



Produced by Suzanne Shell and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net





Transcriber's note:

Italic text is denoted by _underscores_ and bold text by =equal
signs=.

Small capital text has been replaced with all capitals.

Minor typographical and punctuation errors have been corrected
without note. Irregularities and inconsistencies in the text have
been retained as printed.

The illustrations have been moved so that they do not break up
paragraphs, thus the page number of the illustration might not match
the page number in the List of Illustrations.

Mismatched quotes are not fixed if it's not sufficiently clear where
the missing quote should be placed.

The cover for the eBook version of this book was created by the
transcriber and is placed in the public domain.

Page 379: Table B and Table C legends were added by the transcriber.

Appendix E: Douglass, Frederick. The + was added by the transcriber.




  THE
  UNDERGROUND RAILROAD
  FROM SLAVERY TO FREEDOM

[Illustration: THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD:

LEVI COFFIN RECEIVING A COMPANY OF FUGITIVES IN THE OUTSKIRTS OF
CINCINNATI, OHIO.

(From a painting by C. T. Webber, Cincinnati, Ohio.)]




  THE
  UNDERGROUND RAILROAD
  FROM SLAVERY TO FREEDOM

  A COMPREHENSIVE HISTORY

  Wilbur H. Siebert

  _With an Introduction by_
  Albert Bushnell Hart


  DOVER PUBLICATIONS, INC.
  Mineola, New York




_Bibliographical Note_

This Dover edition, first published in 2006, is an unabridged
republication of _The Underground Railroad from Slavery to Freedom_,
originally published by The Macmillan Company, New York and London,
in 1898. The original fold-out map facing page 113 has now been set
into the book on three separate pages in the same location.

_International Standard Book Number: 0-486-45039-2_

Manufactured in the United States of America Dover Publications,
Inc., 31 East 2nd Street, Mineola, N. Y. 11501




To My Wife




INTRODUCTION

BY ALBERT BUSHNELL HART


Of all the questions which have interested and divided the people
of the United States, none since the foundation of the Federal
Union has been so important, so far-reaching, and so long contested
as slavery. During the first half of the nineteenth century the
other great national questions were nearly all economic--taxation,
currency, banks, transportation, lands,--and they had a strong
material basis, a flavor of self-interest; but though slavery had
also an economic side, the reasons for the onslaught upon it were
chiefly moral. The first objection brought by the slave-power
against the anti-slavery propaganda was the cry of the sacredness
of vested and property rights against attack by sentimentalists;
but what dignified the whole contest was the very fact that the
sentiment for human rights was at the bottom of it, and that the
abolitionists felt a moral responsibility even though property
owners suffered. The slavery question, which in origin was
sectional, became national as the moral issues grew clearer; and
finally loomed up as the dominant question through the determination
of both sides to use the power and prestige of the national
government. From the moral agitation came also the personal element
in the struggle, the development of strong characters, like Calhoun,
Toombs, Stephens and Jefferson Davis on one side; like Lundy,
Lovejoy, Garrison, Giddings, Sumner, Chase, John Brown and Lincoln
on the other.

Among the many weak spots in the system of slavery none gave such
opportunities to Northern abolitionists as the locomotive powers
of the slaves; a "thing" which could hear its owner talking about
freedom, a "thing" which could steer itself Northward and avoid
the "patterollers," was a thing of impaired value as a machine,
however intelligent as a human being. From earliest colonial times
fugitive slaves helped to make slavery inconvenient and expensive.
So long as slavery was general, every slaveholder in every colony
was a member of an automatic association for stopping and returning
fugitives; but, from the Revolution on, the fugitives performed the
important function of keeping continually before the people of the
states in which slavery had ceased, the fact that it continued in
other parts of the Union. Nevertheless, though between 1777 and 1804
all the states north of Maryland threw off slavery, the free states
covenanted in the Federal Constitution of 1787 to interpose no
obstacle to the recapture of fugitives who might come across their
borders; and thus continued to be partners in the system of slavery.
From the first there was reluctance and positive opposition to this
obligation; and every successful capture was an object lesson to
communities out of hearing of the whipping-post and out of sight of
the auction-block.

In aiding fugitive slaves the abolitionist was making the most
effective protest against the continuance of slavery; but he was
also doing something more tangible; he was helping the oppressed, he
was eluding the oppressor; and at the same time he was enjoying the
most romantic and exciting amusement open to men who had high moral
standards. He was taking risks, defying the laws, and making himself
liable to punishment, and yet could glow with the healthful pleasure
of duty done.

To this element of the personal and romantic side of the slavery
contest Professor Siebert has devoted himself in this book. The
Underground Railroad was simply a form of combined defiance of
national laws, on the ground that those laws were unjust and
oppressive. It was the unconstitutional but logical refusal of
several thousand people to acknowledge that they owed any regard
to slavery or were bound to look on fleeing bondmen as the property
of the slaveholders, no matter how the laws read. It was also a
practical means of bringing anti-slavery principles to the attention
of the lukewarm or pro-slavery people in free states; and of
convincing the South that the abolitionist movement was sincere and
effective. Above all, the Underground Railroad was the opportunity
for the bold and adventurous; it had the excitement of piracy, the
secrecy of burglary, the daring of insurrection; to the pleasure
of relieving the poor <DW64>'s sufferings it added the triumph of
snapping one's fingers at the slave-catcher; it developed coolness,
indifference to danger, and quickness of resource.

The first task of the historian of the Underground Railroad is to
gather his material, and the characteristic of this book is to
consider the whole question on a basis of established facts. The
effort is timely; for there are still living, or were living when
the work began, many hundreds of persons who knew the intimate
history of parts of the former secret system of transportation;
the book is most timely, for these invaluable details are now fast
disappearing with the death of the actors in the drama. Professor
Siebert has rescued and put on record events which in a few years
will have ceased to be in the memory of living men. He has done for
the history of slavery what the students of ballad and folk-lore
have done for literature; he has collected perishing materials.

Reminiscence is of course, standing alone, an insufficient basis
for historical generalization. On that point Professor Siebert
has been careful to explain his principle: he does not attempt
to generalize from single memories not otherwise substantiated,
but to use reminiscences which confirm each other, to search out
telling illustrations, and to discover what the tendencies were from
numerous contrasted testimonies. Actual contemporary records are
scanty; a few are here preserved, such as David Putnam's memorandum,
and Campbell's letter; and the crispness which they give to the
narrative makes us wish for more. The few available biographies,
autobiographies, and contemporary memoirs have been diligently
sought out and used; and no variety of sources has been ignored
which seemed likely to throw light on the subject. The ground has
been carefully traversed; and it is not likely that much will
ever be added to the body of information collected by Professor
Siebert. His list of sources, described in the introductory chapter
and enumerated in the Appendices, is really a carefully winnowed
bibliography of the contemporary materials on slavery.

The book is practically divided into four parts: the Railroad
itself (Chapters ii, v); the railroad hands (Chapters iii, iv,
vi); the freight (Chapters vii, viii); and political relations and
effects (Chapters ix, x, xi). Perhaps one of the most interesting
contributions to our knowledge of the subject is the account of
the beginnings of the system of secret and systematic aid to
fugitives. The evidence goes to show that there was organization
in Pennsylvania before 1800; and in Ohio soon after 1815. The book
thus becomes a much-needed guide to information about the obscure
anti-slavery movement which preceded William Lloyd Garrison, and
to some degree prepared the way for him; and it will prove a
source for the historian of the influence of the West in national
development. As yet we know too little of the anti-slavery movement
which so profoundly stirred the Western states, including Kentucky
and Missouri, and which came closely into contact with the actual
conditions of slavery. As Professor Siebert points out, most of the
early abolitionists in the West were former slaveholders or sons of
slaveholders.

Professor Siebert has applied to the whole subject a graphic form of
illustration which is at the same time a test of his conclusions.
How can the scattered reminiscences and records of escapes in
widely separated states be shown to refer to the results of one
organized method? Plainly by applying them to the actual face of the
country, so as to see whether the alleged centres of activity have
a geographical connection. The painstaking map of the lines of the
Underground Railroad "system" is an historical contribution of a
novel kind; and it is impossible to gainsay its evidence, which is
expounded in detail in one of the chapters of the book. The result
is a gratifying proof of the usefulness of scientific methods in
historical investigation; one who lived in an anti-slavery community
before the Civil War is fascinated by tracing the hitherto unknown
stretches north and south from the centre which he knew. The map
bears testimony not only to the wide-spread practice of aiding
fugitives, but to the devotion of the conductors on the Underground
Railroad. How useful a section of Mr. Siebert's map would have been
to the slave-catcher in the 50's, when so many strange <DW64>s were
appearing and disappearing in the free states! The facts presented
in the brief compass of the map would have been of immense value
also to the leaders of the Southern Confederacy in 1861, as a
confirmation of their argument that the North would not perform its
constitutional duty of returning the fugitives; yet there is no
record in this book of the betraying of the secrets of the U. G. R.
R. by any person in the service. The moral bond of opposition to the
whole slave power kept men at work forwarding fugitives by a road
of which they themselves knew but a small portion. The political
philosophers who think that the Civil War might have been averted by
timely concessions would do well to study this picture of the wide
distribution of persons who saw no peace in slavery.

Amid all the varieties of anti-slavery men, from the Garrisonian
abolitionist to faint-hearted slaveholders like James G. Birney,
it is interesting to see how many had a share in the Underground
Railroad; and how many earned a reputation as heroes. Professor
Siebert has gathered the names of about 3,200 persons known to
have been engaged in this work--a roll of honor for many American
families. Everybody knew that the fugitives were aided by Fred
Douglass, Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Gerrit Smith, Joshua Giddings,
John Brown, Levi Coffin, Thomas Garrett and Theodore Parker; but
this book gives us some account of the interest of men like Thaddeus
Stevens, not commonly counted among the sons of the prophets; and
performs a special service to the student of history and the lover
of heroic deeds, by the brief account of the services of obscure
persons who deserve a place in the hearts of their countrymen. Men
like Rev. George Bourne, Rev. James Duncan and Rev. John Rankin,
years before Garrison's propaganda, had begun to speak and publish
against slavery, and to prepare men's minds for a righteous
disregard of Fugitive Slave Acts. Joseph Sider, with his carefully
subdivided peddler's wagon, deserves a place alongside the better
known Henry Box Brown. The thirty-five thousand stripes of Calvin
Fairbank, seventeen years a convict in the Kentucky penitentiary,
range him with Lovejoy as an anti-slavery martyr. Rev. Charles
Torrey had in the work of rousing slaves to escape, the same
devotion to a fatal duty as that which animated John Brown. And no
one who has ever heard Harriet Tubman describe her part as "Moses"
of the fugitives can ever forget that African prophetess, whose
intense vigor is relieved by a shrewd and kindly humanity.

The quiet recital of the facts has all the charm of romance to
the passengers on the Underground Railroad: whether travelling
by night in a procession of covered wagons, or boldly by day in
disguises; whether boxed up as so much freight, or riding on passes
unhesitatingly given by abolitionist directors of railroads; the
fugitives in these pages rejoice in their prospect of liberty. The
road sign near Oberlin, of a tiger chasing a <DW64>, was a white
man's joke; but it was a <DW64> who said, apropos of his master's
discouraging account of Canada: "They put some extract onto it to
keep us from comin'"; and neither Whittier in his poems, nor Harriet
Beecher Stowe in her novels, imagined a more picturesque incident
than the crossing of the Detroit River by Fairfield's "gang" of
twenty-eight rescued souls singing, "I'm on my way to Canada, where
<DW52> men are free," to the joyful accompaniment of their firearms.

To the settlements of fugitives in Canada Professor Siebert has
given more labor than appears in his book; for his own visits
supplement the accounts of earlier investigators; and we have here
the first complete account of the reception of the <DW64>s in Canada
and their progress in civilization.

Upon the general question of the political effects of the
Underground Railroad, the book adds much to our information, by its
discussion of the probable numbers of fugitives, and of the alarm
caused in the slave states by their departure. The census figures
of 1850 and 1860 are shown to be wilfully false; and the escape
of thousands of persons seems established beyond cavil. Into the
constitutional question of the right to take fugitives, the book
goes with less minuteness, since it is intended to be a contribution
to knowledge, and not an addition to the abundant literature on the
legal side of slavery.

It has been the effort of Professor Siebert to furnish the means for
settling the following questions: the origin of the system of aid to
the fugitives, popularly called the Underground Railroad; the degree
of formal organization; methods of procedure; geographical extent
and relations; the leaders and heroes of the movement; the behavior
of the fugitives on their way; the effectiveness of the settlement
in Canada; the numbers of fugitives; and the attitude of courts and
communities. On all these questions he furnishes new light; and he
appears to prove his concluding statement that "the Underground
Railroad was one of the greatest forces which brought on the Civil
War and thus destroyed slavery."




CONTENTS


  CHAPTER I

  SOURCES OF THE HISTORY OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD

                                                                 PAGE

  The Underground Road as a subject for research                    1

  Obscurity of the subject                                          2

  Books dealing with the subject                                    2

  Magazine articles on the Underground Railroad                     5

  Newspaper articles on the subject                                 6

  Scarcity of contemporaneous documents                             7

  Reminiscences the chief source                                   11

  The value of reminiscences illustrated                           12

  CHAPTER II

  ORIGIN AND GROWTH OF THE UNDERGROUND ROAD

  Conditions under which the Underground Road originated           17

  The disappearance of slavery from the Northern states            17

  Early provisions for the return of fugitive slaves               19

  The fugitive slave clause in the Ordinance of 1787               20

  The fugitive slave clause in the United States Constitution      20

  The Fugitive Slave Law of 1793                                   21

  The Fugitive Slave Law of 1850                                   22

  Desire for freedom among the slaves                              25

  Knowledge of Canada among the slaves                             27

  Some local factors in the origin of the underground movement     30

  The development of the movement in eastern Pennsylvania, in
  New Jersey, and in New York                                      33

  The development of the movement in the New England states        36

  The development of the movement in the West                      37

  The naming of the Road                                           44

  CHAPTER III

  THE METHODS OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD

  Penalties for aiding fugitive slaves                              47

  Social contempt suffered by abolitionists                         48

  Espionage practised upon abolitionists                            50

  Rewards for the capture of fugitives and the kidnapping of
        abolitionists                                               52

  Devices to secure secrecy                                         54

  Service at night                                                  54

  Methods of communication                                          56

  Methods of conveyance                                             59

  Zigzag and variable routes                                        61

  Places of concealment                                             62

  Disguises                                                         64

  Informality of management                                         67

   and white agents                                          69

  City vigilance committees                                         70

  Supplies for fugitives                                            76

  Transportation of fugitives by rail                               78

  Transportation of fugitives by water                              81

  Rescue of fugitives under arrest                                  83

  CHAPTER IV

  UNDERGROUND AGENTS, STATION-KEEPERS, OR CONDUCTORS

  Underground agents, station-keepers, or conductors                87

  Their hospitality                                                 87

  Their principles                                                  89

  Their nationality                                                 90

  Their church connections                                          93

  Their party affinities                                            99

  Their local standing                                             101

  Prosecutions of underground operators                            101

  Defensive League of Freedom proposed                             103

  Persons of prominence among underground helpers                  104

  CHAPTER V

  STUDY OF THE MAP OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD SYSTEM

  Geographical extent of underground lines                         113

  Location and distribution of stations                            114

  Southern routes                                                  116

  Lines of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York                  120

  Routes of the New England states                                 128

  Lines within the old Northwest Territory                         134

  Noteworthy features of the general map                           139

  Complex routes                                                   141

  Broken lines and isolated place names                            141

  River routes                                                     142

  Routes by rail                                                   142

  Routes by sea                                                    144

  Terminal stations                                                145

  Lines of lake travel                                             147

  Canadian ports                                                   148

  CHAPTER VI

  ABDUCTION OF SLAVES FROM THE SOUTH

  Aversion among underground helpers to abduction of slaves        150

  Abductions by <DW64>s living along the northern border of the
    slave states                                                   151

  Abductions by Canadian refugees                                  152

  Abductions by white persons in the South                         153

  Abductions by white persons of the North                         154

  The Missouri raid of John Brown                                  162

  John Brown's great plan                                          166

  Abductions attempted in response to appeals                      168

  Devotees of abduction                                            178

  CHAPTER VII

  LIFE OF THE  REFUGEES IN CANADA

  Slavery question in Canada                                       190

  Flight of slaves to Canada                                       192

  Refugees representative of the slave class                       195

  Misinformation about Canada among slaves                         197

  Hardships borne by Canadian refugees                             198

  Efforts toward immediate relief for fugitives                    199

  Attitude of the Canadian government                              201

  Conditions favorable to their settlement in Canada               203

  Sparseness of population                                         203

  Uncleared lands                                                  204

  Encouragement of agricultural colonies among refugees            205

  Dawn Settlement                                                  205

  Elgin Settlement                                                 207

  Refugees' Home Settlement                                        209

  Alleged disadvantages of the colonies                            211

  Their advantages                                                 212

  Refugee settlers in Canadian towns                               217

  Census of Canadian refugees                                      220

  Occupations of Canadian refugees                                 223

  Progress made by Canadian refugees                               224

  Domestic life of the refugees                                    227

  School privileges                                                228

  Organizations for self-improvement                               230

  Churches                                                         231

  Rescue of friends from slavery                                   231

  Ownership of property                                            232

  Rights of citizenship                                            233

  Character as citizens                                            233

  CHAPTER VIII

  FUGITIVE SETTLERS IN THE NORTHERN STATES

  Number of fugitive settlers in the North                         235

  The Northern states an unsafe refuge for runaway slaves          237

  Reclamation of fugitives in the free states                      239

  Protection of fugitives in the free states                       242

  Object of the personal liberty laws                              245

  Effect of the law of 1850 on fugitive settlers                   246

  Underground operators among fugitives of the free states         251

  CHAPTER IX

  PROSECUTIONS OF UNDERGROUND RAILROAD MEN

  Enactment of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793                      254

  Grounds on which the constitutionality of the measure was
    questioned                                                     254

  Denial of trial by jury to the fugitive slave                    255

  Summary mode of arrest                                           257

  The question of concurrent jurisdiction between the federal
    and state governments in fugitive slave cases                  259

  The law of 1793 versus the Ordinance of 1787                     261

  Power of Congress to legislate concerning the extradition of
    fugitive slaves denied                                         263

  State officers relieved of the execution of the law by the
    Prigg decision, 1842                                           264

  Amendment of the law of 1793 by the law of 1850                  265

  Constitutionality of the law of 1850 questioned                  267

  First case under the law of 1850                                 268

  Authority of a United States commissioner                        269

  Penalties imposed for aiding and abetting the escape of
    fugitives                                                      273

  Trial on the charge of treason in the Christiana case, 1854      279

  Counsel for fugitive slaves                                      281

  Last case under the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850                   285

  Attempted revision of the law                                    285

  Destructive attacks upon the measure in Congress                 286

  Lincoln's Proclamation of Emancipation                           287

  Repeal of the Fugitive Slave Acts                                288

  CHAPTER X

  THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD IN POLITICS

  Valuation of the Underground Railroad in its political aspect    290

  The question of the extradition of fugitive slaves in colonial
        times                                                      290

  Importance of the question in the constitutional conventions     293

  Failure of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793                        294

  Agitation for a more efficient measure                           295

  Diplomatic negotiations for the extradition of 
    refugees from Canada, 1826-1828                                299

  The fugitive slave a missionary in the cause of freedom          300

  Slave-hunting in the free states                                 302

  Preparation for the abolition movement of 1830                   303

  The Underground Railroad and the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850      308

  The law in Congress                                              310

  The enforcement of the law of 1850                               316

  The Underground Road and _Uncle Tom's Cabin_                     321

  Political importance of the novel                                323

  Sumner on the influence of escaped slaves in the North           324

  The spirit of nullification in the North                         327

  The Glover rescue, Wisconsin, 1854                               327

  The rendition of Burns, Boston, 1854                             331

  The rescue of Addison White, Mechanicsburg, Ohio, 1857           334

  The Oberlin-Wellington rescue, 1858                              335

  Obstruction of the Fugitive Slave Law by means of the personal
  liberty acts                                                     337

  John Brown's attempt Lo free the slaves                          338

  CHAPTER XI

  EFFECT OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD

  The Underground Road the means of relieving the South of many
  despairing slaves                                                340

  Loss sustained by slave-owners through underground channels      340

  The United States census reports on fugitive slaves              342

  Estimate of the number of slaves escaping into Ohio, 1830-1860   346

  Similar estimate for Philadelphia, 1830-1860                     346

  Drain on the resources of the depot at Lawrence, Kansas,
        described in a letter of Col. J. Bowles, April 4, 1859     347

  Work of the Underground Railroad as compared with that of the
        American Colonization Society                              350

  The violation of the Fugitive Slave Law a chief complaint of
        Southern states at the beginning of the Civil War          351

  Refusal of the Canadian government to yield up the fugitive
        Anderson, 1860                                             352

  Secession of the Southern states begun                           353

  Conclusion of the fugitive slave controversy                     355

  General effect and significance of the controversy               356




ILLUSTRATIONS, PORTRAITS, FACSIMILES AND MAPS


  The Underground Railroad: Levi Coffin receiving a company of
  fugitives in the outskirts of Cincinnati, Ohio        _Frontispiece_

                                                           FACING PAGE

  Isaac T. Hopper                                                   17

  The Runaway: a stereotype cut used on handbills advertising
        escaped slaves                                              27

  Crossing-place on the Ohio River at Steubenville, Ohio            47

  The Rankin House, Ripley, Ohio                                    47

  Facsimile of an Underground Message                    _On page_  57

  Barn of Seymour Finney, Detroit, Michigan                         65

  The Old First Church, Galesburg, Illinois                         65

  William Still                                                     75

  Levi Coffin                                                       87

  Frederick Douglass                                               104

  Caves in Salem Township, Washington County, Ohio                 130

  House of Mrs. Elizabeth Buffum Chace, Valley Falls, Rhode
        Island                                                     130

  The Detroit River at Detroit, Michigan                           147

  Ashtabula Harbor, Ohio                                           147

  Ellen Craft as she escaped from Slavery                          163

  Samuel Harper and Wife                                           163

  Dr. Alexander M. Ross                                            180

  Harriet Tubman                                                   180

  Group of Refugee Settlers at Windsor, Ontario, C.W.              190

  Theodore Parker                                                  205

  Thomas Wentworth Higginson                                       205

  Dr. Samuel G. Howe                                               205

  Benjamin Drew                                                    205

  Church of the Fugitive Slaves, Boston, Massachusetts             235

  Salmon P. Chase                                                  254

  Thomas Garrett                                                   254

  Rush R. Sloane                                                   282

  Thaddeus Stevens                                                 282

  J. R. Ware                                                       282

  Rutherford B. Hayes                                              282

  Gerrit Smith                                                     290

  Joshua R. Giddings                                               290

  Charles Sumner                                                   290

  Richard H. Dana                                                  290

  Bust of Rev. John Rankin                                         307

  Harriet Beecher Stowe                                            321

  Captain John Brown                                               338

  Facsimile of a Leaf from the Diary of Daniel Osborn
                                                   _On pages_ 344, 345


  MAPS

  Map of the Underground Railroad System             _Facing page_ 113

  Map of Underground Lines in Southeastern Pennsylvania     "      113

  Map of Underground Lines in Morgan County, Ohio      _On page_   136

  Lewis Falley's Map of the Underground Routes of Indiana and
        Michigan                                       _On page_   138

  Map of an Underground Line through Livingston and La Salle
       Counties, Illinois                              _On page_   139

  Map of Underground Lines through Greene, Warren and Clinton
        Counties, Ohio                                 _On page_   140


APPENDICES

                                                                 PAGES

  APPENDIX A: Constitutional Provisions and National Acts
        relative to Fugitive Slaves, 1787-1850                 359-366

  APPENDIX B: List of Important Fugitive Slave Cases           367-377

  APPENDIX C: Figures from the United States Census Reports
        relating to Fugitive Slaves                           378, 379

  APPENDIX D: Bibliography                                     380-402

  APPENDIX E: Directory of the names of Underground Railroad
        Operators and Members of Vigilance Committees          403-439




PREFACE


This volume is the outgrowth of an investigation begun in 1892-1893,
when the writer was giving a portion of his time to the teaching of
United States history in the Ohio State University. The search for
materials was carried on at intervals during several years until the
mass of information, written and printed, was deemed sufficient to
be subjected to the processes of analysis and generalization.

Patience and care have been required to overcome the difficulties
attaching to a subject that was in an extraordinary sense a hidden
one; and the author has constantly tried to observe those well-known
dicta of the historian; namely, to be content with the materials
discovered without making additions of his own, and to let his
conclusions be defined by the facts, rather than seek to cast these
"in the mould of his hypothesis."

Starting without preconceptions, the writer has been constrained
to the views set forth in Chapters X and XI in regard to the real
meaning and importance of the underground movement. And if it be
found by the reader that these views are in any measure novel, it is
hoped that the pages of this book contain evidence sufficient for
their justification. There is something mysterious and inexplicable
about the whole anti-slavery movement in the United States, as its
history is generally recounted. According to the accepted view the
anti-slavery movement of the thirties and the later decades has been
considered as altogether distinct from the earlier abolition period
in our history, both in principle and external features, and as
separated from it by a considerable interval of time. The earlier
movement is supposed to have died a natural death, and the later to
have sprung into full life and vigor with the appearance of Garrison
and the _Liberator_. Issue is made with this view in the following
pages, where Macaulay's rational account of revolutions in general
may, perhaps, be thought to find illustration. Macaulay says in
one of his essays: "As the history of states is generally written,
the greatest and most momentous revolutions seem to come upon them
like supernatural inflictions, without warning or cause. But the
fact is, that such revolutions are almost always the consequences
of moral changes, which have gradually passed on the mass of the
community, and which ordinarily proceed far before their progress
is indicated by any public measure. An intimate knowledge of the
domestic history of nations is therefore absolutely necessary to the
prognosis of political events." Or, the essayist might have added,
to a subsequent understanding of them.

It is impossible for the author to make acknowledgments to all who
have contributed, directly and indirectly, to the promotion of
his research. A liberal use of foot-notes suffices to reduce his
obligations in part only. But, although the great balance of his
indebtedness must stand against him, his special acknowledgments
are due in certain quarters. The writer has to thank Professor J.
Franklin Jameson of Brown University for calling his attention to
a rare and important little book, which otherwise would almost
certainly have escaped his notice. To Professor Eugene Wambaugh of
the Harvard Law School he is indebted for the critical perusal of
Chapter IX, on the Prosecutions of Underground Railroad Men,--a
chapter based largely on reports of cases, and involving legal
points about which the layman may easily go astray. The frequent
citations of the monograph on _Fugitive Slaves_ by Mrs. Marion
G. McDougall attest the general usefulness of that book in the
preparation of the present work. For personal encouragement in
the undertaking after the collection of materials had begun, and
for assistance while the study was being put in manuscript, the
author is most deeply indebted to Professor Albert Bushnell Hart,
and the Seminary of American History in Harvard University, over
which he and his colleague, Professor Edward Channing, preside. The
proof-sheets of this book have been read by Mr. F. B. Sanborn, of
Concord, Massachusetts, and, it is hardly necessary to add, have
profited thereby in a way that would have been impossible had they
passed under the eye of one less widely acquainted with anti-slavery
times and anti-slavery people. More than to all others the author's
gratitude is due to the members of his own household, without whose
abiding interest and ready assistance in many ways this work could
not have been carried to completion. It should be said that no
responsibility for the use made of data or the conclusions drawn
from them can justly be imposed upon those whose generous offices
have kept these pages freer from discrepancies than they could have
been otherwise.

It is a fortunate circumstance that, by the kindness of the artist,
Mr. C. T. Webber, the reproduction of his painting entitled "The
Underground Railroad" can appear as the frontispiece of this book.
Mr. Webber was fitted by his intimate acquaintance with the Coffin
family of Cincinnati, Ohio, and their remarkable record in the work
of secret emancipation, to give a sympathetic delineation of the
Underground Railroad in operation.

  OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY,
  October, 1898.




THE

UNDERGROUND RAILROAD

FROM

SLAVERY TO FREEDOM




CHAPTER I

SOURCES OF THE HISTORY OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD


Historians who deal with the rise and culmination of the
anti-slavery movement in the United States have comparatively little
to say of one phase of it that cannot be neglected if the movement
is to be fully understood. This is the so-called Underground
Railroad, which, during fifty years or more, was secretly engaged
in helping fugitive slaves to reach places of security in the free
states and in Canada. Henry Wilson speaks of the romantic interest
attaching to the subject, and illustrates the coöperative efforts
made by abolitionists in behalf of  refugees in two short
chapters of the second volume of his _Rise and Fall of the Slave
Power in America_.[1] Von Holst makes several references to the
work of the Road in his well-known _History of the United States_,
and predicts that "The time will yet come, even in the South, when
due recognition will be given to the touching unselfishness, simple
magnanimity and glowing love of freedom of these law-breakers on
principle, who were for the most part people without name, money, or
higher education."[2] Rhodes in his great work, the _History of the
United States from the Compromise of 1850_, mentions the system,
but considers it only as a manifestation of popular sentiment.[3]
Other writers give less space to an account of this enterprise,
although it was one that extended throughout many Northern states,
and in itself supplied the reason for the enactment of the Fugitive
Slave Law of 1850, one of the most remarkable measures issuing from
Congress during the whole anti-slavery struggle.

  [1] Chapters VI and VII, pp. 61-86.

  [2] Vol. III, p. 552, foot-note.

  [3] _History of the United States_, Vol. II, pp. 74-77, 361, 362.

The explanation of the failure to give to this "institution" the
prominence which it deserves, is to be found in the secrecy in which
it was enshrouded. Continuous through a period of two generations,
the Road spread to be a great system by being kept in an oblivion
that its operators aptly designated by the figurative use of the
word "underground." Then, too, it was a movement in which but few
of those persons were involved whose names have been most closely
associated in history with the public agitation of the question of
slavery, or with those political developments that resulted in the
destruction of slavery. In general the participants in underground
operations were quiet persons, little known outside of the
localities where they lived, and were therefore members of a class
that historians find it exceedingly difficult to bring within their
field of view.

Before attempting to prepare a new account of the Underground
Railroad, from new materials, something should be said of previous
works upon it, and especially of the seven books which deal
specifically with the subject: _The Underground Railroad_, by the
Rev. W. M. Mitchell; _Underground Railroad Records_, by William
Still; _The Underground Railroad in Chester and the Neighboring
Counties of Pennsylvania_, by R. C. Smedley; _The Reminiscences of
Levi Coffin_; _Sketches in the History of the Underground Railroad_,
by Eber M. Pettit; _From Dixie to Canada_, by H. U. Johnson; and
_Heroes in Homespun_, by Ascott R. Hope (a _nom de plume_ for Robert
Hope Moncrieff).

While several of these volumes are sources of original material,
their value is chiefly that of collections of incidents, affording
one an insight into the workings of the Underground Railroad in
certain localities, and presenting types of character among the
helpers and the helped. In composition they are what one would
expect of persons who lived simple, strenuous lives, who with
sincerity record what they knew and experienced. They have not only
the characteristics of a deep-seated, moral movement, they have also
an undeniable value for historical purposes.

Mitchell's small volume of 172 pages was published in England in
1860. Its author was a free <DW64>, who served as a slave-driver in
the South for several years, then became a preacher in Ohio, and
for twelve years engaged in underground work; finally, about 1855,
he went to Toronto, Canada, to minister to  refugees as a
missionary in the service of the American Free Baptist Mission
Society.[4] It was while soliciting money in England for the purpose
of building a chapel and schoolhouse for his people in Toronto
that he was induced to write his book. The range of experience
of the author enabled him to relate at first hand many incidents
illustrative of the various phases of underground procedure, and to
give an account of the condition of the fugitive slaves in Canada.[5]

  [4] Mitchell, _Underground Railroad_, Preface, p. vi; p. 17.

  [5] Mr. Mitchell divides his little book into two chapters, one
  on the "Underground Railroad," occupying 124 pages, the other on
  the "Condition of Fugitive Slaves in Canada," occupying 48 pages.

Still's _Underground Railroad Records_, a large volume of 780
pages, appeared in 1872, and a second edition in 1883. For some
years before the War Mr. Still was a clerk in the office of the
Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society in Philadelphia; and from 1852
to 1860 he served as chairman of the Acting Vigilance Committee
of Philadelphia, a body whose special business it was to harbor
fugitives and help them towards Canada. About 1850 Mr. Still began
to keep records of the stories he heard from runaways, and his
book is mainly a compilation of these stories, together with some
Underground Railroad correspondence. At the end there are some
biographical sketches of persons more or less prominent in the
anti-slavery cause. The book is a mine of material relating to the
work of the Vigilance Committee of Philadelphia.

Operations carried on in an extended field of six or seven counties
in southeastern Pennsylvania, over routes many of which led to
the Quaker City, are recounted in Smedley's volume of 395 pages,
published in 1883. The abundant reminiscences and short biographies
were patiently gathered by the author from many aged participants in
underground enterprises.

In his _Reminiscences_, a book of 732 pages, Levi Coffin, the
reputed president of the Underground Railroad, relates his
experiences from the time when he began, as a youth in North
Carolina, to direct slaves northward on the path to liberty, till
the time when, after twenty years of service in eastern Indiana and
fifteen in Cincinnati, Ohio, he and his coworkers were relieved by
the admission of slaves within the lines of the Union forces in the
South. Mr. Coffin was a Quaker of the gentle but firm type depicted
by Harriet Beecher Stowe in the character Simeon Halliday, of which
he may have been the original. It need scarcely be said, therefore,
that his autobiography is characterized by simplicity and candor,
and supplies a fund of information in regard to those branches of
the Road with which its author was connected.

Pettit's _Sketches_ comprise a series of articles printed in the
Fredonia (New York) _Censor_, during the fall of 1868, and collected
in 1879 into a book of 174 pages. The author was for many years a
"conductor" in southwestern New York, and most of the adventures
narrated occurred within his personal knowledge.

Johnson's _From Dixie to Canada_ is a little volume of 194 pages,
in which are reprinted some of the many stories first published
by him in the _Lake Shore Home Magazine_ during the years 1883 to
1889 under the heading, "Romances and Realities of the Underground
Railroad." The data that most of these tales embody were accumulated
by research, and while the names of operators, towns and so forth
are authentic, the writer allows himself the license of the
story-teller instead of restricting himself to the simple recording
of the information secured. His investigations have given him an
acquaintance with the routes of northeastern Ohio and the adjacent
portions of Pennsylvania and New York.

Hope's volume, published in 1894, does not increase the number
of our sources of information, inasmuch as its materials are
derived from Still's _Underground Railroad Records_ and Coffin's
_Reminiscences_. It was written by an Englishman apparently as a
popular exposition of the hidden methods of the abolitionists.

To these books should be added a pamphlet of thirty pages,
entitled _The Underground Railroad_, by James H. Fairchild, D.D.,
ex-President of Oberlin College, published in 1895 by the Western
Reserve Historical Society.[6] The author had personal knowledge
of many of the events he narrates and recounts several underground
cases of notoriety; he thus affords a clear insight into the
conditions under which secret aid came to be rendered to runaways.

  [6] _Tract No. 87_, in Vol. IV, pp. 91-121, of the publications
  of the Society.

It is surprising that a subject, the mysterious and romantic
character of which might be supposed to appeal to a wide circle
of readers, has not been duly treated in any of the modern
popular magazines. During the last ten years a few articles
about the Underground Railroad have appeared in _The Magazine of
Western History_,[7] _The Firelands Pioneer_,[8] _The Midland
Monthly_,[9] _The Canadian Magazine of Politics, Science, Art and
Literature_[10] and _The American Historical Review_.[11] Three of
these publications, the first two and the last, are of a special
character; the other two, although they appeal to the general
reader, cannot be said to have attempted more than the presentation
of a few incidents out of the experience of certain underground
helpers. From time to time the _New England Magazine_ has given its
readers glimpses of the Underground Road by its articles dealing
with several well-known fugitive slave cases, and a biographical
sketch of the abductor Harriet Tubman.[12] But it would be quite
impossible for any one to gain an adequate idea of the movement from
the meagre accounts that have appeared in any of these magazines.

  [7] March, 1887, pp. 672-682.

  [8] July, 1888, pp. 19-88. This periodical is issued by
  the Firelands Historical Society of Ohio. The bulk of the
  number mentioned is made up of contributions in regard to the
  Underground Road in northwestern Ohio.

  [9] February, 1895, pp. 173-180.

  [10] May, 1895, pp. 9-16.

  [11] April, 1896, pp. 455-463. This article is a preliminary
  study prepared by the author.

  [12] Lillie B. C. Wyman: "Black and White," in _New England
  Magazine_, N.S., Vol. V, pp. 476-481; "Harriet Tubman," _ibid._,
  March, 1896, pp. 110-118. Nina M. Tiffany: "The Escape of William
  and Ellen Craft," _ibid._, January, 1890, p. 524 _et seq._;
  "Shadrach," _ibid._, May, 1890, pp. 280-283; "Sims," _ibid._,
  June, 1890, pp. 385-388; "Anthony Burns," _ibid._, July, 1890,
  pp. 569-576. A. H. Grimké: "Anti-Slavery Boston," _ibid._,
  December, 1890, pp. 441-459.

In contrast with the magazines, the newspapers have frequently
published some of the stirring recollections of surviving
abolitionists, but the result for the reader is usually that he
learns only some anecdotes concerning a small section of the Road,
without securing an insight into the real significance of the
underground movement. Without undertaking here to print a full
list of articles on the subject, it is worth while to notice a few
newspapers in which series of sketches have appeared of more or less
value in extending our geographical knowledge of the system, or in
illustrating some important phase of its working. The New Lexington
(Ohio) _Tribune_, from October, 1885, to February, 1886, contains a
series of reminiscences, written by Mr. Thomas L. Gray, that supply
interesting information about the work in southeastern Ohio. The
Pontiac (Illinois) _Sentinel_, in 1890 and 1891, published fifteen
chapters of "A History of Anti-Slavery Days" contributed by Mr. W.
B. Fyffe, recording some episodes in the development of this Road
in northeastern Illinois. The _Sentinel_, of Mt. Gilead, Ohio, in
a series of articles, one of which appeared every week from July
13 to August 17, 1893, under the name of Aaron Benedict, affords
a knowledge of the way in which the secret work was carried on in
a typical Quaker community. In _The Republican Leader_, of Salem,
Indiana, at various dates from Nov. 17, 1893, to April, 1894, E.
Hicks Trueblood printed the results of some investigations begun
at the instance of the author, which disclose the principal routes
of south central Indiana. An account of the peculiar methods of
the pedler Joseph Sider, an abductor of slaves, is also given by
Mr. Trueblood. The Rev. John Todd has preserved in the columns
of the Tabor (Iowa) _Beacon_, in 1890 and 1891, some valuable
reminiscences, running through more than twenty numbers of the
paper, under the title, "The Early Settlement and Growth of Western
Iowa"; several of these are devoted to fugitive slave cases.[13]

  [13] Other newspapers in which materials have been found are
  mentioned in the Appendix, pp. 395-398.

It is not surprising, in view of the unlawful nature of
Underground Railroad service, that extremely little in the way of
contemporaneous documents has descended to us even across the short
span of a generation or two, and that there are few written data for
the history of a movement that gave liberty to thousands of slaves.
The legal restraints upon the rendering of aid to slaves bent on
flight to Canada were, of course, ever present in the minds of
those that pitied the bondman, whether a well-informed lawyer, like
Joshua R. Giddings, or an illiterate <DW64>, who, notwithstanding his
fellow-feeling, was yet sufficiently sagacious to avoid the open
violation of what others might call the law of the land. Therefore,
written evidence of complicity was for the most part carefully
avoided; and little information concerning any part of the work of
the Underground Road was allowed to get into print. It is known that
records and diaries were kept by certain helpers; and a few of the
letters and messages that passed between station-keepers have been
preserved. These sources of information are as valuable as they are
rare: they would doubtless be more plentiful if the Fugitive Slave
Law of 1850 had not created such consternation as to lead to the
destruction of most of the telltale documents.

The great collection of contemporaneous material is that of William
Still, relating mainly to the work of the Vigilance Committee of
Philadelphia. The motives and the methods of Mr. Still in keeping
his register are given in the following words: "Thousands of
escapes, harrowing separations, dreadful longings, dark gropings
after lost parents, brothers, sisters, and identities, seemed ever
to be pressing on my mind. While I knew the danger of keeping strict
records, and while I did not then dream that in my day slavery would
be blotted out, or that the time would come when I could publish
these records, it used to afford me great satisfaction to take them
down fresh from the lips of fugitives on the way to freedom, and
to preserve them as they had given them...."[14] When in 1852 Mr.
Still became the chairman of the Acting Committee of Vigilance his
opportunities were doubtless increased for obtaining histories of
cases; and he was then directed as head of the committee "to keep a
record of all their doings, ... especially of the money received and
expended on behalf of every case claiming their interposition."[15]
During the period of the War, Chairman Still concealed the records
and documents he had collected in the loft of Lebanon Cemetery
building, and although their publication became practicable when the
Proclamation of Emancipation was issued, the _Underground Railroad
Records_ did not appear until 1872.[16]

  [14] _Underground Railroad Records_, pp. xxxiii, xxxiv.

  [15] _Ibid._, p. 611, where is printed an article from the
  _Pennsylvania Freeman_, December 9, 1852, giving an account of
  the formation of the Committee.

  [16] See pp. xxxiv, xxxv, xxxvi.

Theodore Parker, the distinguished Unitarian clergyman of Boston,
and one of the most active members of the Vigilance Committee
of that city, kept memoranda of occurrences growing out of the
attempted enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law in his neighborhood.
He was outspoken in his opposition to the law, and was not less bold
in gathering into a journal, along with newspaper clippings and
handbills referring to the troubles of the time, manuscripts of his
own bearing on the unlawful procedure of the Committee. This journal
or scrap-book, given to the Boston Public Library in 1874 by Mrs.
Parker,[17] was compiled day by day from March 15, 1851, to February
19, 1856, and throws much light on the rendition of the fugitives
Burns and Sims.

  [17] The title Mr. Parker gave to this scrap-book is as follows:
  "Memoranda of the Troubles in Boston occasioned by the infamous
  Fugitive Slave Law."

John Brown, of Osawattomie, left a few notes of his memorable
journey through Kansas and Iowa, on his way to Canada in the winter
of 1858 and 1859, with a company of slaves rescued by him from
bondage in western Missouri. On the back of the original draft of
a letter written by Brown for the _New York Tribune_ soon after
the slaves had been taken from their masters, appear the names
of station-keepers of the Underground Railroad in eastern Kansas,
and a record of certain expenditures forming, doubtless, a part of
the cost of his trip.[18] When the fearless abductor arrived at
Springdale, Iowa, late in February, he wrote to a friend in Tabor a
statement concerning the "Reception of Brown and Party at Grinnell,
Iowa, compared with Proceedings at Tabor," in which he set down in
the form of items the substantial attentions he had received at the
hands of citizens of Grinnell.[19] These meagre records, together
with the letter written to the _Tribune_ mentioned above, are all
that Brown wrote, so far as known, giving explicit information in
regard to an exploit that created a stir throughout the country.

  [18] Sanborn, _Life and Letters of John Brown_, p. 482.

  [19] _Ibid._, pp. 488, 489.

Mr. Jirch Platt, of the vicinity of Mendon, Illinois, recorded
his experiences as a station-keeper in a "sort of diary and farm
record," and in a "blue-book," and appears to have been the only one
of the underground helpers of Illinois that ventured to chronicle
matters of this kind. The diary is still extant, and shows entries
covering a period of more than ten years, closing with October,
1859; the following items will illustrate sufficiently the character
of the record:--

"_May 19, 1848._ Hannah Coger arrived on the U. G. Railroad, the
last $100.00 for freedom she was to pay to Thomas Anderson, Palmyra,
Mo. The track is kept bright, it being the 3rd time occupied since
the first of April...."

"_Nov. 9, '54._ <DW64> hoax stories have been very high in the market
for a week past."

       *       *       *       *       *

"_Oct. 1859._ U. G. R. R. Conductor reported the passage of five,
who were considered very valuable pieces of Ebony, all designated
by names, such as _John Brooks_, _Daniel Brooks_, _Mason Bushrod_,
_Sylvester Lucket_ and _Hanson Gause_. Have understood also that
three others were ticketed about midsummer."

In Ohio, Daniel Osborn, of the Alum Creek Quaker Settlement, in
the central part of the state, kept a diary, of which to-day only
a leaf remains. This bit of paper gives a record of the number
of <DW64>s passing through the Alum Creek neighborhood during an
interval of five months, from April 14 to September 10, 1844,
and is of considerable importance, because it supplies data that
furnish, when taken in connection with other terms, the elements
for an interesting computation of the number of slaves that escaped
into Ohio.[20] In the correspondence of Mr. David Putnam, of Point
Hamar, near Marietta, Ohio, there were found a few letters relating
to the journeys of fugitives. That even these few letters remain is
doubtless due to neglect or oversight on the part of the recipient.
It is noticeable that some of them bear unmistakable signs of
intended secrecy, the proper names having been blotted out, or
covered with bits of paper.

  [20] See Chap. XI, p. 346.

Underground managers who were so indiscreet as to keep a diary or
letters for a season, were induced to part with such condemning
evidence under the stress of a special danger. Mr. Robert Purvis,
of Philadelphia, states that he kept a record of the fugitives
that passed through his hands and those of his coworkers in the
Quaker City for a long period, till the trepidation of his family
after the passage of the Fugitive Slave Bill in 1850 caused him to
destroy it.[21] Daniel Gibbons, a Friend, who lived near Columbia
in southeastern Pennsylvania, began in 1824 to keep a record of the
number of fugitives he aided. He was in the habit of entering in his
book the name of the master of each fugitive, the fugitive's own
name and his age, and the new name given him. The data thus gathered
came in time to form a large volume, but after the passage of the
Fugitive Slave Law Mr. Gibbons burned this book.[22] William Parker,
the  leader in the famous Christiana case, was found by a
friend to have a large number of letters from escaped slaves hidden
about his house at the time of the Christiana affair, September
11, 1851, and these fateful documents were quickly destroyed. Had
they been discovered by the officers that visited Parker's house,
they might have brought disaster upon many persons.[23] Thus,
the need of secrecy constantly served to prevent the making of
records, or to bring about their early destruction. The written and
printed records do give a multitude of unquestioned facts about the
Underground Railroad; but when wishing to find out the details of
rational management, the methods of business, and the total amount
of traffic, we are thrown back on the recollections of living
abolitionists as the main source of information; from them the gaps
in the real history of the Underground Railroad must be filled, if
filled at all.

  [21] Conversation with Robert Purvis, Philadelphia, Pa., December
  24, 1895.

  [22] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 56, 57.

  [23] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 120, 121.

It is with the aid of such memorials that the present volume has
been written. Reminiscences have been gathered by correspondence
and by travel from many surviving abolitionists or their families;
and recollections of fugitive slave days have been culled from
books, newspapers, letters and diaries. During three years of the
five years of preparation the author's residence in Ohio afforded
him opportunity to visit many places in that state where former
employees of the Underground Railroad could be found, and to extend
these explorations to southern Michigan, and among the surviving
fugitives along the Detroit River in the Province of Ontario.
Residence in Massachusetts during the years 1895-1897 has enabled
him to secure some interesting information in regard to underground
lines in New England. The materials thus collected relate to
the following states: Iowa, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio,
Michigan, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, New
Hampshire, Rhode Island, Massachusetts and Vermont, besides a few
items concerning North Carolina, Maryland and Delaware.

Underground operations practically ceased with the beginning of the
Civil War. In view of the lapse of time, the reasons for trusting
the credibility of the evidence upon which our knowledge of the
Underground Road rests should be stated. Some of the testimony
dealt with in this chapter was put in writing during the period
of the Road's operation, or at the close of its activity, and,
therefore, cannot be easily questioned. But it may be said that
a large part of the materials for this history were drawn from
written and oral accounts obtained at a much later date; and that
these materials, even though the honesty and fidelity of the
narrators be granted, are worthy of little credit for historical
purposes. Such a criticism would doubtless be just as applied to
reminiscences purporting to represent particular events with great
detail of narration, but clearly it would lose much of its force
when directed against recollections of occurrences that came within
the range of the narrator's experience, not once nor twice, but
many times with little variation in their main features. It would
be difficult to imagine an "old-time" abolitionist, whose faculties
are in a fair state of preservation, forgetting that he received
fugitives from a certain neighbor or community a few miles away,
that he usually stowed them in his garret or his haymow, and that
he was in the habit of taking them at night in all kinds of weather
to one of several different stations, the managers of which he knew
intimately and trusted implicitly. Not only did repetition serve to
deepen the general recollections of the average operator, but the
strange and romantic character of his unlawful business helped to
fix them in his mind. Some special occurrences he is apt to remember
with vividness, because they were in some way extraordinary. If it
be argued that the surviving abolitionists are now old persons, it
should not be forgotten that it is a fact of common observation that
old persons ordinarily remember the occurrences of their youth and
prime better than events of recent date. The abolitionists, as a
class, were people whose remembrances of the ante-bellum days were
deepened by the clear definition of their governing principles, the
abiding sense of their religious convictions, and the extraordinary
conditions, legal and social, under which their acts were performed.
The risks these persons ran, the few and scattered friends they had,
the concentration of their interests into small compass, because
of the disdain of the communities where they lived, have secured
to us a source of knowledge, the value of which cannot be lightly
questioned. If there be doubt on this point, it must give way before
the manner in which statements gathered from different localities
during the last five years articulate together, the testimony of
different and sometimes widely separated witnesses combining to
support one another.[24]

  [24] The value of reminiscences and memoirs is considered in
  an article on "Recollections as a Source of History," by the
  Hon. Edward L. Pierce, in the _Proceedings of the Massachusetts
  Historical Society_, March and April, 1896, pp. 473-490. This,
  with the remarks of Professor H. Morse Stephens in his article
  entitled "Recent Memoirs of the French Directory," _American
  Historical Review_, April, 1896, pp. 475, 476, 489, should
  be read as a corrective by the student that finds himself
  constrained to have recourse to recollections for information.

The elucidation by new light of some obscure matter already
reported, the verification by a fresh witness of some fact already
discovered, gives at once the rule and test of an investigation
such as this. Out of many illustrations that might be given, the
following are offered. Mr. J. M. Forsyth, of Northwood, Logan
County, Ohio, writes under date September 22, 1894: "In Northwood
there is a denomination known as Covenanters; among them the
runaways were safe. Isaac Patterson has a cave on his place where
the fugitives were secreted and fed two or three weeks at a time
until the hunt for them was over. Then friends, as hunters, in
covered wagons would take them to Sandusky. The highest number taken
at one time was seven. The conductors were mostly students from
Northwood. All I did was to help get up the team...."

The Rev. J. S. T. Milligan, of Esther, Pennsylvania, December 5,
1896, writes entirely independently: "In 1849 my brother ... and
I went ... to Logan Co., Ohio, to conduct a grammar school ...
at a place called Northwood. The school developed into a college
under the title of Geneva Hall. J. R. W. Sloane[25] ... was elected
President and moved to Northwood in 1851.... The region was settled
by Covenanters and Seceders, and every house was a home for the
wanderers. But there was a cave on the farm of a man by the name of
Patterson, absolutely safe and fairly comfortable for fugitives.
In one instance thirteen fugitives, after resting in the cave for
some days, were taken by the students in two covered wagons to
Sandusky, some 90 miles, where I had gone to engage passage for them
on the Bay City steamboat across the lake to Malden--where I saw
them safely landed on free soil, to their unspeakable joy. Indeed, I
thought one old man would have died from the gladness of his heart
in being safe in freedom. I went from Belle Centre [near Northwood]
by rail, and did not go with the land escort--but from what they
told me of their experience, it was often amusing and sometimes
thrilling. They were ostensibly a hunting party of 10 or 12 armed
men.... The two covered wagons were a 'sanctum sanctorum' into which
no mortal was allowed to peep.... The word of command, 'Stand back,'
was always respected by those who were unduly intent upon seeing
the thirteen deer ... brought from the woods of Logan and Hardin
counties and being taken to Sandusky."

  [25] The Rev. J. R. W. Sloane, D.D., was the father of Professor
  William M. Sloane, of Columbia University, New York City.
  Professor Sloane, in a letter recently received, says: "The first
  clear, conscious memory I have is of seeing slaves taken from
  our garret near midnight, and forwarded towards Sandusky. I also
  remember the formal, but rather friendly, visitation of the house
  by the sheriff's posse." Date of letter, Paris, November 19, 1896.

In the same letter Mr. Milligan corroborates some information
secured from the Rev. R. G. Ramsey, of Cadiz, Ohio, August 18, 1892,
in regard to an underground route in southern Illinois. Mr. Ramsey
related that his father, Robert Ramsey, first engaged in Underground
Railroad work at Eden, Randolph County, Illinois, in 1844, and
that he carried it on at intervals until the War. "The fugitives,"
he said, "came up the river to Chester, Illinois, and there they
started northeast on the state road, which followed an old Indian
trail. The stations were each in a community of Covenanters, ..."
and existed, according to his account, at Chester, Eden, Oakdale,
Nashville and Centralia. "Besides my father," said Mr. Ramsey,
"John Hood and two brothers, James B. and Thomas McClurkin, lived
in Oakdale, where my father lived during the last thirty-five years
of his life. He lived in Eden before this time...."[26] The Rev.
Mr. Milligan writes as follows: "My father removed to Randolph Co.,
Ill., in 1847, and with Rev. Wm. Sloane ... and the Covenanter
congregations under their ministry kept a very large depot wide
open for slaves escaping from Missouri. Scores at a time came to
Sparta [the post-office of the Eden settlement mentioned above]--my
father's region, were harbored there, ... and finally escorted to
Elkhorn [about two miles from Oakdale], the region of Father Sloane,
where they were sheltered and escorted ... to some friends in the
region of Nashville, Ill., and thence north on the regular trail
which I am not able further to locate. At Sparta, Coultersville and
Elkhorn there was an almost constant supply of fugitives.... But ...
few were ever gotten from the ægis of the Hayes and Moores and Todds
and McLurkins and Hoods and Sloanes and Milligans of that region."

  [26] Conversation with the Rev. R. G. Ramsey, Cadiz, Ohio, August
  18, 1892.

The evidence above quoted has the well-known value of two witnesses,
examined apart, who corroborate each other; and it also illustrates
the way in which the pieces of underground routes may be joined
together. These letters, together with some additional testimony,
enable us to trace on the map a section of a secret line of travel
in southern Illinois.

Another example throws light on a channel of escape in northeastern
Indiana. While Levi Coffin lived at Newport (now Fountain City),
Indiana, he sometimes sent slaves northward by way of what he
called "the Mississinewa route,"[27] from the Mississinewa River,
near which undoubtedly it ran for a considerable distance. This
road seems to have been called also the Grant County route. In the
most general way only do these descriptions tell anything about
the route. However, correspondence with several people of Indiana
has brought it to light. One letter[28] informs us in regard to
fugitives departing from Newport: "If they came to Economy they
were sent to Grant Co...." Now, so far as known, Jonesboro' was the
next locality to which they were usually forwarded, and the line
from this point northward is given us by the Hon. John Ratliff,
of Marion, Indiana, who had been over it with passengers. He says
that the first station north of Jonesboro' was North Manchester,
where "Morris" Place was agent; the next station, Goshen, where
Dr. Matchett harbored fugitives; and thence the line ran to Young's
Prairie,[29] which is in Cass County, Michigan. The same section of
Road, but with a few additional stations, is marked out by William
Hayward. The additional stations may not have existed at the time
when Mr. Ratliff served as a guide, or he may have forgotten to
mention them. Mr. Hayward writes: "My cousin, Maurice Place, often
brought carriage loads of <DW52> people from North Manchester,
Wabash Co., to my father's house, six miles west of Manchester on
the Rochester road.... We would keep them ... until sometime in the
night; then my father would go with them to Avery Brace's ... three
miles ... north, through the woods. He took them ... seven miles
farther ... to Chauncey Hurlburt's in Kosciusko Co.... They (the
Hurlburts) took them twelve miles farther ... to Warsaw, to a man by
the name of Gordon, and he took them to Dr. Matchett's in Elkhart
Co., not far from Goshen. There were friends there to help them to
Michigan."[30]

  [27] _Reminiscences_, p. 184.

  [28] Letter of John Charles, Economy, Wayne County, Indiana,
  January 9, 1896. Mr. Charles is a Quaker, and took part in the
  underground work at Economy.

  [29] Letter from Charles W. Osborn, Economy, Indiana, March 4,
  1896. Mr. Osborn obtained the names of stations in conversation
  with Mr. Ratliff.

  [30] Letter of William Hayward.

In weighing the testimony amassed, the author has had the advantage
of personal acquaintance with many of those furnishing information;
and the internal evidence of letters has been considered in
estimating the worth of written testimony. Doubtless the work could
have been more thoroughly executed, if the collection of materials
had been systematically undertaken by some one a decade or two
earlier. It is certain that it could not have been postponed to a
later period. Since the inception of this research the ravages of
time have greatly thinned the company of witnesses, who count it
among their chiefest joys that they were permitted to live to see
their country rid of slavery, and the <DW64> race a free people.

[Illustration: ONE OF THE PIONEERS IN THE UNDERGROUND MOVEMENT IN
PHILADELPHIA AND NEW YORK.

Mr. Hopper is supposed to have resorted to underground methods as
early as 1787.]




CHAPTER II

ORIGIN AND GROWTH OF THE UNDERGROUND ROAD


The Underground Road developed in a section of country rid of
slavery, and situated between two regions, from one of which slaves
were continually escaping with the prospect of becoming indisputably
free on crossing the borders of the other. Not a few persons living
within the intervening territory were deeply opposed to slavery,
and although they were bound by law to discountenance slaves
seeking freedom, they felt themselves to be more strongly bound by
conscience to give them help. Thus it happened that in the course of
the sixty years before the outbreak of the War of the Rebellion the
Northern states became traversed by numerous secret pathways leading
from Southern bondage to Canadian liberty.

Slavery was put in process of extinction at an early period in
Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York and the New England states. From
the five and a fraction states created out of the Northwestern
Territory slavery was excluded by the Ordinance of 1787. It is
interesting to note how rapid was the progress of emancipation in
the Northeastern states, where the conditions of climate, industry
and public opinion were unfavorable to the continuance of slavery.
In 1777 emancipation was begun by the action of Vermont, which upon
its separation from New York adopted a constitution in which slavery
was prohibited. Pennsylvania and Massachusetts took action three
years later. Pennsylvania provided by statute for gradual abolition,
and its example was followed by Rhode Island and Connecticut in
1784, by New York in 1799, and by New Jersey in 1804. Massachusetts
was less direct, but not less effective, in securing the extinction
of slavery; happily it had inserted in the declaration of rights
prefixed to its constitution: "All men are born free and equal, and
have certain natural, essential and inalienable rights."[31] This
clause received at a later time strict interpretation at the bar of
the state supreme court, and slavery was held to have ceased with
the year 1780.

  [31] Constitution of Massachusetts, Part I, Art. 1; quoted by Du
  Bois, _Suppression of the Slave Trade_, p. 225.

There is little to be said about the remaining group of states with
which we are here concerned. Their territorial organizations were
effected under the provisions of the Ordinance of 1787. One of the
most important of these provisions is as follows: "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."[32] It was this feature, introduced
into the great Ordinance by New England men, that rendered futile
the many attempts subsequently made by Indiana Territory to have
slavery admitted within its own boundaries by congressional
enactment. "It is probable," says Rhodes, "that had it not been for
the prohibitory clause, slavery would have gained such a foothold
in Indiana and Illinois that the two would have been organized as
slaveholding states."[33] The five states, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois,
Michigan and Wisconsin were therefore admitted to the Union as
free states. West of the Mississippi River there is one state, at
least, that must be added to the group just indicated, namely, Iowa.
Slaveholding was prevented within its domain by the Act of Congress
of 1820, prohibiting slavery in the territory acquired under the
Louisiana purchase north of latitude 36° 30', and several years
before this law was abrogated Iowa had entered statehood with a
constitution that fixed her place among the free commonwealths. The
enfranchisement of this extended region was thus accomplished by
state and national action. The ominous result was the establishment
of a sweeping line of frontier between the slaveholding South and
the non-slaveholding North, and thereby the propounding to the
nation of a new question, that of the status of fugitives in
free regions. The elements were in the proper condition for the
crystallization of this question.

  [32] See Appendix A, p. 359.

  [33] _History of the United States_, Vol. I, p. 16.

The colonies generally had found it necessary to provide regulations
in regard to fugitives and the restoration of them to their masters.
Such provisions, it is probable, were reasonably well observed as
long as runaways did not escape beyond the borders of the colonies
to which their owners belonged; but escapes from the territory of
one colony into that of another were at first left to be settled
as the state of feeling existing between the two peoples concerned
should dictate. In 1643 the New England Confederation of Plymouth,
Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Haven, unwilling to leave the
subject of the delivery of fugitives longer to intercolonial
comity, incorporated a clause in their Articles of Confederation
providing: "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 proofs, the said servant
shall be deliuered either to his Master or any other that pursues
and brings such Certificate or proofe." About the same time an
agreement was entered into between the Dutch at New Netherlands and
the English at New Haven for the mutual surrender of fugitives, a
step that was preceded by a complaint from the commissioners of the
United Colonies to Governor Stuyvesant of New Netherlands, to the
effect that the Dutch agent at Hartford was harboring one of their
Indian slaves, and by the refusal to return some of Stuyvesant's
runaway servants from New Haven until the redress of the grievance.
It was only when some of the fugitives had been restored to New
Netherlands, and a proclamation, issued in a spirit of retaliation
by the Lords of the West India Company, forbidding the rendition
of fugitive slaves to New Haven, had been annulled, that the
agreement for the mutual surrender of runaways was made by the
two parties. Negotiations in regard to fugitives early took place
between Maryland and New Netherlands; at one time on account of the
flight of some slaves from the Southern colony into the Northern
colony, and later on account of the reversal of the conditions.
The temper of the Dutch when calling for their servants in 1659
was not conciliatory, for they threatened, if their demand should
be refused, "to publish free liberty, access and recess to all
planters, servants, <DW64>s, fugitives, and runaways which may go
into New Netherland." The escape of fugitives from the Eastern
colonies northward to Canada was also a constant source of trouble
between the French and the Dutch, and between the French and
English.[34]

  [34] M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 2-11.

When, therefore, emancipation acts were passed by Vermont and four
other states the new question came into existence. It presented
itself also in the Western territories. The framers of the
Northwest Ordinance found themselves confronted by the question,
and they dealt with it in the spirit of compromise. They enacted a
stipulation for the territory, "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."[35]

  [35] _Journals of Congress_, XII, 84, 92.

Meanwhile the Federal Convention in Philadelphia had the same
question to consider. The result of its deliberations on the point
was not different from that of Congress expressed in the Ordinance.
Among the concessions to slavery that the Federal Convention felt
constrained to make, this provision found place in the Constitution:
"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."[36] Neither of these clauses appears to have
been subjected to much debate, and they were adopted by votes that
testify to their acceptableness; the former received the support of
all members present but one, the latter passed unanimously.

  [36] Constitution of the United States, Art. IV, § 2. See
  _Revised Statutes of the United States_, I, 18. See also Appendix
  A, p. 359.

In the sentiment of the time there seems to have been no sense of
humiliation on the part of the North over the conclusions reached
concerning the rendition of escaped slaves. It had been seen by
Northern men that the subject was one requiring conciliatory
treatment, if it were not to become a block in the way of certain
Southern states entering the Union; and, besides, the opinion
generally prevailed that slavery would gradually disappear from all
the states, and the riddle would thus solve itself.[37] The South
was pleased, but apparently not exultant, over the supposed security
gained for its slave property. General C. C. Pinckney, of South
Carolina, probably expressed the view of most Southerners when he
said that the terms for the security of slave property gained by
his section were not bad, although they were not the best from the
slaveholders' standpoint, and that they permitted the recapture
of runaways in any part of America--a right the South had never
before enjoyed.[38] In abstract law the rights of the slave-owner
had in truth been well provided for. Especially deserving of note
is the fact that a constitutional basis had been furnished for
claims which, in case slavery did not disappear from the country--a
contingency not anticipated by the fathers--might be insisted upon
as having the fundamental and positive sanction of the government.
But what would be the fate of the running slave was a matter with
which, after all, private principles and sympathies, and not merely
constitutional provisions, would have a good deal to do in each case.

  [37] Elliot's _Debates_. See also George Livermore's _Historical
  Research Respecting the Opinions of the Founders of the Republic
  on <DW64>s, as Citizens and as Soldiers_, 1862, p. 51 _et seq._

  [38] Elliot's _Debates_, III, 277.

For several years the stipulations for the rendition of fugitive
slaves remained inoperative. At length, in 1791, a case of
kidnapping occurred at Washington, Pennsylvania, and this served
to bring the subject once more to the public mind. Early in 1793
Congress passed the first Fugitive Slave Law.[39] This law provided
for the reclamation of fugitives from justice and fugitives from
labor. We are concerned, of course, with the latter class only.
The sections of the act dealing with this division are too long to
be here quoted: they empowered the owner, his agent or attorney,
to seize the fugitive and take him before a United States circuit
or district judge within the state where the arrest was made, or
before any local magistrate within the county in which the seizure
occurred. The oral testimony of the claimant, or an affidavit
from a magistrate in the state from which he came, must certify
that the fugitive owed service as claimed. Upon such showing the
claimant secured his warrant for removing the runaway to the state
or territory from which he had fled. Five hundred dollars fine
constituted the penalty for hindering arrest, or for rescuing or
harboring the fugitive after notice that he or she was a fugitive
from labor.

  [39] Appendix A, pp. 359-361.

All the evidence goes to show that this law was ineffectual; Mrs.
McDougall points out that two cases of resistance to the principle
of the act occurred before the close of 1793.[40] Attempts at
amendment were made in Congress as early as the winter of 1796,
and were repeated at irregular intervals down to 1850. Secret or
"underground" methods of rescue were already well understood in and
around Philadelphia by 1804. Ohio and Pennsylvania, and perhaps
other states, heeded the complaints of neighboring slave states,
and gave what force they might to the law of 1793 by enacting laws
for the recovery of fugitives within their borders. The law of
Pennsylvania for this purpose was passed the same year in which
Mr. Clay, then Secretary of State, began negotiations with England
looking toward the extradition of slaves from Canada (1826); but
it was quashed by the decision of the United States Supreme Court
in the Prigg case in 1842.[41] By 1850 the Northern states were
traversed by numerous lines of Underground Railroad, and the South
was declaring its losses of slave property to be enormous.

  [40] _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 19.

  [41] See Chap. IX, pp. 259-267; also Stroud, _Sketch of the Laws
  Relating to Slavery in the Several States_, 2d ed., pp. 220-222.

The result of the frequent transgressions of the Fugitive Slave Law
on the one hand and of the clamorous demand for a measure adequate
to the needs of the South on the other, was the passage of a new
Fugitive Recovery Bill in 1850.[42] The increased rigor of the
provisions of this act was ill adapted to generate the respect that
a good law secures, and, indeed, must have in order to be enforced.
The law contained features sufficiently objectionable to make many
converts to the cause of the abolitionists; and a systematic evasion
of the law was regarded as an imperative duty by thousands. The
Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 was based on the earlier law, but was
fitted out with a number of clauses, dictated by a self-interest
on the part of the South that ignored the rights of every party
save those of the master. Under the regulations of the act the
certificate authorizing the arrest and removal of a fugitive slave
was to be granted to the claimant by the United States commissioner,
the courts, or the judge of the proper circuit, district, or county.
If the arrest were made without process, the claimant was to take
the fugitive forthwith before the commissioner or other official,
and there the case was to be determined in a summary manner. The
refusal of a United States marshal or his deputies to execute a
commissioner's certificate, properly directed, involved a fine of
one thousand dollars; and failure to prevent the escape of the <DW64>
after arrest, made the marshal liable, on his official bond, for the
value of the slave. When necessary to insure a faithful observance
of the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution, the commissioners,
or persons appointed by them, had the authority to summon the posse
comitatus of the county, and "all good citizens" were "commanded
to aid and assist in the prompt and efficient execution" of the
law. The testimony of the alleged fugitive could not be received
in evidence. Ownership was determined by the simple affidavit of
the person claiming the slave; and when determined it was shielded
by the certificate of the commissioner from "all molestation ...
by any process issued by any court, judge, magistrate, or other
person whomsoever." Any act meant to obstruct the claimant in his
arrest of the fugitive, or any attempt to rescue, harbor, or conceal
the fugitive, laid the person interfering liable "to a fine not
exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding six
months," also liable for "civil damages to the party injured in the
sum of one thousand dollars for each fugitive so lost." In all
cases where the proceedings took place before a commissioner he
was "entitled to a fee of ten dollars in full for his services,"
provided that a warrant for the fugitive's arrest was issued; if,
however, the fugitive was discharged, the commissioner was entitled
to five dollars only.[43]

  [42] Appendix A, pp. 361-366.

  [43] _Statutes at Large_, IX, 462-465.

By the abolitionists, at whom it was directed, this law was
detested. A government, whose first national manifesto contained the
exalted principles enshrined in the Declaration of Independence,
stooping to the task of slave-catching, violated all their ideas
of national dignity, decency and consistency. Many persons,
indeed, justified their opposition to the law in the familiar
words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are
created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain
inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness." The scriptural injunction "not to deliver
unto his master the servant that hath escaped,"[44] was also
frequently quoted by men whose religious convictions admitted of
no compromise. They pointed out that the law virtually made all
Northern citizens accomplices in what they denominated the crime
of slave-catching; that it denied the right of trial by jury,
resting the question of lifelong liberty on ex-parte evidence; made
ineffective the writ of habeas corpus; and offered a bribe to the
commissioner for a decision against the <DW64>.[45] The penalties of
fine and imprisonment for offenders against the law were severe,
but they had no deterrent effect upon those engaged in helping
slaves to Canada. On the contrary, the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850
stimulated the work of secret emancipation. "The passage of the new
law," says a recent investigator, "probably increased the number of
anti-slavery people more than anything else that had occurred during
the whole agitation. Many of those formerly indifferent were roused
to active opposition by a sense of the injustice of the Fugitive
Slave Act as they saw it executed in Boston and elsewhere.... As
Mr. James Freeman Clarke has said, 'It was impossible to convince
the people that it was right to send back to slavery men who were so
desirous of freedom as to run such risks. All education from boyhood
up to manhood had taught us to believe that it was the duty of all
men to struggle for freedom.'"[46]

  [44] _Deut._ xxiii, 15, 16.

  [45] See _Some Recollections of the Anti-Slavery Conflict_, by S.
  J. May, p. 345 _et seq._; Stroud's _Sketch of the Laws Relating
  to Slavery in the Several States_, 2d ed., 1856, pp. 271-280;
  Wilson, _History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol.
  II, pp. 304-322.

  [46] M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 43; J. F. Clarke,
  _Anti-Slavery Days_, p. 92.

The desire for freedom was in the mind of nearly every enslaved
<DW64>. Liberty was the subject of the dreams and visions of slave
preachers and sibyls; it was the object of their prayers. The
plaintive songs of the enslaved race were full of the thought of
freedom. It has been well said that "one of the finest touches in
_Uncle Tom's Cabin_ is the joyful expression of Uncle Tom when
told by his good and indulgent master that he should be set free
and sent back to his old home in Kentucky. In attributing the
common desire of humanity to the <DW64> the author was as true as
she was effective."[47] To slaves living in the vicinity, Mexico
and Florida early afforded a welcome refuge. Forests, islands and
swamps within the Southern states were favorite places of resort for
runaways. The Great Dismal Swamp became the abode of a large colony
of these refugees, whose lives were spent in its dark recesses, and
whose families were reared and buried there. Even in this retreat,
however, the <DW64>s were not beyond molestation, for they were
systematically hunted by men with dogs and guns.[48] Scraps of
information about Canada and the Northern states were gleaned and
treasured by minds recognizing their own degradation, but scarcely
knowing how to take the first step towards the betterment of their
condition.

  [47] Rhodes, _History of the United States_, Vol. I, p. 377.

  [48] F. L. Olmsted, _Journey in the Back Country_, p. 155; Rev.
  W. M. Mitchell, _The Underground Railroad_, pp. 72, 73; M. G.
  McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 57.

There can be no doubt that the form in which slavery existed in
the South during the opening decade of the present century was
comparatively mild; but it is quite clear that it soon exchanged
this character for one from which the amenities of the patriarchal
type had practically disappeared. With the rapid expansion of
the industries peculiar to the South after the opening up of the
Louisiana purchase, the invention of the cotton gin, and the removal
of the Indians from the Gulf states, came the era of the slave's
dismay. The auction block and the brutal overseer became his dread
while awake, his nightmare when asleep. That his fears were not ill
founded is proved by the activity of the slave-marts of Baltimore,
Richmond, New Orleans and Washington from the time of the migrations
to the Mississippi territory until the War. Alabama is said to have
bought millions of dollars worth of slaves from the border states up
to 1849. Dew estimated that six thousand slaves were carried from
Virginia, though not all of these were sold to other states.[49]

  [49] Edward Ingle, _Southern Side-Lights_, p. 293.

The fear of sale to the far South must have stimulated slaves to
flight. That the number of escapes did increase is deduced from
the consensus of abolitionist testimony. Our sole reliance is upon
this testimony until the appearance of the United States census
reports for 1850 and 1860;[50] and the exhibits on fugitive slaves
in these compendiums we are constrained by various considerations
to regard as inadequate. However, the flight of slaves from the
South was not what the new conditions would readily account for. We
must conclude, therefore, that the deterring effect of ignorance
and the sense of the difficulties in the way were reënforced after
1840 by increased vigilance on the part of the slave-owning class,
owing to the rise in value of slave property. "Since 1840," says a
careful observer, "the high price of slaves may be supposed ... to
have increased the vigilance and energy with which the recapture
of fugitives is followed up, and to have augmented the number of
free <DW64>s reduced to slavery by kidnappers. Indeed it has led
to a proposition being quite seriously entertained in Virginia,
of enslaving the whole body of the free <DW64>s in that state by
legislative enactment."[51] Then, too, the <DW64>'s attachment to
the land of his birth, and to his kindred, when these were not torn
from him, must be allowed to have hindered flight in many instances;
when, however, the appearance of the dreaded slave-dealer, or
the brutality of the overseer or the master, spread dismay among
the hands of a plantation, flights were likely to follow. This
was sometimes the case, too, when by the death of a planter the
division of his property among his heirs was made necessary. William
Johnson, of Windsor, Ontario, ran away from his Kentucky master
because he was threatened with being sent South to the cotton and
rice fields.[52] Horace Washington, of Windsor, after working
nearly two years for a man that had a claim on him for one hundred
and twenty-five dollars, reminded his employer that the original
agreement required but one year's labor, and asked for release.
Getting no satisfaction, and fearing sale, he fled to Canada.[53]
Lewis Richardson, one of the slaves of Henry Clay, sought relief
in flight after receiving a hundred and fifty stripes from Mr.
Clay's overseer.[54] William Edwards, of Amherstburg, Ontario,
left his master on account of a severe flogging.[55] One of the
station-keepers of an underground line in Morgan County, Ohio,
recalls an instance of a family of seven fugitives giving as the
cause of their flight the death of their master, and the expected
scattering of their number when the division of the estate should
occur.[56]

  [50] These reports will be dealt with in another connection. See
  Chap. XI, pp. 342, 343.

  [51] G. M. Weston, _Progress of Slavery in the United States_,
  Washington, D.C., 1858, pp. 22, 23.

  [52] Conversation with William Johnson, Windsor, Ontario, July,
  1895.

  [53] Conversation with Horace Washington, Windsor, Ontario, Aug.
  2, 1895.

  [54] _The Liberator_, April 10, 1846.

  [55] Conversation with William Edwards, Amherstburg, Ontario,
  Aug. 3, 1895.

  [56] Letter of H. C. Harvey, Manchester, Kan., Jan. 16, 1893.

[Illustration: This picture of a poor fugitive is from one of the
stereotype cuts manufactured in this city for the southern market,
and used on handbills offering rewards for runaway slaves.

THE RUNAWAY

(Slightly enlarged from _The Anti-Slavery Record_,
published in New York City by the American Anti-Slavery Society.)]

It has already been remarked that slaves began to find their way to
Canada before the opening of the present century, but information
in regard to that country as a place of refuge can scarcely be said
to have come into circulation before the War of 1812. The hostile
relations existing between the two nations at that time caused
<DW64>s of sagacious minds to seek their liberty among the enemies
of the United States.[57] Then, too, soldiers returning from the War
to their homes in Kentucky and Virginia brought the news of the
disposition of the Canadian government to defend the rights of the
self-emancipated slaves under its jurisdiction. Rumors of this sort
gave hope and courage to the blacks that heard it, and, doubtless,
the welcome reports were spread by these among trusted companions
and friends. By 1815 fugitives were crossing the Western Reserve in
Ohio, and regular stations of the Underground Railroad were lending
them assistance in that and other portions of the state.[58]

  [57] S. G. Howe, _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp.
  11, 12.

  [58] Wilson, _History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_,
  Vol. II, p. 63.

After the discovery of Canada by  refugees from the Southern
states, it was, presumably, not long before some of them, returning
for their families and friends, gave circulation in a limited way
to reports more substantial than the vague rumors hitherto afloat.
Among the escaped slaves that carried the promise of Canadian
liberty across Mason and Dixon's line were such successful abductors
as Josiah Henson and Harriet Tubman. In 1860 it was estimated that
the number of <DW64>s that journeyed annually from Canada to the
slave states to rescue their fellows was about five hundred. It
was said that these persons "carried the Underground Railroad and
the Underground Telegraph into nearly every Southern state."[59]
The work done by these fugitives was supplemented by the cautious
dissemination of news by white persons that went into the South to
abduct slaves or encourage them to escape, or while engaged there in
legitimate occupations used their opportunities to pass the helpful
word or to afford more substantial aid. The Rev. Calvin Fairbank,
the Rev. Charles T. Torrey and Dr. Alexander M. Ross may be cited
as notable examples of this class. The latter, a citizen of Canada,
made extensive tours through various slave states for the express
purpose of spreading information about Canada and the routes by
which that country could be reached. He made trips into Maryland,
Kentucky, Virginia and Tennessee, and did not think it too great a
risk to make excursions into the more southern states. He went to
New Orleans, and from that point set out on a journey, in the course
of which he visited Vicksburg, Selma and Columbus, Mississippi,
Augusta, Georgia, and Charleston, South Carolina.[60]

  [59] Redpath, _The Public Life of Captain John Brown_, p. 229.

  [60] Dr. A. M. Ross, _Recollections and Experiences of an
  Abolitionist_, 2d ed., 1876, pp. 10, 11, 15, 39.

Considering the comparative freedom of movement between the slave
and the free states along the border, it is easy to understand how
slaves in Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky and Missouri might pick up
information about the "Land of Promise" to the northward. Isaac
White, a slave of Kanawha County, Virginia, was shown a map and
instructed how to get to Canada by a man from Cleveland, Ohio. Allen
Sidney, a <DW64> who ran a steamboat on the Tennessee River for his
master, first learned of Canada from an abolitionist at Florence,
Alabama.[61] Until the contest over the peculiar institution had
become heated, it was not an uncommon thing for slaves to be sent
on errands, or even hired out to residents of the border counties
of the free states. Notwithstanding Ohio's political antagonism
to slavery from the beginning, there was a "tacit tolerance" of
slavery by the people of the state down to about 1835; and "numbers
of slaves, as many as two thousand it was sometimes supposed, were
hired ... from Virginia and Kentucky, chiefly by farmers." Doubtless
such persons heard more or less about Canada, and when the agitation
against slavery became vehement, they were approached by friends,
and many were induced to accept transportation to the Queen's
dominions.[62]

  [61] Conversation with White and Sidney in Canada West, August,
  1895.

  [62] Rufus King, _Ohio_, in _American Commonwealths_, pp. 364,
  365, relates that some of these slaves were discharged from
  servitude "by writs of habeas corpus procured in their names,"
  and that "numbers were abducted from the slave states and
  concealed, or smuggled by the 'Underground Railroad' into Canada."

Depredations of this sort caused alarm among slaveholders. They
sought to deter their chattels from flight by talking freely before
them about the rigors of the climate and the poverty of the soil of
Canada. Such talk was wasted on the slaves, who were shrewd enough
to discern the real meaning of their masters. They were alert to
gather all that was said, and interpret it in the light of rumors
from other sources. Thus, masters themselves became disseminators
of information they meant to withhold. In this and other ways the
slaves of the border states heard of Canada. The sale of some of
these slaves to the South helps to explain the knowledge of Canada
possessed by many blacks in those distant parts. When Mr. Ross
visited Vicksburg, Mississippi, he found that "many of these <DW64>s
had heard of Canada from the <DW64>s brought from Virginia and the
border slave states; but the impression they had was that, Canada
being so far away, it would be useless to try to reach it."[63]
Notwithstanding the distance, the number of successful escapes
from the interior as well as from the border slave states seems
to have been sufficient to arouse the suspicion in the minds of
Southerners that a secret organization of abolitionists had agents
at work in the South running off slaves. This suspicion was brought
to light during the trial of Richard Dillingham in Tennessee in
1849.[64] The labors of Mr. Ross several years later gave color to
the same notion. These facts help to explain the insistence of the
lower Southern states on the passage and strict enforcement of the
Fugitive Slave Law in 1850.

  [63] Dr. A. M. Ross, _The Recollections and Experiences of an
  Abolitionist_, p. 38.

  [64] A. L. Benedict, _Memoir of Richard Dillingham_, p. 17.

With the growth of a thing so unfavored as was the Underground Road,
local conditions must have a great deal to do. The characteristics
of small and scattered localities, and even of isolated families,
are of the first importance in the consideration of a movement such
as this. These little communities were in general the elements
out of which the underground system built itself up. The sources
of the convictions and confidences that knitted these communities
together in defiance of what they considered unjust law can only
be learned by the study of local conditions. The incorporation in
the Constitution of the compromises concerning slavery doubtless
quieted the consciences of many of the early friends of universal
liberty. It was only natural, however, that there should be some
that would hold such concessions to be sinful, and in violation of
the principles asserted in the Declaration of Independence and in
the very Preamble of the Constitution itself. These persons would
cling tenaciously to their views, and would aid a fugitive slave
whenever one would ask protection and help. It is not strange that
representatives of this class should be found more frequently among
the Quakers than any other sect. In southeastern Pennsylvania and in
New Jersey the work of helping slaves to escape was, for the most
part, in the hands of Quakers from the beginning. This was true also
of Wilmington, Delaware, New Bedford, Massachusetts, and Valley
Falls, Rhode Island, as of a number of important centres in western
Pennsylvania, and eastern, central and southwestern Ohio, in eastern
Indiana, in southern Michigan and in eastern Iowa.

Anti-slavery views prevailed against the first attempts at
enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793 in Massachusetts,
and spread to other localities in the New England states. When the
tide of emigration to the Western states set in, settlers from New
England were given more frequent occasions to put their principles
into practice in their new homes than they had known in the seaboard
region. The western portions of New York and Pennsylvania, as well
as the neighboring section of Ohio, called the Western Reserve, are
dotted over with communities where <DW64>s learned the meaning of
Yankee hospitality. Like Joshua R. Giddings, the people of these
communities claimed to have borrowed their abolition sentiments
from the writings of Jefferson, whose "abolition tract," Giddings
said, "was called the Declaration of Independence."[65] In northern
Illinois there were many centres of the New England type, though, of
course, not all the underground stations in that region were kept by
New Englanders.

  [65] George W. Julian, _Life of Joshua R. Giddings_, p. 157.

In a few neighborhoods settlers from the Southern states were
helpers. These persons had left the South on account of slavery;
they preferred to raise their families away from influences they
felt to be harmful; and they pitied the slave. It was easy for
them to give shelter to the self-freed <DW64>. In south central
Ohio, in a district of four or five counties locally known as the
old Chillicothe Presbytery, a number of the early preachers were
anti-slavery men from the Southern states. Among the number were
John Rankin, of Ripley, James Gilliland, of Red Oak, Jesse Lockhart,
of Russellville, Robert B. Dobbins, of Sardinia, Samuel Crothers,
of Greenfield, Hugh S. Fullerton, of Chillicothe, and William
Dickey, of Ross or Fayette County. The Presbyterian churches over
which these men presided became centres of opposition to slavery,
and fugitives finding their way into the vicinity of any one of
them were likely to receive the needed help.[66] The stations in
Bond, Putnam and Bureau counties, Illinois, were kept in part by
anti-slavery settlers from the South.

  [66] _History of Brown County, Ohio_, p. 313 _et seq._ Also
  letter of Dr. Isaac M. Beck, Sardinia, O., Dec. 26, 1892. Mr.
  Beck was born in 1807, and knew personally the clergymen named.
  He joined the abolition movement in 1835. His excellent letter is
  verified in various points by other correspondents.

It is a fact worthy of record in this connection that the teachings
of the two sects, the Scotch Covenanters and the Wesleyan
Methodists, did not exclude the <DW64> from the bonds of Christian
brotherhood, and where churches of either denomination existed the
Road was likely to be found in active operation. Within the borders
of Logan County, Ohio, there were a number of Covenanter homes that
received fugitives; and in southern Illinois, between the towns
of Chester and Centralia, there was a series of such hospitable
places. There were several Wesleyan Methodist stations in Harrison
County, Ohio, and with these were intermixed a few of the Covenanter
denomination.

It was natural that <DW64> settlements in the free states should be
resorted to by fugitive slaves. The <DW52> people of Greenwich, New
Jersey, the Stewart Settlement of Jackson County, Ohio, the Upper
and Lower Camps, Brown County, Ohio, and the  Settlement,
Hamilton County, Indiana, were active. The list of towns and cities
in which <DW64>s became coworkers with white persons in harboring
and concealing runaways is a long one. Oberlin, Portsmouth and
Cincinnati, Ohio, Detroit, Michigan, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and
Boston, Massachusetts, will suffice as examples.

The principles and experience gained by a number of students while
attending college in Oberlin did not come amiss later when these
young men established themselves in Iowa. Professor L. F. Parker,
after describing what was probably the longest line of travel
through Iowa for escaped slaves, says: "Along this line Quakers
and Oberlin students were the chief namable groups whose houses
were open to such travellers more certainly than to white men,"[67]
and the Rev. William M. Brooks, a graduate of Oberlin, until
recently President of Tabor College, writes: "The stations ... in
southwestern Iowa were in the region of Civil Bend, where the colony
from Oberlin, Ohio, settled which afterwards settled Tabor."[68]

  [67] Letter from Professor L. F. Parker, Grinnell, Iowa, Aug. 30,
  1894.

  [68] Letter from President W. M. Brooks, Tabor, Iowa, Oct. 11,
  1894.

The origin of the Underground Road dates farther back than is
generally known; though, to be sure, the different divisions of the
Road were not contemporary in development. Two letters of George
Washington, written in 1786, give the first reports, as yet known,
of systematic efforts for the aid and protection of fugitive slaves.
One of these letters bears the date May 12, and the other, November
20. In the former, Washington speaks of the slave of a certain Mr.
Dalby residing at Alexandria, who has escaped to Philadelphia, and
"whom a society of Quakers in the city, formed for such purposes,
have attempted to liberate."[69] In the latter he writes of a slave
whom he sent "under the care of a trusty overseer" to the Hon.
William Drayton, but who afterwards escaped. He says: "The gentleman
to whose care I sent him has promised every endeavor to apprehend
him, but it is not easy to do this, when there are numbers who
would rather facilitate the escape of slaves than apprehend them
when runaways."[70] The difficulties attending the pursuit of the
Drayton slave, like those in the other case mentioned, seem to have
been associated in Washington's mind with the procedure of certain
citizens of Pennsylvania; it is quite possible that he was again
referring to the Quaker society in Philadelphia. However that may
be, it appears probable that the record of Philadelphia as a centre
of active sympathy with the fugitive slave was continuous from the
time of Washington's letters. In 1787 Isaac T. Hopper, who soon
became known as a friend of slaves, settled in Philadelphia, and,
although only sixteen or seventeen years old, had already taken a
resolution to befriend the oppressed Africans.[71] Some cases of
kidnapping that occurred in Columbia, Pennsylvania, in 1804, stirred
the citizens of that town to intervention in the runaways' behalf;
and the movement seems to have spread rapidly among the Quakers of
Chester, Lancaster, York, Montgomery, Berks and Bucks counties.[72]
New Jersey was probably not behind southeastern Pennsylvania in
point of time in Underground Railroad work. This is to be inferred
from the fact that the adjacent parts of the two states were largely
settled by people of a sect distinctly opposed to slavery, and were
knitted together by those ties of blood that are known to have
been favorable in other quarters to the development of underground
routes. That protection was given to fugitives early in the present
century by the Quakers of southwestern New Jersey can scarcely
be doubted; and we are told that <DW64>s were being transported
through New Jersey before 1818.[73] New York was closely allied
with the New Jersey and Philadelphia centres as far back as our
meagre records will permit us to go. Isaac T. Hopper, who had grown
familiar with underground methods of procedure in Philadelphia,
moved to New York in 1829. No doubt his philanthropic arts were
soon made use of there, for in 1835 we find him accused, though
falsely this time, of harboring a runaway at his store in Pearl
Street.[74] Frederick Douglass mentions the assistance rendered
by Mr. Hopper to fugitives in New York; and says that he himself
received aid from David Ruggles, a <DW52> man and coworker with the
venerable Quaker.[75] After the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law in
1850, New York City became more active than ever in receiving and
forwarding refugees.[76] This city at the mouth of the Hudson was
the entrepôt for a line of travel by way of Albany, Syracuse and
Rochester to Canada, and for another line diverging at Albany, and
extending by the way of Troy to the New England states and Canada;
and these routes appear to have been used at an early date. The
Elmira route, which connected Philadelphia with Niagara Falls by
way of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, was made use of from about 1850
to 1860. Its comparatively late development is explained by the
fact that one of its principal agents was a fugitive slave, John
W. Jones, who did not settle in Elmira until 1844, and that the
line of the Northern Central Railroad was not completed until about
1850.[77] In western New York fugitives began to arrive from the
neighboring parts of Pennsylvania and Ohio between 1835 and 1840,
if not earlier. Professor Edward Orton recalls that in 1838, soon
after his father moved to Buffalo, two sleigh-loads of <DW64>s from
the Western Reserve were brought to the house in the night-time;[78]
and Mr. Frederick Nicholson, of Warsaw, New York, states that the
underground work in his vicinity began in 1840. From this time on
there was apparently no cessation of migrations of fugitives into
Canada at Black Rock, Buffalo and other points.[79]

  [69] Sparks's _Washington_, IX, 158, quoted in _Quakers of
  Pennsylvania_, by Dr. A. C. Applegarth, Johns Hopkins Studies, X,
  p. 463.

  [70] Lunt, _Origin of the Late War_, Vol. I, p. 20.

  [71] L. Maria Child, _Life of Isaac T. Hopper_, 1854, p. 35.

  [72] _History of Chester County, Pennsylvania_, R. C. Smedley's
  article on the "Underground Railroad," p. 426; also Smedley,
  _Underground Railroad_, p. 26.

  [73] The Rev. Thomas C. Oliver, born and raised in Salem, N.J.,
  says that the work of the Underground Railroad was going on
  before he was born, (1818) and continued until the time of the
  War. Mr. Oliver was raised in the family of Thomas Clement, a
  member of the Society of Friends. He graduated from the Princeton
  Theological Seminary in 1856. As a youth he began to take part
  in rescues. Although seventy-five years old when visited by the
  author, he was vigorous in body and mind, and seemed to have a
  remarkably clear memory.

  [74] L. Maria Child, _Life of Isaac T. Hopper_, p. 316.

  [75] _History of Florence, Mass._, p. 131, Charles A. Sheffeld,
  Editor.

  [76] The Underground Road was active in New York City at a much
  earlier date certainly than Lossing gives. He says, "After the
  Fugitive Slave Law, the Underground Railroad was established, and
  the city of New York became one of the most important stations on
  the road." _History of New York_, Vol. II, p. 655.

  [77] Letter of Mrs. Susan L. Crane, Elmira, Sept. 14, 1896. Mrs.
  Crane's father, Mr. Jervis Langdon, was active in underground
  work at Elmira, and had a trusted co-laborer in John W. Jones,
  who still lives in Elmira.

  [78] Conversation with Professor Orton, Ohio State University,
  Columbus, O., 1893.

  [79] For cases of arrivals of escaped slaves over some of the
  western New York branches, see _Sketches in the History of the
  Underground Railroad_, by Eber M. Pettit, 1879. These sketches
  were first published in the _Fredonia Censor_, the series closing
  Nov. 18, 1868.

The remoteness of New England from the slave states did not
prevent its sharing in the business of helping blacks to Canada.
In Vermont, which seems to have received fugitives from the Troy
line of eastern New York, the period of activity began "in the
latter part of the twenties of this century, and lasted till the
time of the Rebellion."[80] In New Hampshire there was a station
at Canaan after 1830, and probably before that time.[81] The Hon.
Mellen Chamberlain, of Chelsea, Massachusetts, personally conducted
a fugitive on two occasions from Concord, New Hampshire, to his
uncle's at Canterbury, in the same state "most probably in 1838
or 1839."[82] This thing once begun in New Hampshire seems to
have continued steadily during the decades until the War of the
Rebellion.[83] As regards Connecticut the Rev. Samuel J. May states
that as long ago as 1834 slaves were addressed to his care while he
was living in the eastern part of the state.[84] In Massachusetts
the town of Fall River became an important station in 1839.[85]
New Bedford, Boston, Marblehead, Concord, Springfield, Florence
and other places in Massachusetts are known to have given shelter
to fugitives as they travelled northward. Mr. Simeon Dodge, of
Marblehead, who had personal knowledge of what was going on,
recollects that the Underground Road was active between 1840 and
1860, and his testimony is substantiated by that of a number of
other persons.[86] Doubtless there was underground work going on
in Massachusetts before this period, but it was probably of a less
systematic character. In Maine fugitives frequently obtained help in
the early forties. The Rev. O. B. Cheney, later President of Bates
College, was concerned in a branch of the Road running from Portland
to Effingham, New Hampshire, and northward, during the years 1843
to 1845.[87] That later conditions probably increased the labors
of the Maine abolitionists appears from the statement of Mr. Brown
Thurston, of Portland, that he had at one time after the passage of
the second Fugitive Slave Law the care of thirty fugitives.[88]

  [80] Letter of Mr. Aldis O. Brainerd, St. Albans, Vt., Oct. 21,
  1895.

  [81] Letter of Mr. Charles E. Lord, Franklin, Pa., July 6, 1896:
  "My maternal grandfather, James Furber, lived for several years
  in Canaan, N.H., where his house was one of the stations of the
  Underground Railway. His father-in-law, James Harris, who lived
  in the same house, had been engaged in helping fugitive <DW64>s
  on toward Canada ever since 1830, and probably before that time."

  [82] Letter of Judge Mellen Chamberlain, Chelsea, Mass., Feb. 1,
  1896.

  [83] Letter of Mr. Thomas P. Cheney, Ashland, N.H., March 30,
  1896.

  [84] _Recollections of the Anti-Slavery Conflict_, p. 297.

  [85] Elizabeth Buffum Chace, _Anti-Slavery Reminiscences_, p.
  27. Mrs. Chace says: "From the time of the arrival of James
  Curry at Fall River, and his departure for Canada, in 1839, that
  town became an important station on the so-called Underground
  Railroad." The residence of Mrs. Chace was a place of refuge from
  the year named.

  [86] Concerning Springfield, Mass, see Mason A. Green's _History
  of Springfield_, pp. 470, 471. For the sentiment of New Bedford,
  see Ellis's _History of New Bedford_, pp. 306, 307.

  [87] Letter of the Rev. O. B. Cheney, Pawtuxet, R.I., Apr. 8,
  1896.

  [88] Letter of Mr. Brown Thurston, Portland, Me., Oct. 21, 1895.

Considering the geographical situation of Ohio and western
Pennsylvania, the period of their settlement, and the character of
many of their pioneers, it is not strange that this work should
have become established in this region earlier than in the other
free states along the Ohio River. The years 1815 to 1817 witnessed,
so far as we now know, the origin of underground lines in both the
eastern and western parts of this section. Henry Wilson explains
this by saying that soldiers from Virginia and Kentucky, returning
home after the War of 1812, carried back the news that there was a
land of freedom beyond the lakes. John Sloane, of Ravenna, David
Hudson, the founder of the town of Hudson, and Owen Brown, the
father of John Brown of Osawattomie, were among the first of those
known to have harbored slaves in the eastern part.[89] Edward
Howard, the father of Colonel D. W. H. Howard, of Wauseon, and the
Ottawa Indians of the village of Chief Kinjeino were among the
earliest friends of fugitives in the western part.[90] At least
one case of underground procedure is reported to have occurred in
central Ohio as early as 1812. The report is but one remove from its
original source, and was given to Mr. Robert McCrory, of Marysville,
Ohio, by Richard Dixon, an eye-witness. The alleged runaway, seized
at Delaware, was unceremoniously taken from the custody of his
mounted captor when the two reached Worthington, and was brought
before Colonel James Kilbourne, who served as an official of all
work in the village he had founded but a few years before. By Mr.
Kilbourne's decision, the <DW64> was released, and was then sent
north aboard one of the government wagons engaged at the time in
carrying military supplies to Sandusky.[91] That such action was
not inconsistent with the character of Colonel Kilbourne and his
New England associates is evidenced by the fact that as an agent
for "The Scioto Company," formed in Granby, Connecticut, in the
winter of 1801-1802, he had delayed the purchase of a township in
Ohio for settlement until a state constitution forbidding slavery
should be adopted.[92] If now the testimony of the oldest surviving
abolitionists from the different regions of the state be compared,
some interesting results may be found. Job Mullin, a Quaker of
Warren County, in his eighty-ninth year when his statement was
given, says: "The most active time to my knowledge was from 1816
to 1830...." In 1829 Mr. Mullin moved off the line with which he
had been connected and took no further part in the work.[93] Mr.
Eliakim H. Moore, for a number of years the treasurer of Ohio
University at Athens, says that the work began near Athens during
1823 and 1824. "In those years not so many attempted to escape as
later, from 1845 to 1860."[94] Dr. Thomas Cowgill, an aged Quaker
of Kennard, Champaign County, recollects that the work of the
Underground Railroad began in his neighborhood about 1824. The time
between 1840 and the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law he regards
as the period of greatest activity within his experience. Joseph
Skillgess, a  citizen of Urbana, now seventy-six years old,
says that it is among his earliest recollections that runaways
were entertained at Dry Run Church, in Ross County.[95] William A.
Johnston, an old resident of Coshocton, testifies: "We had such
a road here as early as the twenties, I know from tradition and
personal observation."[96] Mahlon Pickrell, a prominent Quaker of
Logan County, writes: "There was some travel on the Underground
Railroad as early as 1820, but the period of greatest activity in
this vicinity was between 1840 and 1850."[97] Finally, Mr. R. C.
Corwin, of Lebanon, writes: "My first recollection of the business
dates back to about 1820, when I remember seeing fugitives at my
father's house, though I dare say it had been going on long before
that time. From that time until 1840 there was a gradual increase of
business. From 1840 to 1860 might be called the period of greatest
activity."[98] Among these aged witnesses, those have been quoted
whose experience, character and clearness of mind gave weight to
their words. Mr. Rush R. Sloane, of Sandusky, who made some local
investigations in northwestern Ohio and published the results in
1888, produces some evidence that agrees with the testimony just
given. He found that, "The first runaway slave known as such at
Sandusky was there in the fall of the year 1820.... Judge Jabez
Wright, one of the three associate judges who held the first term
of court in Huron County in 1815, was among the first white men
upon the Firelands to aid fugitive slaves; he never failed when
opportunity offered to lend a helping hand to the fugitives,
secreting them when necessary, feeding them when they were hungry,
clothing and employing them."[99] After reciting a number of
instances of rescues occurring between 1820 and 1850, Mr. Sloane
remarks that one of the immediate results of the passage of the
second Fugitive Slave Law was the increased travel of fugitives
through the State of Ohio.[100] The foregoing items have been
brought together to show that there was no break in the business of
the Road from the beginning to the end. The death or the change of
residence of abolitionists may have interrupted travel on one or
another route, and may even have broken a line permanently, but the
history of the Underground Railroad system in Ohio is continuous.

  [89] Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. II, p.
  63; Alexander Black, _The Story of Ohio_, see account of the
  Underground Railroad.

  [90] Letter of Col. D. W. H. Howard, Wauseon, O., Aug. 22, 1894.

  [91] Conversation with Robert McCrory, Marysville, O., Sept. 30,
  1898. Mr. McCrory was educated at Oberlin College, and has an
  excellent memory.

  [92] Howe's _Historical Collections of Ohio_, Vol. I, p. 614.

  [93] Letter from Job Mullin, dictated to his son-in-law, W. H.
  Newport, at Springboro, O., Sept. 9, 1895.

  [94] Conversation with Mr. Eliakim H. Moore, Athens, O.

  [95] Conversation with Joseph Skillgess, Urbana, O., Aug. 14,
  1894.

  [96] Letter of Wm. A. Johnston, Coshocton, O., Aug. 23, 1894.

  [97] Letter of Hannah W. Blackburn, for her father, Mahlon
  Pickrell, Zanesfield, O., March 25, 1893.

  [98] Letter of R. C. Corwin, Lebanon, O., Sept. 11, 1895.

  [99] _The Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 34.

  [100] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 34 _et seq._

In North Carolina underground methods are known to have been
employed by white persons of respectability as early as 1819. We
are informed that "Vestal Coffin organized the Underground Railroad
near the present Guilford College in 1819. Addison Coffin, his
son, entered its service as a conductor in early youth and still
survives in hale old age.... Vestal's cousin, Levi Coffin, became
an anti-slavery apostle in early youth and continued unflinching to
the end. His early years were spent in North Carolina, whence he
helped many slaves to reach the West."[101] Levi Coffin removed to
Indiana in 1826. Of his own and his cousin's activities in behalf
of slaves while still a resident of North Carolina, Mr. Coffin
writes: "Runaway slaves used frequently to conceal themselves in
the woods and thickets of New Garden, waiting opportunities to make
their escape to the North, and I generally learned their places of
concealment and rendered them all the service in my power.... These
outlying slaves knew where I lived, and, when reduced to extremity
of want or danger, often came to my room, in the silence and
darkness of the night, to obtain food or assistance. In my efforts
to aid these fugitives I had a zealous coworker in my friend and
cousin Vestal Coffin, who was then, and continued to the time of his
death--a few years later--a staunch friend to the slave."[102] When
Levi Coffin emigrated in 1826 to southeastern Indiana, he did not
give up his active interest in the fleeing slave, and his house at
Newport (now Fountain City) became a centre at which three distinct
lines of Underground Road converged. It is probable, however, that
wayfarers from bondage found aid from pioneer settlers in Indiana
before Friend Coffin's arrival. John F. Williams, of Economy,
Indiana, says that fugitives "commenced coming in 1820," and he
denominated himself "an agent since 1820," although he "never kept
a depot till 1852."[103] It is scarcely necessary to make a showing
of testimony to prove that an expansion of routes like that taking
place in Ohio and states farther east occurred also in Indiana.

  [101] Stephen B. Weeks, _Southern Quakers and Slavery_, p. 242.

  [102] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, 2d ed., pp. 20, 21.

  [103] Letter from John F. Williams, Economy, Ind., March 21,
  1893. When this letter was written, Mr. Williams was eighty-one
  years old. He was, he says, born in 1812. In 1820 he would have
  been eight years old. Children were sometimes sent to carry food
  to refugees in hiding, or to do other little services with which
  they could be safely trusted. Such experiences were apt to make
  deep impressions on their young memories.

It is doubtful at what time stations first came to exist in
Illinois. Mr. H. B. Leeper, an old resident of that state, assigns
their origin to the years 1819 and 1820, at which time a small
colony of anti-slavery people from Brown County, Ohio, settled in
Bond County, southern Illinois. Emigrations from this locality to
Putnam County, about 1830, led, he thinks, to the establishment
there of a new centre for this work. These settlers were persons
that had left South Carolina on account of slavery, and during their
residence in Brown County, Ohio, had accepted the abolitionist views
of the Rev. James Gilliland, a Presbyterian preacher of Red Oak;
and in Illinois they did not shrink from putting their principles
into practice. This account is plausible, and as it is substantiated
in certain parts by facts from the history of Brown County, Ohio,
it may be considered probable in those parts that are and must
remain without corroboration. Concerning his father Mr. Leeper
writes: "John Leeper moved from Marshall County, Tennessee, to Bond
County, Illinois, in 1816. Was a hater of slavery.... Remained
in Bond County until 1823, then moved to Jacksonville, Morgan
County, and in 1831 to Putnam County, and in 1833 to Bureau County,
Illinois.... My father's house was always a hiding-place for the
fugitive from slavery."[104] On the basis of this testimony, and
the probability in the case, we may believe that the underground
movement in Illinois dates back, at least, to the time of the
admission of Illinois into the Union, that is, to 1818. Soon after
1835, the movement seems to have become well established, and to
have increased in importance with considerable rapidity till the War.

  [104] Letter from H. B. Leeper, Princeton, Ill., received Dec.
  19, 1895. Mr. Leeper is seventy-five years of age. His letter
  shows a knowledge of the localities of which he writes, Bond
  County in southwestern Illinois, and Bureau and Putnam Counties
  in the central part of the state.

It is a fact worthy of note that the years that witnessed the
beginnings in Ohio, Indiana, North Carolina and Illinois of this
curious method of assailing the slave power, precede but slightly
those that witnessed the formulation of three several bills in
Congress designed to strengthen the first Fugitive Slave Law. The
three measures were drafted during the interval from 1818 to 1822.

The abolitionist enterprises of the more western states, Iowa and
Kansas, came too late to be in any way connected with the proposal
of these bills. The settlement of these territories was, of course,
considerably behind that of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois, but the
nearness of the new regions to a slaveholding section insured the
opportunity for Underground Railroad work as soon as settlement
should begin. Professor L. F. Parker, of Tabor College, Iowa, has
sketched briefly the successive steps in the opening of his state
to occupancy. "The Black-Hawk Purchase opened the eastern edge of
Iowa to the depth of 40 or 50 miles to the whites in 1833. The
strip ... west of that which included what is now Grinnell was not
opened to white occupancy till 1843, and it was ten years later
before the white residents in this county numbered 500. Grinnell was
settled in 1854, when central and western Iowa was merely dotted
by a few hamlets of white men, and seamed by winding paths along
prairie ridges and through bridgeless streams."[105] One of the
early settlers in southeastern Iowa was J. H. B. Armstrong, who
had been familiar with the midnight appeals of escaping slaves in
Fayette County, Ohio. Mr. Armstrong removed to the West in 1839,
and settled in Lee County, Iowa. His proximity to the northeastern
boundary of Missouri seems to have involved him in Underground
Railroad work from the start, on the route running to Salem and
Denmark. When in 1852 Mr. Armstrong moved to Appanoose County, and
located within four miles of the Missouri line, among a number of
abolitionists, he found himself even more concerned with secret
projects to help slaves to Canada. The lines of travel of fugitive
slaves that extended east throughout the entire length of Iowa were
more or less associated with Kansas men and Kansas movements, and
their development is, therefore, to be assigned to the time of the
outbreak of the struggle over Kansas (1854). Residents of Tabor
in southwestern Iowa, and of Grinnell in central Iowa, agree in
designating 1854 as the year in which their Underground Railroad
labors began. The Rev. John Todd, one of the founders of the college
colony of Tabor, is authority for the statement that the first
fugitives arrived in the summer of 1854.[106] Professor Parker
states that Grinnell was a stopping-place for the hunted slave from
the time of its founding in 1854.

  [105] Letter from Professor L. F. Parker, Grinnell, Iowa, Aug.
  30, 1894.

  [106] Letter from Professor James E. Todd, Vermillion, South
  Dakota, Nov. 6, 1894. Professor Todd is the son of the Rev. John
  Todd.

  The _Tabor Beacon_, 1890, 1891, contains a series of
  reminiscences from the pen of the Rev. John Todd. The first of
  these recounts the first arrival of fugitives in July, 1854.

We may summarize our findings in regard to the expansion of the
Underground Railroad, then, by saying that it had grown into a
wide-spread "institution" before the year 1840, and in several
states it had existed in previous decades. This statement coincides
with the findings of Dr. Samuel G. Howe in Canada, while on a tour
of investigation in 1863. He reports that the arrivals of runaway
slaves in the provinces, at first rare, increased early in the
century; that some of the fugitives, rejoicing in the personal
freedom they had gained and banishing all fear of the perils they
must endure, went stealthily back to their former homes and brought
away their wives and children. The Underground Road was of great
assistance to these and other escaping slaves, and "hundreds," says
Dr. Howe, "trod this path every year, but they did not attract much
public attention."[107] It does not escape Dr. Howe's consideration,
however, that the fugitive slaves in Canada were soon brought to
public notice by the diplomatic negotiations between England and the
United States during the years 1826-1828, the object being, as Mr.
Clay, the Secretary of State, himself declared, "to provide for a
growing evil." The evidence gathered from surviving abolitionists
in the states adjacent to the lakes shows an increased activity of
the Underground Road during the period 1830-1840. The reason for
flight given by the slave was, in the great majority of cases, the
same, namely, fear of being sold to the far South. It is certainly
significant in this connection that the decade above mentioned
witnessed the removal of the Indians from the Gulf states, and,
in the words of another contemporary observer and reporter, "the
consequent opening of new and vast cotton fields."[108] The swelling
emphasis laid upon the value of their escaped slaves by the Southern
representatives in Congress, and by the South generally, resounded
with terrific force at length in the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.
That act did not, as it appears, check or diminish in any way the
number of underground rescues. In spite of the exhibit on fugitive
slaves made in the United States census report of 1860, which
purports to show that the number of escapes was about a thousand a
year, it is difficult to doubt the consensus of testimony of many
underground agents, to the effect that the decade from 1850 to 1860
was the period of the Road's greatest activity in all sections of
the North.[109]

  [107] S. G. Howe, _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_,
  1864, pages 11, 12.

  [108] G. M. Weston, _Progress of Slavery in the United States_,
  Washington, D.C., 1858, p. 22.

  [109] Some conclusions presented in the _American Historical
  Review_, April, 1896, pp. 460-462, are here repeated.

It is not known when the name "Underground Railroad" came to be
applied to these secret trails, nor where it was first applied
to them. According to Mr. Smedley the designation came into use
among slave-hunters in the neighborhood of Columbia soon after the
Quakers in southeastern Pennsylvania began their concerted action
in harboring and forwarding fugitives. The pursuers seem to have had
little difficulty in tracking slaves as far as Columbia, but beyond
that point all trace of them was generally lost. All the various
methods of detection customary in such cases were resorted to, but
failed to bring the runaways to view. The mystery enshrouding these
disappearances completely bewildered and baffled the slave-owners
and their agents, who are said to have declared, "there must be
an Underground Railroad somewhere."[110] As this work reached
considerable development in the district indicated during the first
decade of this century the account quoted is seen to contain an
anachronism. Railroads were not known either in England or the
United States until about 1830, so that the word "railroad" could
scarcely have received its figurative application as early as Mr.
Smedley implies.

  [110] R. C. Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 34, 35.

The Hon. Rush R. Sloane, of Sandusky, Ohio, gives the following
account of the naming of the Road: "In the year 1831, a fugitive
named Tice Davids came over the line and lived just back of
Sandusky. He had come direct from Ripley, Ohio, where he crossed the
Ohio River....

"When he was running away, his master, a Kentuckian, was in close
pursuit and pressing him so hard that when the Ohio River was
reached he had no alternative but to jump in and swim across. It
took his master some time to secure a skiff, in which he and his
aid followed the swimming fugitive, keeping him in sight until he
had landed. Once on shore, however, the master could not find him.
No one had seen him; and after a long ... search the disappointed
slave-master went into Ripley, and when inquired of as to what had
become of his slave, said ... he thought 'the <DW65> must have gone
off on an underground road.' The story was repeated with a good deal
of amusement, and this incident gave the name to the line. First
the 'Underground Road,' afterwards 'Underground Railroad.'"[111]
A <DW52> man, the Rev. W. M. Mitchell, who was for several years
a resident of southern Ohio, and a friend of fugitives, gives
what appears to be a version of Mr. Sloane's story.[112] These
anecdotes are hardly more than traditions, affording a fair general
explanation of the way in which the Underground Railroad got its
name; but they cannot be trusted in the details of time, place
and occasion. Whatever the manner and date of its suggestion, the
designation was generally accepted as an apt title for a mysterious
means of transporting fugitive slaves to Canada.

  [111] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 35.

  [112] The _Underground Railroad_, pp. 4, 5.

[Illustration: A CROSSING PLACE FOR FUGITIVE SLAVES ON THE OHIO
RIVER, AT STEUBENVILLE, OHIO.

(From a recent photograph.)]

[Illustration: HOUSE OF THE REV. JOHN RANKIN, RIPLEY, OHIO.

Situated on the top of a high hill, this initial station was readily
found by runaways from the Kentucky shore opposite.

(From a recent photograph.)]




CHAPTER III

THE METHODS OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD


By the enactment of the first Fugitive Slave Law, February 12,
1793, the aiding of fugitive slaves became a penal offence. This
measure laid a fine of five hundred dollars upon any one harboring
escaped slaves, or preventing their arrest. The provisions of the
law were of a character to stimulate resistance to its enforcement.
The master or his agent was authorized to arrest the runaway,
wherever found; to bring him before a judge of the circuit or the
district court of the United States, or before a local magistrate
where the capture was made; and to receive, on the display of
satisfactory proof, a certificate operating as a full warrant for
taking the prisoner back to the state from which he had fled. This
summary method of disposing of cases involving the high question of
human liberty was regarded by many persons as unjust; they freely
denounced it, and, despite the penalty attached, many violated the
law. Secrecy was the only safeguard of these persons, as it was
of those they were attempting to succor; hence arose the numerous
artifices employed.

The uniform success of the attempts to evade this first Fugitive
Slave Law, and doubtless, also, the general indisposition of
Northern people to take part in the return of refugees to their
Southern owners, led, as early as in 1823, to negotiations between
Kentucky and the three adjoining states across the Ohio. It is
unnecessary to trace the history of these negotiations, or to point
out the statutes in which the legislative results are recorded. It
is notable that sixteen years elapsed before the legislature of Ohio
passed a law to secure the recovery of slave property, and that the
new enactment remained on the statute books only four years. The
penalties imposed by this law for advising or for enticing a slave
to leave his master, or for harboring a fugitive, were a fine, not
to exceed five hundred dollars, and, at the discretion of the court,
imprisonment not to exceed sixty days. In addition, the offender was
to be liable in an action at the suit of the party injured.[113] It
can scarcely be supposed that a state Fugitive Slave Law like this
would otherwise affect persons that were already engaged in aiding
runaways than to make them more certain than ever that their cause
was just.

  [113] The date of the act is February 26, 1839.

The loss of slave property sustained by Southern planters was
not diminished, and the outcry of the South for a more rigorous
national law on the subject was by no means hushed. In 1850 Congress
met the case by substituting for the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793
the measure called the second Fugitive Slave Law. The penalties
provided by this law were, of course, more severe than those of the
act of 1793. Any person hindering the claimant from arresting the
fugitive, or attempting the rescue or concealment of the fugitive,
became "subject to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, or
imprisonment not exceeding six months," and was liable for "civil
damages to the party injured by such illegal conduct in the sum of
one thousand dollars for each fugitive so lost." These provisions
of the new law only added fresh fuel to the fire. The determination
to prevent the recovery of escaped slaves by their owners spread
rapidly among the inhabitants of the free states. Many of these
persons, who had hitherto refrained from acting for or against the
fugitive, were provoked into helping defeat the action of a law
commanding them "to aid and assist in the prompt and efficient
execution" of a measure that would have set them at the miserable
business of slave-catching. Clay only expressed a wish instead of
a fact, when he maintained in 1851 that the law was being executed
in Indiana, Ohio and other states. Another Southern senator was
much nearer the truth when he complained of the small number of
recaptures under the recent act.

The risk of suffering severe penalties by violating the Fugitive
Slave laws was less wearing, probably, on abolitionists than was
the social disdain they brought upon themselves by acknowledging
their principles. During a generation or more they were in a
minority in many communities, and were forced to submit to the
taunts and insults of persons that did not distinguish between
abolition of slavery and fusion of the white and the black races.
"Black abolitionist," "niggerite," "amalgamationist" and "<DW65>
thief" were convenient epithets in the mouths of pro-slavery
champions in many Northern neighborhoods. The statement was not
uncommonly made about those suspected of harboring slaves, that
they did so from motives of thrift and gain. It was said that some
underground helpers made use of the labor of runaways, especially
in harvest-time, as long as it suited their convenience, then
on the pretext of danger hurried the <DW64>s off without pay.
Unreasoning malice alone could concoct so absurd an explanation of
a philanthropy involving so much cost and risk.[114] Abolitionists
were often made uncomfortable in their church relations by the
uncomplimentary attentions they received, or by the discovery
that they were regarded as unwelcome disturbers of the household
of faith.[115] Even the Society of Friends is not above the
charge of having lost sight, in some quarters, of the precepts
of Anthony Benezet and John Woolman. Uxbridge monthly meeting is
known to have disowned Abby Kelly because she gave anti-slavery
lectures.[116] The church certificate given to Mrs. Elizabeth
Buffum Chace when she transferred her membership from Swanzey
monthly meeting to Providence (Rhode Island) monthly meeting was
without the acknowledgment usually contained in such certificates
that the bearer "was of orderly life and conversation."[117] A
popular Hicksite minister of New York City, in commending the
fugitive Thomas Hughes for consenting to return South with his
master, said, "I had a thousand times rather be a slave, and spend
my days with slaveholders, than to dwell in companionship with
abolitionists."[118] In the Methodist Church there came to be
such stress of feeling between the abolitionists and the other
members, that in many places the former withdrew and organized
little congregations apart, under the denominational name, Wesleyan
Methodist. The truth is, the mass of the people of the free states
were by no means abolitionists; they cherished an intense prejudice
against the <DW64>, and permitted it to extend to all anti-slavery
advocates. They were willing to let slavery alone, and desired that
others should let it alone. In the Western states the character
of public sentiment is evidenced by the fact that generally the
political party considered to be most favorable to slavery could
command a majority, and "black laws" were framed at the behest of
Southern politicians for the purpose of making residence in the
Northern states a disagreeable thing for the <DW64>.[119]

  [114] See an article entitled "An Underground Railway," by Robert
  W. Carroll, of Cincinnati, O., in the _Cincinnati Times-Star_,
  Aug. 19, 1890; also Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 182; and
  J. B. Robinson, _Pictures of Slavery and Anti-Slavery_, pp. 293,
  294.

  [115] _History of Henry County, Indiana_, p. 126 _et seq._

  [116] Elizabeth Buffum Chace, _Anti-Slavery Reminiscences_, p. 19.

  [117] _Ibid._, p. 18.

  [118] Lydia Maria Child, _Life of Isaac T. Hopper_, pp. 388, 389.

  [119] See President Fairchild's pamphlet, _The Underground
  Railroad_.

Abolitionists were frequently subjected to espionage; the arrival
of a party of <DW52> people at a house after daybreak would arouse
suspicion and cause the place to be closely watched; a chance
meeting with a neighbor in the highway would perhaps be the means
by which some abolitionists' secrets would become known. In such
cases it did not always follow that the discovery brought ruin upon
the head of the offender, even when the discoverer was a person of
pro-slavery views. Nevertheless, accidents of the kind described
served to fasten the suspicions of a locality upon the offender.
Gravner and Hannah Marsh, Quakers, living near Downington, in
Chester County, Pennsylvania, became known to their pro-slavery
neighbors as agents on the Underground Road. These neighbors were
not disposed to inform against them, although one woman, intent on
finding out how many slaves they aided in a year, with much watching
counted sixty.[120] The Rev. John Cross, a Presbyterian minister
living in Elba Township, Knox County, Illinois, about the year
1840, had neighbors that insisted on his answering to the law for
the help he gave to some fugitives. Mr. Cross made no secret of his
principles and accordingly became game for his enemies. One of these
was Jacob Kightlinger, who observed a wagon-load of <DW64>s being
taken in the direction of Mr. Cross's house. Investigation by Mr.
Kightlinger and several of his friends proved their suspicions to
be true, and by their action Mr. Cross was indicted for harboring
fugitive slaves.[121]

  [120] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 139.

  [121] _History of Knox County, Ill._, pp. 213, 214. Mr.
  Kightlinger's account of this affair is published under his own
  name.

Parties in pursuit of fugitives were compelled to make careful
and often long-continued search to find traces of their wayfaring
chattels. During such missions they were, of course, inquisitive
and vigilant, and when circumstances seemed to warrant it, they
set men to watch the premises of the persons most suspicioned, and
to report any mysterious actions occurring within the district
patrolled. The houses of many noted abolitionists along the Ohio
River were frequently under the surveillance of slave-hunters. It
was not a rare thing that towns and villages in regions adjacent to
the Southern states were terrorized by crowds of roughs eager to
find the hiding-places of slaves, recently missed by masters bent on
their recovery. The following extracts from a letter written by Mr.
William Steel to Mr. David Putnam, Jr., of Point Harmar, Ohio, will
show the methods practised by slave-hunters when in eager pursuit of
fugitives:--

  WOODSFIELD, MONROE CO., O.

  Sept. 5, 1843.

     MR. DAVID PUTNAM, JR.:

     _Dear Sir_,--I received yours of the 26th ult, and was very
     glad to hear from it that Stephen Quixot had such good luck
     in getting his family from Virginia, but we began to be very
     uneasy about them as we did not hear from them again until last
     Saturday, ... we then heard they were on the route leading
     through Summerfield, but that the route from there to Somerton
     was so closely watched both day and night for some time past
     on account of the human cattle that have lately escaped from
     Virginia, that they could not proceed farther on that route.
     So we made an arrangement with the Summerfield friends to meet
     them on Sunday evening about ten miles west of this and bring
     them on to this route ... the abolitionists of the west part of
     this county have had very difficult work in getting them all off
     without being caught, as the whole of that part of the country
     has been filled with Southern blood hounds upon their track, and
     some of the abolitionists' houses have been watched day and
     night for several days in succession. This evening a company of
     eight Virginia hounds passed through this place north on the
     hunt of some of their two-legged chattels.... Since writing the
     above I have understood that something near twenty Virginians
     including the eight above mentioned have just passed through
     town on their way to the Somerton neighborhood, but I do not
     think they will get much information about their lost chattels
     there....

  Yours for the Slave,

  WILLIAM STEEL.[122]

  [122] The original letter is in the possession of the author of
  this book.

A case that well illustrates the method of search employed by
pursuing parties is that of the escape of the Nuckolls slaves
through Iowa, the incidents of which are still vivid in the memories
of some that witnessed them. Mr. Nuckolls, of Nebraska City,
Nebraska, lost two slave-girls in December, 1858. He instituted
search for them in Tabor, an abolitionist centre, and did not
neglect to guard the crossings of two streams in the vicinity,
Silver Creek and the Nishnabotna River. As the slaves had been
promptly despatched to Chicago, this search availed him nothing. A
second and more thorough hunt was decided on, and the aid of a score
or more fellows was secured. These men made entrance into houses by
force and violence, when bravado failed to gain them admission.[123]
At one house where the remonstrance against intrusion was unusually
strong the person remonstrating was struck over the head and injured
for life. The outcome of the whole affair was that Mr. Nuckolls had
some ten thousand dollars to pay in damages and costs, and, after
all, failed to recover his slaves.[124]

  [123] The _Tabor Beacon_, 1890, 1891, Chapter XXI of a series
  of articles by the Rev. John Todd, on "The Early Settlement
  and Growth of Western Iowa." Mr. Todd was one of the early
  settlers of western Iowa. The letters were received from his
  son, Professor James E. Todd, of the University of South Dakota,
  Vermillion, S. Dak.

  [124] Letter of Mr. Sturgis Williams, Percival, Ia., 1894. Mr.
  Williams was also one of the pioneers of western Iowa.

Many were the inducements to practise espionage on abolitionists.
Large sums were offered for the capture of fugitives, and rewards
were offered also for the arrest and delivery south of Mason
and Dixon's line of certain abolitionists, who were well-enough
known to have the hatred of many Southerners. "At an anti-slavery
meeting of the citizens of Sardinia and vicinity, held on November
21, 1838, a committee of respectable citizens presented a report,
accompanied with affidavits in support of its declarations, stating
that for more than a year past there had been an unusual degree of
hatred manifested by the slave-hunters and slaveholders towards
the abolitionists of Brown County, and that rewards varying from
$500 to $2,500 had been repeatedly offered by different persons
for the abduction or assassination of the Rev. John B. Mahan; and
rewards had also been offered for Amos Pettijohn, William A. Frazier
and Dr. Isaac M. Beck, of Sardinia, the Rev. John Rankin and Dr.
Alexander Campbell, of Ripley, William McCoy, of Russellville,
and citizens of Adams County."[125] A resolution was offered in
the Maryland Legislature, in January, 1860, proposing a reward
for the arrest of Thomas Garrett, of Wilmington, for "stealing"
slaves.[126] It is perhaps an evidence of the extraordinary caution
and shrewdness employed by managers of the Road generally that so
many of them escaped without suffering the penalties of the law or
the inflictions of private vengeance.

  [125] _History of Brown County, Ohio_, p. 314.

  [126] _The New Reign of Terror in the Slaveholding States_, for
  1859-1860 (_Anti-Slavery Tracts_, No. 4, New Series), pp. 49, 50.

Slave-owners occasionally tried to find out the secrets of an
underground station or of a route by visiting various localities in
disguise. A Kentucky slaveholder clad in the Friends' peculiar garb
went to the house of John Charles, a Quaker of Richmond, Indiana,
and meeting a son of Mr. Charles, accosted him with the words,
"Well, sir, my little mannie, hasn't thee father gone to Canada
with some <DW65>s?" Young Charles quickly perceived the disguise,
and pointing his finger at the man declared him to be a "wolf in
sheep's clothing."[127] About the year 1840 there came into Cass
County, Indiana, a man from Kentucky by the name of Carpenter, who
professed to be an anti-slavery lecturer and an agent for certain
anti-slavery papers. He visited the abolitionists and seemed zealous
in the cause. In this way he learned the whereabouts of seven
fugitives that had arrived in the neighborhood from Kentucky a few
weeks before. He sent word to their masters, and in due time they
were all seized, but had not been taken far before the neighborhood
was aroused, masters and victims were overtaken and carried to the
county-seat, a trial was procured, and the slaves were again set
free.

  [127] Letter of Mrs. Mary C. Thorne, Selma, Clark Co., O., March
  3, 1892. John Charles was an uncle of Mrs. Thorne.

Thus the penalties of the law, the contempt of neighbors, and the
espionage of persons interested in returning fugitives to bondage
made secrecy necessary in the service of the Underground Railroad.

Night was the only time, of course, in which the fugitive and his
helpers could feel themselves even partially secure. Probably most
slaves that started for Canada had learned to know the north star,
and to many of these superstitious persons its light seemed the
enduring witness of the divine interest in their deliverance. When
clouds obscured the stars they had recourse, perhaps, to such bits
of homely knowledge as, that in forests the trunks of trees are
commonly moss-grown on their north sides. In Kentucky and western
Virginia many fugitives were guided to free soil by the tributaries
of the Ohio; while in central and eastern Virginia the ranges of
the Appalachian chain marked the direction to be taken. After
reaching the initial station of some line of Underground Road the
fugitive found himself provided with such accommodations for rest
and refreshment as circumstances would allow; and after an interval
of a day or more he was conveyed, usually in the night, to the house
of the next friend. Sometimes, however, when a guide was thought to
be unnecessary the fugitive was sent on foot to the next station,
full and minute instructions for finding it having been given
him. The faltering step, and the light, uncertain rapping of the
fugitive at the door, was quickly recognized by the family within,
and the stranger was admitted with a welcome at once sincere and
subdued. There was a suppressed stir in the house while the fire
was building and food preparing; and after the hunger and chill
of the wayfarer had been dispelled, he was provided with a bed in
some out-of-the-way part of the house, or under the hay in the
barn loft, according to the degree of danger. Often a household was
awakened to find a company of five or more <DW64>s at the door. The
arrival of such a company was sometimes announced beforehand by
special messenger.

That the amount of time taken from the hours of sleep by underground
service was no small item may be seen from the following record
covering the last half of August, 1843. The record or memorandum is
that of Mr. David Putnam, Jr., of Point Harmar, Ohio, and is given
with all the abbreviations:

  Aug.             13/43  Sunday Morn.     2 o'clock arrived
                          Sunday Eve.      8-1/2 "  departed for B.
                   16     Wednesday Morn.  2     "  arrived
                   20     Sunday eve.     10     "  departed for N.
  Wife & children  21     Monday morn.     2     "  arrived from B.
                          Monday eve.     10     "  left for Mr. H.
                   22     Tuesday eve.    11     "  left for W.
  A. L. & S. J.    28     Monday morn.     1     "  arrived left
                                                    2 o'clock.[128]

  [128] The original memorandum is written in pencil on a letter
  received by Mr. Putnam from Mr. John Stone, of Belpre, O., in
  Aug., 1843. The contents of this letter, or message, is given on
  page 57. The original is in possession of the author.

This is plainly a schedule of arriving and departing "trains" on
the Underground Road. It is noticeable that the schedule contains
no description, numerical or otherwise, of the parties coming and
going; nor does it indicate, except by initial, to what places or
persons the parties were despatched; further, it does not indicate
whether Mr. Putnam accompanied them or not. It does, however, give
us a clue to the amount of night service that was done at a station
of average activity on the Ohio River as early as the year 1843.
The demands upon operators increased, we know, from this time on
till 1860. The memorandum also shows the variation in the length of
time during which different companies of fugitives were detained
at a station; thus, the first fugitive, or company of fugitives,
as the case may have been, departed on the evening of the day of
arrival; the second party was kept in concealment from Wednesday
morning until the Sunday night next following before it was sent on
its way; the third party seems to have been divided, one section
being forwarded the night of the day of arrival, the other the next
night following; in the case of the last company there seems to have
existed some especial reason for haste, and we find it hurried away
at two o'clock in the morning, after only an hour's intermission
for rest and refreshment. The memorandum of night service at the
Putnam station may be regarded as fairly representative of the night
service at many other posts or stations throughout Ohio and the
adjoining states.

Much of the communication relating to fugitive slaves was had
in guarded language. Special signals, whispered conversations,
passwords, messages couched in figurative phrases, were the common
modes of conveying information about underground passengers,
or about parties in pursuit of fugitives. These modes of
communication constituted what abolitionists knew as the "grape-vine
telegraph."[129] The signals employed were of various kinds, and
were local in usage. Fugitives crossing the Ohio River in the
vicinity of Parkersburg, in western Virginia, were sometimes
announced at stations near the river by their guides by a shrill
tremolo-call like that of the owl. Colonel John Stone and Mr.
David Putnam, Jr., of Marietta, Ohio, made frequent use of this
signal.[130] Different neighborhoods had their peculiar combinations
of knocks or raps to be made upon the door or window of a station
when fugitives were awaiting admission. In Harrison County, Ohio,
around Cadiz, one of the recognized signals was three distinct but
subdued knocks. To the inquiry, "Who's there?" the reply was, "A
friend with friends."[131] Passwords were used on some sections
of the Road. The agents at York in southeastern Pennsylvania made
use of them, and William Yokum, a constable of the town, who was
kindly disposed towards runaways, was able to be most helpful in
times of emergency by his knowledge of the watchwords, one of which
was "William Penn."[132] Messages couched in figurative language
were often sent. The following note, written by Mr. John Stone, of
Belpre, Ohio, in August, 1843, is a good example:--

  BELPRE Friday Morning

     DAVID PUTNAM

     Business is aranged for Saturday night be on the lookout and if
     practicable let a cariage come & meet the cara_wan_

  J S[133]

  [129] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 20; also letter of
  S. J. Wright, Rushville, O., Aug. 29, 1894, and letter of Ira
  Thomas, Springboro, O., Oct. 29, 1895.

  [130] This owl signal was mentioned in conversation with several
  residents of Marietta. Miss Martha Putnam says she has heard her
  father make the "hoot-owl" call hundreds of times. General R.
  R. Dawes designates this call the "river signal." "When I was a
  boy of eight," he says, "I was visiting my grandfather, Judge
  Ephraim Cutler. The place was called Constitution. Somehow, in
  the night I was wakened up, and a wagon came down over the hill
  to the river. Then a call was given, a hoot-owl call, and this
  was answered by a similar one from the other side; then a boat
  went out and brought over the crowd. My mother got out of bed and
  kneeled down and prayed for them, and had me kneel with her."
  Conversation with General Dawes, Marietta, O., Aug. 21, 1892.

  [131] Letter of the Rev. J. B. Lee, Franklinville, N.Y., Oct. 21,
  1895.

  [132] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 46.

  [133] See the facsimile.

[Illustration: hand written note]

Mr. I. Newton Peirce forwarded a number of fugitives from Alliance,
Ohio, to Cleveland, over the Cleveland and Western Railroad. He
sent with each company a note to a Cleveland merchant, Mr. Joseph
Garretson, saying: "Please forward immediately the U. G. baggage
this day sent to you. Yours truly, I. N. P."[134] Mr. G. W.
Weston, of Low Moor, Iowa, was the author of similar communications
addressed to a friend, Mr. C. B. Campbell, of Clinton.

  [134] Letter of I. Newton Peirce, Folcroft, Sharon Hill P.O.,
  Delaware Co., Pa., Feb. 1, 1893.

  LOW MOOR, May 6, 1859.

     MR. C. B. C.,

     _Dear Sir_:--By to-morrow evening's mail, you will receive two
     volumes of the "Irrepressible Conflict" bound in black. After
     perusal, please forward, and oblige,

  Yours truly,

  G. W. W.[135]

  [135] _History of Clinton County, Iowa_, article on the
  "Underground Railroad," pp. 413-416.

The Hon. Thomas Mitchell, founder of Mitchellville, near Des Moines,
Iowa, forwarded fugitives to Mr. J. B. Grinnell, after whom the town
of Grinnell was named. The latter gives the following note as a
sample of the messages that passed between them:--

     _Dear Grinnell_:--Uncle Tom says if the roads are not too bad
     you can look for those fleeces of wool by to-morrow. Send them
     on to test the market and price, no back charges.

  Yours,

  HUB.[136]

  [136] J. B. Grinnell, _Men and Events of Forty Years_, p. 217.

There were many persons engaged in underground work that did not
always take the precaution to veil their communications. Judge
Thomas Lee, of the Western Reserve, was one of this class, as the
following letter to Mr. Putnam, of Point Harmar, will show:--

  CADIZ, OHIO, March 17th, 1847.

     MR. DAVID PUTNAM,

     _Dear Sir_:--I understand you are a friend to the poor and are
     willing to obey the heavenly mandate, "Hide the outcasts, betray
     not him that wandereth." Believing this, and at the request of
     Stephen Fairfax (who has been permitted in divine providence to
     enjoy for a few days the kind of liberty which Ohio gives to the
     man of colour), I would be glad if you could find out and let me
     know by letter what are the prospects if any and the probable
     time when, the balance of the family will make the same effort
     to obtain their inalienable right to life, liberty, and the
     pursuit of happiness. Their friends who have gone north are very
     anxious to have them follow, as they think it much better to
     work for eight or ten dollars per month than to work for nothing.

     Yours in behalf of the millions of poor, opprest and downtrodden
     in our land.

  THOMAS LEE.

In the conveyance of fugitives from station to station there existed
all the variety of method one would expect to find. In the early
days of the Underground Road the fugitives were generally men. It
was scarcely thought necessary to send a guide with them unless some
special reason for so doing existed. They were, therefore, commonly
given such directions as they needed and left to their own devices.
As the number of refugees increased, and women and children were
more frequently seen upon the Road, and pursuit was more common,
the practice of transporting fugitives on horseback, or by vehicle,
was introduced. The steam railroad was a new means furnished to
abolitionists by the progress of the times, and used by them with
greater or less frequency as circumstances required, and when the
safety of passengers would not be sacrificed.

When fugitive travellers afoot or on horseback found themselves
pursued, safety lay in flight, unless indeed the company was large
enough, courageous enough, and sufficiently well armed to give
battle. The safety of fugitives while travelling by conveyance lay
mainly in their concealment, and many were the stratagems employed.
Characteristic of the service of the Underground Railroad were
the covered wagons, closed carriages and deep-bedded farm-wagons
that hid the passengers. There are those living who remember
special day-coaches of more peculiar construction. Abram Allen, a
Quaker of Oakland, Clinton County, Ohio, had a large three-seated
wagon, made for the purpose of carrying fugitives. He called it
the Liberator. It was curtained all around, would hold eight or
ten persons, and had a mechanism with a bell, invented by Mr.
Allen, to record the number of miles travelled.[137] A citizen
of Troy, Ohio, a bookbinder by trade, had a large wagon, built
about with drawers in such a way as to leave a large hiding-place
in the centre of the wagon-bed. As the bookbinder drove through
the country he found opportunity to help many a fugitive on his
way to Canada.[138] Horace Holt, of Rutland, Meigs County, Ohio,
sold reeds to his neighbors in southern Ohio. He had a box-bed
wagon with a lid that fastened with a padlock. In this he hauled
his supply of reeds; it was well understood by a few that he also
hauled fugitive slaves.[139] Joseph Sider, of southern Indiana,
found his pedler wagon well adapted to the transportation of slaves
from Kentucky plantations.[140] William Still gives instances of
<DW64>s being placed in boxes, and shipped as freight by boat, and
also by rail, to friends in the North. William Box Peel Jones was
boxed in Baltimore and sent to Philadelphia by way of the Ericsson
line of steamers, being seventeen hours on the way.[141] Henry Box
Brown had the same thrilling and perilous experience. His trip
consumed twenty-four hours, during which time he was in the care of
the Adams Express Company in transit from Richmond, Virginia, to
Philadelphia.[142]

  [137] Judge R. B. Harlan and others, _History of Clinton County,
  Ohio_, pp. 380-383; letter of Seth Linton, Oakland, Clinton
  County, O., Sept. 4, 1892; Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p.
  187.

  [138] The _Miami Union_, April 10, 1895, article entitled "A
  Reminiscence of Slave Times."

  [139] Letter of Mrs. C. Grant, Pomeroy, Meigs Co., O.

  [140] The _Republican Leader_, March 16, 1894, article,
  "Reminiscence of the Underground Railroad," by E. H. Trueblood.

  [141] See _Underground Railroad Records_, pp. 46, 47.

  [142] _Ibid._, pp. 81-84; see also _Narrative of Henry Box Brown,
  who escaped from slavery enclosed in a box 3 feet long and 2
  wide, written from a statement of facts made by himself_, 1849,
  by Charles Stearns.

Abolitionists that drove wagons or carriages containing refugees,
"conductors" as they came to be called in the terminology of the
Railroad service, generally took the precaution to have ostensible
reasons for their journeys. They sought to divest their excursions
of the air of mystery by seeming to be about legitimate business.
Hannah Marsh, of Chester County, Pennsylvania, was in the habit
of taking garden produce to the Philadelphia markets to sell;
when, therefore, she sometimes used her covered market-wagon, even
in daytime, to convey fugitives, she attracted no attention, and
made her trips without molestation.[143] Calvin Fairbank abducted
the Stanton family, father, mother and six children, from the
neighborhood of Covington, Kentucky, by packing them in a load of
straw.[144] James W. Torrence, of Northwood, Ohio, together with
some of his neighbors exported grain, and sometimes feathers, to
Sandusky. These products were generally shipped when there were
fugitives to go with the load. As the distance to Sandusky was a
hundred and twenty miles, refugees who happened to profit by this
arrangement were saved much time and no small amount of risk in
getting to their destination.[145] Mr. William I. Bowditch, of
Boston, used a two-horse carryall on one occasion to take a single
fugitive to Concord.[146] Mr. John Weldon and other abolitionists,
of Dwight, Illinois, took <DW64>s to Chicago concealed in wagons
loaded with sacks of bran.[147] Levi Coffin, of Cincinnati, Ohio,
frequently received large companies for which safe transportation
had to be supplied. On one occasion a party of twenty-eight
<DW64>s arrived, towards daylight, in the suburbs of Cincinnati,
from Boone County, Kentucky, and it was necessary to send them on
at once. Accordingly at Friend Coffin's suggestion a number of
carriages were procured, formed into a long funeral-like procession
and started solemnly on the road to Cumminsville.[148] An almost
endless array of incidents similar to these can be given, but enough
have been recited to illustrate the caution that prevailed in the
transportation of fugitive slaves toward Canada.

  [143] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 138, 139.

  [144] _The Rev. Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times_, pp. 24,
  25; see also the _Chicago Tribune_, Jan. 29, 1893, p. 33.

  [145] Conversation with James W. Torrence, Northwood, Logan Co.,
  O., Sept. 22, 1894.

  [146] Letter of William I. Bowditch, Boston, Mass., April 5, 1893.

The routes were very far from being straight. They are perhaps best
described by the word zigzag. The exigencies that determined in
what direction an escaping slave should go during any particular
part of his journey were, in the nature of the case, always local.
The ultimate goal was Canada, but a safe passage was of greater
importance than a quick one. When speed would contribute safety the
guide would make a long trip with his charge, or perhaps resort
to the steam railroad; but under ordinary circumstances, in those
regions where the Underground Railroad was most patronized, a guide
had almost always a choice between two or more routes; he could, as
seemed best at the time, take the right-hand road to one station, or
the left-hand road to another. In truth, the underground paths in
these regions formed a great and intricate network, and it was in
no small measure because the lines forming the meshes of this great
system converged and branched again at so many stations that it was
almost an impossibility for slave-hunters to trace their <DW64>s
through even a single county without finding themselves on the wrong
trail. It was a common stratagem in times of special emergency to
switch off travellers from one course to another, or to take them
back on their track and then, after a few days of waiting, send
them forward again. It is, then, proper to say that zigzag was one
of the regular devices to blind and throw off pursuit. It served
moreover to avoid unfriendly localities. It seems probable that the
circuitous land route from Toledo to Detroit was an expedient of
this sort, for slave-owners and their agents were often known to
be on the lookout along the direct thoroughfare between the places
named. The two routes between Millersburgh and Lodi in northern
Ohio are explained by the statement that the most direct route,
the western one, fell under suspicion for a while, and in the
meantime a more circuitous path was followed through Holmesville and
Seville.[149]

  [147] Letter of John Weldon, Dwight, Ill., Nov. 7, 1895.

  [148] _History of Darke County, Ohio_, p. 332 _et seq._

  [149] Letter of Thomas L. Smith, Fredericksburg, Wayne Co., O.,
  Oct. 6, 1894.

During the long process by which the slave with the help of friends
was being transmuted into the freeman he spent much of his time
in concealment. His progress was made in the night-time. When a
station was reached he was provided with a hiding-place, and he
scarcely left it until his host decided it would be safe for him to
continue his journey. The hiding-places the fugitive entered first
and last were as dissimilar as can well be imagined. Slaves that
crossed the Ohio River at Ripley, and fell into the hands of the
Rev. John Rankin, were often concealed in his barn, which is said
to have been provided with a secret cellar for use by the slaves
when pursuers approached. The barn of Deacon Jirch Platt at Mendon,
Illinois, was a haven into which many slaves from Missouri were
piloted by way of Quincy. A hazel thicket in Mr. Platt's pasture-lot
was sometimes resorted to,[150] as was one of his hayricks that
was hollow and had a blind entrance.[151] Joshua R. Giddings, the
sturdy anti-slavery Congressman from the Western Reserve, had an
out-of-the-way bedroom in one wing of his house at Jefferson, Ohio,
that was kept in readiness for fugitive slaves.[152] The attic over
the _Liberator_ office in Boston is said to have been a rendezvous
for such persons.[153] A station-keeper at Plainfield, Illinois,
had a woodpile with a room in the centre for a hiding-place.[154]
The Rev. J. Porter, pastor of a Congregational church at Green Bay,
Wisconsin, was asked to furnish a place of hiding for a family of
fugitives, and at his wife's suggestion he put them in the belfry
of his church, where they remained three days before a vessel came
by which they could be safely transported to Canada.[155] Mr. James
M. Westwater and other citizens of Columbus, Ohio, fitted up an
old smoke-house standing on Chestnut Street near Fourth Street as
a station of the Underground Railroad.[156] A fugitive reaching
Canton, Washington County, Indiana, was secreted for a while in a
low place in a thick, dark woods; and afterwards in a rail pen
covered with straw.[157] Eli F. Brown, of Amesville, Athens County,
Ohio, writes: "I built an addition to my house in which I had a room
with its partition in pannels. One pannel could be raised about a
half inch and then slid back, so as to permit a man to enter the
room. When the pannel was in place it appeared like its fellows....
In the abutment of Zanesville bridge on the Putnam side there was
a place of concealment prepared."[158] "Conductors" Levi Coffin,
Edward Harwood, and W. H. Brisbane, of Cincinnati, Ohio, had a
number of hiding-places for slaves. "One was in the dark cellar of
Coffin's store; another was at Mr. Coffin's out-of-the-way residence
between Avondale and Walnut Hills; another was a dark sub-cellar
under the rear part of Dr. Bailey's residence, corner of Sixth
and College Streets."[159] The gallery of the old First Church at
Galesburg, Illinois, was utilized as a place of concealment for
refugees by certain members of that church.[160] Gabe N. Johnson, a
<DW52> man of Ironton, on the Ohio River, sometimes hid fugitives
in a coal-bank back of his house.[161] This list of illustrations
could be almost indefinitely continued. A sufficient number has been
given to show the ingenuity necessarily used to secure safety.

  [150] Letter of J. E. Platt, Guthrie, Ok., March 28, 1896. Mr.
  Platt is a son of Deacon Jirch Platt.

  [151] Letter of William H. Collins, Quincy, Ill., Jan. 13, 1896.

  [152] Conversation with J. Addison Giddings, Jefferson, O.

  [153] Letter of Lewis Ford, Boston, Mass. See also _Reminiscences
  of Fugitive Slave Law Days in Boston_, by Austin Bearse, 1880, p.
  12.

  [154] Letter of John Weldon, Dwight, Ill., Jan. 10, 1896.

  [155] Letter of the Rev. J. E. Roy, Chicago, Ill., April 9, 1896.

  [156] W. G. Deshler and others, _Memorial on the Death of James
  M. Westwater_, pp. 14, 15.

  [157] Letter of E. H. Trueblood, Hitchcock, Ind.

  [158] Letter of E. F. Brown, Amesville, O.

  [159] _Cincinnati Commercial Gazette_, Feb. 11, 1894, article by
  W. Eldebe.

  [160] Letter of Professor George Churchill, Galesburg, Jan. 29,
  1896.

  [161] Conversation with Gabe N. Johnson, Ironton, O., Sept. 30,
  1894.

In the transit from station to station some simple disguise was
often assumed. Thomas Garrett, a Quaker of Wilmington, Delaware,
kept a quantity of garden tools on hand for this purpose. He
sometimes gave a man a scythe, rake, or some other implement to
carry through town. Having reached a certain bridge on the way to
the next station, the pretending laborer concealed his tool under
it, as he had been directed, and journeyed on. Later the tool was
taken back to Mr. Garrett's to be used for a similar purpose.[162]
Valentine Nicholson, a station-keeper at Harveysburg, Warren
County, Ohio, concealed the identity of a fugitive, a mulatto,
who was known to be pursued, by blacking his face and hands with
burnt cork.[163] Slight disguises like these were probably not used
as often as more elaborate ones. The Rev. Calvin Fairbank, and
John Fairfield, the Virginian, who abducted many slaves from the
South, resorted frequently to this means of securing the safety of
their followers. Mr. Fairbank tells us that he piloted slave-girls
attired in the finery of ladies, men and boys tricked out as
gentlemen and the servants of gentlemen; and that sometimes he found
it necessary to require his followers to don the garments of the
opposite sex.[164] In May, 1843, Mr. Fairbank went to Arkansas for
the purpose of rescuing William Minnis from bondage. He found that
the slave was a young man of light complexion and prepossessing
appearance, and that he closely resembled a gentleman living in the
vicinity of Little Rock. Minnis was, therefore, fitted out with the
necessary wig, beard and moustache, and clothes like those of his
model; he was quickly drilled in the deportment of his assumed rank,
and, as the test proved, he sustained himself well in his part. On
boarding the boat that was to carry him to freedom he discovered his
owner, Mr. Brennan, but so effectual was the slave's make-up that
the master failed to penetrate the disguise.[165]

  [162] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 242.

  [163] Letter of Valentine Nicholson, Indianapolis, Ind., Sept.
  10, 1892.

  [164] _The Rev. Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times_, p. 10.

  [165] _Ibid._, p 34. _et seq._

[Illustration: BARN OF SEYMOUR FINNEY, ESQ., DETROIT, MICHIGAN.

A shelter for fugitives in Detroit, formerly standing where the
Chamber of Commerce Building now stands.]

[Illustration: THE OLD FIRST CHURCH, GALESBURG, ILLINOIS.

Fugitive slaves were sometimes concealed in the gallery of this
church.]

A similar story is told by Mr. Sidney Speed, of Crawfordsville,
Indiana, when recalling the work of his father, John Speed, and that
of Fisher Doherty. "In 1858 or 1859, a mulatto girl about eighteen
or twenty years old, very good-looking and with some education, ...
reached our home. The <DW65>-catchers became so watchful that she
could not be moved for several days. In fact, some of them were
nearly always at the house either on some pretended business or
making social visits. I do not think that the house was searched,
or they would surely have found her, as during all this time she
remained in the garret over the old log kitchen, where the fugitives
were usually kept when there was danger. Her owner, a man from New
Orleans, had just bought her in Louisville, and he had traced her
surely to this place; she had not struck the Underground before, but
had made her way alone this far, and as they got no trace of her
beyond here they returned and doubled the watches on Doherty and
my father. But at length a day came, or a night rather, when she
was led safely out through the gardens to the house of a <DW52>
man named Patterson. There she was rigged out in as fine a costume
of silk and ribbons as it was possible to procure at that time,
and was furnished with a white baby borrowed for the occasion, and
accompanied by one of the Patterson girls as servant and nurse."
Thus disguised, the lady boarded the train at the station. But what
must have been her feelings to find her master already in the same
car; he was setting out to watch for her at the end of the line.
She kept her courage, and when they reached Detroit she went aboard
the ferry-boat for Canada; her pretended nurse returned to shore
with the borrowed baby; and as the gang-plank was being raised, the
young slave-woman on the boat removed her veil that she might bid
her owner good-by. The master's display of anger as he gazed at the
departing boat was as real as the situation was gratifying to his
former slave and amusing to the bystanders.[166]

  [166] Letter from Mr. Sidney Speed, Crawfordsville, Ind., March
  6, 1896.

John Fairfield, the Virginian, depended largely on disguises in
several of his abducting exploits. At one time he was asked by a
number of Canadian refugees to help some of their relatives to
the North, and when he found that many of them had very light
complexions, he decided to send them to Canada disguised as white
persons. Having secured for them the requisite wigs and powder, he
was gratified with the transformation in appearance they were able
to effect. He therefore secured tickets for his party, and placed
them aboard a night train for Harrisburg, where they were met by
a person who accompanied them to Cleveland and saw them take boat
for Detroit. Later Fairfield succeeded in aiding other companies of
slaves to escape from Washington and Harper's Ferry by resorting
to similar means.[167] Among the Quakers the woman's costume was a
favorite disguise for fugitives. No one attired in it was likely to
be in the least degree suspicioned of being anything else than what
the garb proclaimed. The veiled bonnet also was peculiarly adapted
to conceal the features of the person disguised.[168] One incident
will suffice to show the utility of the Quaker costume. One evening
Joseph G. Walker, a Quaker of Wilmington, Delaware, was appealed
to by a slave-woman, who was closely pursued. She was permitted to
enter Mr. Walker's house, and a few minutes later, in the gown and
bonnet of Mrs. Walker, she passed out of the front door leaning upon
the arm of the shrewd Quaker.[169]

  [167] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, pp. 439-442.

  [168] M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 61.

  [169] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 244.

It is quite apparent that the Underground Railroad was not a formal
organization with officers of different ranks, a regular membership,
and a treasury from which to meet expenses. A terminology, it is
true, sprang up in connection with the work of the Road, and one
hears of station-keepers, agents, conductors, and even presidents of
the Underground Railroad; but these titles were figurative terms,
borrowed with other expressions from the convenient vocabulary of
steam railways; and while they were useful among abolitionists to
save circumlocution, they commended themselves to the friends of the
slave by helping to mystify the minds of the public. The need of
organization was not felt except in a few localities. It was only in
towns and cities that the distinctions of "managers," "contributing
members," and "agents" began to develop in any significant way, and
even in the case of these places the distinctions must not be pushed
far, for they indicate merely that certain men by their sagacious
activity came to be called "managers," while others less bold, the
contributing members, were willing to give money towards defraying
the expenses of some trusty person, the agent, who would run the
risk of piloting fugitives.

The first reference to an organization devoted to the business of
aiding fugitive slaves occurs in a letter of George Washington,
bearing date May 12, 1786. Washington speaks of a "society of
Quakers in the city [Philadelphia], formed for such purposes...."[170]
We have no means of knowing how this body conducted its work, nor
how long it continued to exist. It is sometimes stated that the
formal organization of the Underground Road took place in 1838,
but this is not an accurate statement. An organized society of the
Underground Railroad was formed in Philadelphia about the year
1838. Mr. Robert Purvis, who was the president, has called this
body the first of its kind, but this may be doubted in view of the
quotation from Washington's letter above cited. The character of
the organization appears from the following account of its methods
given by Mr. Purvis:[171] "The funds for carrying on this enterprise
were raised from our anti-slavery friends, _as the cases came
up_,"[172] and their needs demanded it; for many of the fugitives
required no other help than advice and direction how to proceed.
To the late Daniel Neall, the society was greatly indebted for his
generous gifts, as well as for his encouraging words and fearless
independence.... The most efficient helpers or agents we had, were
two market-women, who lived in Baltimore....

  [170] Spark's _Washington_, IX, 158, quoted in _Quakers of
  Pennsylvania_, by Dr. A. C. Applegarth, _Johns Hopkins Studies_,
  X, 463.

  [171] The letter from which this quotation is made will be found
  in _Underground Railroad_, by R. C. Smedley, pp. 355, 356.

  [172] The italics are my own.

"Another most effective worker was a son of a slaveholder, who lived
at Newberne, S.C. Through his agency, the slaves were forwarded
by placing them on vessels.... Having the address of the active
members of the committee, they were enabled to find us, when not
accompanied by our agents.... The fugitives were distributed among
the members of the society, but most of them were received at my
house in Philadelphia, where ... I caused a place to be constructed
underneath a room, which could only be entered by a trap-door in the
floor...."

This account shows clearly that the organization of 1838 was
limited; and while it was officered with a president, secretary
and committee, and had helpers at a distance called agents, it
can scarcely be said that the plan of action of the society was
different in essential points from that which developed without
the formality of election of officers in many underground centres
throughout the Northern states. Levi Coffin, by his devotion to the
cause of the fugitive from boyhood to old age, gained the title
of President of the Underground Railroad,[173] but he was not
at the head of a formal organization. In northeastern Illinois,
Peter Stewart, a prosperous citizen of Wilmington, who was a very
active worker in the cause, was sometimes called President of the
Underground Railroad,[174] but here again the distinction seems
to have been complimentary and figurative. In truth the work was
everywhere spontaneous, and its character was such that organization
could have added little or no efficiency. Unfaltering confidence
among members of neighboring stations served better than a code
of rules; special messengers sent on the spur of the moment took
the place of conferences held at stated seasons; supplies gathered
privately as they were needed sufficed instead of regular dues; and,
in general, the decision and sagacity of the individual was required
rather than the less rapid efforts of an organization.

  [173] Howe, _Historical Collections of Ohio_, Vol. II, pp. 103,
  104; see also the _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_.

  [174] George H. Woodruff, _History of Will County, Illinois_, p.
  268.

In a few centres where the amount of secret service to be done
was large, a slight specialization of work is to be noticed. This
division of labor consisted in the employment of a regular conductor
or agent at these points to manage the work of transportation of
passengers to points farther north; while the station-keepers
attended more closely to the work of receiving and caring for the
new arrivals. The special conductors chosen were men thoroughly
acquainted with the different routes of their respective
neighborhoods. At Mechanicsburg, Champaign County, Ohio, Udney
Hyde, a fearless and well-known citizen, acted as agent between the
local stations of J. R. Ware and Levi Rathbun, and stations to the
northeast as far as the Alum Creek Quaker Settlement, a distance of
forty miles.[175] The stations at Mechanicsburg were among the most
widely known in central and southern Ohio. They received fugitives
from at least three regular routes, and doubtless had "switch
connections" with other lines. Passengers were taken northward over
one of the three, perhaps four roads, and as one or two of these
lay through pro-slavery neighborhoods a brave and experienced agent
was almost indispensable. George W. S. Lucas, a <DW52> man of
Salem, Columbiana County, Ohio, made frequent trips with the closed
carriage of Philip Evans, between Barnesville, New Philadelphia and
Cadiz, and two stations, Ashtabula and Painesville, on the shore of
Lake Erie. Occasionally Mr. Lucas conducted parties to Cleveland
and Sandusky and Toledo, but in such cases he went on foot or by
stage.[176] His trips were sometimes a hundred miles and more in
length. George L. Burroughes, a <DW52> man of Cairo, Illinois,
became an agent for the Underground Road in 1857, while acting as
porter of a sleeping-car running on the Illinois Central Railroad
between Cairo and Chicago.[177] At Albany, New York, Stephen Meyers,
a <DW64>, was an agent of the Underground Road for a wide extent of
territory.[178] At Detroit there were several  agents; among
them George De Baptiste and George Dolarson.[179]

  [175] Conversation with J. R. Ware, and with the daughter of Mr.
  Hyde, Mrs. Amanda Shepherd, Mechanicsburg, O., Sept. 7, 1895;
  conversation with Major Joseph C. Brand, Urbana, O., Aug. 13,
  1894.

  [176] Conversation with George W. S. Lucas, Salem, Columbiana
  Co., Aug. 14, 1892, when he was fifty-nine years old. He was
  remarkably clear and convincing in his statements, many of which
  have since been corroborated. Citizens of Salem referred to him
  as a reliable source of information.

  [177] Letter from George L. Burroughes, Cairo, Ill., Jan. 6,
  1896. Mr. Burroughes said that Mr. Robert Delany, a friend from
  Canada, proposed to him that they both take an agency for the
  Underground Railroad. Delany took the Rock Island route and
  Burroughes the Cairo route.

  [178] Letter of Martin I. Townsend, Troy, N.Y., Sept. 4, 1896.
  Mr. Townsend was counsel for the fugitive, Charles Nalle, in
  the Nalle or Troy Rescue case. See the little book entitled,
  _Harriet, the Moses of Her People_, 2d ed., p. 146; see also
  _History of the County of Albany, New York, from 1609-1886_, p.
  725.

  [179] Conversation with Judge J. W. Finney, Detroit, Mich., July
  27, 1897.

The slight approach to organization manifest in some centres in the
division of labor between station-keepers and special agents or
conductors was caused by the large number of fugitives arriving at
these points, and the extreme caution necessary. When, at length,
indignation was aroused in the minds of Northern abolitionists by
the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law, September 18, 1850, the
determination to resist this measure displayed itself in certain
localities in the formation of vigilance committees. Theodore Parker
explains that it was in consequence of the enactment of this measure
that "people held indignant meetings, and organized committees of
vigilance whose duty was to prevent a fugitive from being arrested,
if possible, or to furnish legal aid, and raise every obstacle to
his rendition. The vigilance committees," he says, "were also the
employees of the U. G. R. R. and effectively disposed of many a
_casus belli_ by transferring the disputed chattel to Canada. Money,
time, wariness, devotedness for months and years, that cannot be
computed, and will never be recorded, except, perhaps, in connection
with cases whose details had peculiar interest, was nobly rendered
by the true anti-slavery men."[180] Such committees of vigilance
were organized in Syracuse, New York, Boston, Springfield and some
of the smaller towns of Massachusetts, in Philadelphia and other
places. New York City, like Philadelphia, had a Vigilance Committee
as early as 1838. About this association of the metropolis there is
scarcely any information.[181] We must be content then to confine
our attention to the committees called into existence by the
Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.

  [180] Weiss, _Life and Correspondence of Theodore Parker_, Vol.
  II, pp. 92, 93.

  [181] Frederick Douglass relates that when he escaped from
  Maryland to New York, in 1838, he was befriended by David
  Ruggles, the secretary of the New York Vigilance Committee; _Life
  of Frederick Douglass_, 1881, p. 205.

Eight days after the enactment of this law citizens of Syracuse, New
York, issued a call through the newspapers for a public meeting, and
on October 4 members of all parties crowded the city-hall to express
their censure of the law. The meeting recommended "the appointment
of a Vigilance Commitee of thirteen citizens, whose duty it shall
be to see that no person is deprived of his liberty without 'due
process of law.' And all good citizens are earnestly requested to
aid and sustain them in all needed efforts for the security of
every person claiming the protection of our laws." This committee
was appointed and an address and resolutions adopted.[182] At an
adjourned meeting held on October 12 the assemblage voted to form
an association, "pledged to stand by its members in opposing this
law, and to share with any of them the pecuniary losses they may
incur under the operation of this law." The determination shown
in the organization of these two bodies was well sustained a year
later when the attempt was made by officers of the law to seize
Jerry McHenry as a fugitive slave. The Vigilance Committee decided
to storm the court-house, where the <DW52> man was confined under
guard, and rescue the prisoner. This daring piece of work was
successfully accomplished, and the government never again attempted
to recover any slaves in central New York.[183]

  [182] The Rev. J. W. Loguen gives the names of the committee in
  his autobiography, p. 396.

  [183] Samuel J. May, _Recollections of the Anti-Slavery
  Conflict_, pp. 349-364; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power
  in the United States_, Vol. II, pp. 305, 306.

The organization of the Vigilance Committee of Syracuse was closely
followed by the organization of a similar committee in Boston.
At a meeting in Faneuil Hall, October 14, 1850, resolutions were
adopted expressing the conviction that no citizen would take part
in reënslaving a fugitive, and pledging protection to the 
residents of the city. To make good this pledge a Vigilance
Committee of fifty was appointed.[184] This body organized by
choosing a president, treasurer, and secretary, a committee of
finance, an executive committee, a legal committee and a committee
of special vigilance and alarm. An appeal was then issued to the
citizens of Boston calling their attention to the arrival of
many destitute fugitives in Boston, and to the establishment of
an agency for the purpose of securing employment for fugitive
applicants. Gifts of money and clothing were asked for. In response
to a circular sent out by the finance committee to all the churches
in 1851, a sum of about sixteen hundred dollars was raised. That
there might be coöperation throughout the state notices were sent
to all the towns in Massachusetts urging the formation of local
vigilance committees; and as a result such committees were organized
in some towns.[185]

  [184] _Ibid._, p. 308. The list of members of the Committee
  of Vigilance given by Austin Bearse, the doorkeeper of the
  Committee, contains two hundred and nine names. Among these are
  A. Bronson Alcott, Edward Atkinson, Henry I. Bowditch, Richard
  H. Dana, Jr., Lewis Hayden, William Lloyd Garrison, Samuel G.
  Howe, Francis Jackson, Ellis Gray Loring, James Russell Lowell,
  Theodore Parker, Edmund Quincy and others of distinction. See pp.
  3, 4, 5, 6, in Mr. Bearse's _Reminiscences of Fugitive-Slave-Law
  Days in Boston_.

  [185] For much valuable material relating to the Vigilance
  Committee of Boston, see Theodore Parker's _Scrap-Book_, in the
  Boston Public Library.

The meeting-place of the Boston Committee was Meionaon Hall in
Tremont Temple. Members were notified of an intended meeting
personally, if possible, by the doorkeeper of the committee, Captain
Austin Bearse.[186] The proceedings of the committee were secret,
and comparatively little is now known about their work. It is,
however, known that for ten years the organization was active, and
that although it was not successful in rescuing Sims and Burns from
a hard fate, it nevertheless secured the liberty of more than a
hundred others.[187]

  [186] Mr. Bearse says: "There were printed tickets of notice
  which I delivered to each member in person, if possible, of which
  the following copies are specimens:

  'BOSTON, June 7, 1854.

  There will be a meeting of the Vigilance Committee at the
  Meionaon (Tremont Temple), on _Thursday evening_, June 8, at
  half-past seven.

  Pass in by the _Office Entrance_, and through the _Meionaon
  Ante-Room_.

  THEODORE PARKER, _Chairman of Executive Committees_.'

  'VIGILANCE COMMITTEE! The members of the Vigilance Committee are
  hereby notified to meet at ---- ----

  By order of the Committee,

  A. BEARSE, _Doorkeeper_.'"

  --_Reminiscences of Fugitive-Slave-Law Days in Boston_, pp. 15,
  16.

  [187] _Ibid._, p. 14.

Soon after the Fugitive Slave Law was passed John Brown visited
Springfield, Massachusetts, where he had formerly lived. The valley
of the Connecticut had long been a line of underground travel, and
citizens of Springfield,  and white, had become identified
with operations on this line. Brown at once decided that the new
law made organization necessary, and he formed, therefore, the
League of Gileadites to resist systematically the enforcement of the
law. The name of this order was significant in that it contained a
warning to those of its members that should show themselves cowards.
"Whosoever is fearful or afraid let him return and depart early from
Mount Gilead."[188] In the "Agreement and Rules" that Brown drafted
for the order, adopted January 15, 1851, the following directions
for action were laid down: "Should one of your number be arrested,
you must collect together as quickly as possible, so as to outnumber
your adversaries.... Let no able-bodied man appear on the ground
unequipped, or with his weapons exposed to view.... Your plans must
be known only to yourselves and with the understanding that all
traitors must die, wherever caught and proven to be guilty.... Let
the first blow be the signal for all to engage, ... make clean work
with your enemies, and be sure you meddle not with any others....
After effecting a rescue, if you are assailed, go into the houses of
your most prominent and influential white friends with your wives,
and that will effectually fasten upon them the suspicion of being
connected with you, and will compel them to make a common cause with
you.... You may make a tumult in the court-room where a trial is
going on by burning gunpowder freely in paper packages.... But in
such case the prisoner will need to take the hint at once and bestir
himself; and so should his friends improve the opportunity for a
general rush.... Stand by one another, and by your friends, while a
drop of blood remains; and be hanged, if you must, but tell no tales
out of school. Make no confession." By adopting the Agreement and
Rules forty-four <DW52> persons constituted themselves "a branch
of the United States League of Gileadites," and agreed "to have no
officers except a treasurer and secretary pro tem., until after some
trial of courage," when they could choose officers on the basis of
"courage, efficiency, and general good conduct."[189] Doubtless the
Gileadites of Springfield did efficient service, for it appears
that the importance of the town as a way-station on the Underground
Road increased after the passage of the Fugitive Slave Bill.[190]

  [188] Judg. vii. 3; Deut. xx. 8; referred to by Brown in his
  "Agreement and Rules."

  [189] F. B. Sanborn, in his _Life and Letters of John Brown_, pp.
  125, 126, gives the agreement, rules, and signatures. See also R.
  J. Hinton's John _Brown and His Men_, Appendix, pp. 585, 588.

  [190] Mason A. Green, _History of Springfield_, Massachusetts,
  1636-1886, p. 506.

[Illustration: WILLIAM STILL,

CHAIRMAN OF THE ACTING VIGILANCE COMMITTEE IN PHILADELPHIA,
PENNSYLVANIA, 1852-1860.]

We have already learned that Philadelphia had a Vigilance Committee
before 1840. In a speech made before the meeting that organized
the new committee, December 2, 1852, Mr. J. Miller McKim, the
secretary of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society, gave the
reasons for establishing a new committee. He said that the old
committee "had become disorganized and scattered, and that for
the last two or three years the duties of this department had
been performed by individuals on their own responsibility, and
sometimes in a very irregular manner." It was accordingly decided
to form a new committee, called the General Vigilance Committee,
with a chairman and treasurer; and within this body an Acting
Committee of four persons, "who should have the responsibility of
attending to every case that might require their aid, as well as
the exclusive authority to raise the funds necessary for their
purpose." The General Committee comprised nineteen members, and
had as its head Mr. Robert Purvis, one of the signers of the
Declaration of Sentiments of the American Anti-Slavery Society,
and the first president of the old committee. The Acting Committee
had as its chairman William Still, a  clerk in the office
of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society and a most energetic
underground helper. The Philadelphia Vigilance Committee, thus
constituted, continued intact until Lincoln issued the Emancipation
Proclamation.[191] Some insight into the work accomplished by the
Acting Committee can be obtained by an examination of the book
compiled by William Still under the title _Underground Railroad
Records_. The Acting Committee was required to keep a record of
all its doings. Mr. Still's volume was evidently amassed by the
transcription of many of the incidents that found their way under
this order into the archives of the committee. The work was limited
to the assistance of such needy fugitives as came to Philadelphia;
and was not extended, except in rare cases, to inciting slaves to
run away from their masters, or to aiding them in so doing.[192]

  [191] Article, "Meeting to Form a Vigilance Committee," in the
  _Pennsylvania Freeman_, Dec. 9, 1852; quoted in _Underground
  Railroad Records_, by William Still, pp. 610-612.

  [192] Still's _Underground Railroad Records_, p. 177. References
  to the action of the committee of which Mr. Still was chairman
  will be found scattered through the Records. See, for example,
  pp. 70, 98, 102, 131, 150, 162, 173, 176, 204, 224, 274, 275,
  303, 325, 335, 388, 412, 449, 493, 500.

The relief of the destitution existing among the wayworn travellers
was a matter requiring considerable outlay of time and money on
the part of abolitionists. There was occasionally a fugitive or
family of fugitives, that, having better opportunity or possessing
greater foresight than others, made provision for the journey
and escaped to Canada with little or no dependence on the aid of
underground operators. Asbury Parker, of Ironton, Ohio, fled from
Greenup County, Kentucky, in 1857, clad in a suit of broadcloth,
alone befitting, as he thought, the dignity of a free man.[193] The
brother of Anthony Bingey, of Windsor, Ontario, came unexpectedly
into the possession of five hundred dollars. With this money he
instructed a friend in Cincinnati to procure a team and wagon to
convey the family of Bingey to Canada. The company arrived at
Sandusky after being only three days on the road.[194]

  [193] Conversation with Asbury Parker, Ironton, O., Sept. 30,
  1894.

  [194] Conversation with Anthony Bingey, Windsor, Ont., July 3,
  1895.

But the mass of fugitives were thinly clad, and had only such food
as they could forage until they reached the Underground Railroad.
The arrival of a company at a station would be at once followed by
the preparation, often at midnight, of a meal for the pilgrims and
their guides. It was a common thing for a station to entertain a
company of five or six; and companies of twenty-eight or thirty are
not unheard of. Levi Coffin says, "The largest company of slaves
ever seated at our table, at one time, numbered seventeen."[195]
During one month in the year 1854 or 1855 there were sixty runaways
at the house of Aaron L. Benedict, a station in the Alum Creek
Quaker Settlement in central Ohio. On one occasion twenty sat down
to dinner in Mr. Benedict's house.[196] It will thus be seen that
the supply of provisions alone was for the average station-keeper no
inconsiderable item of expense, and that it was one involving much
labor.

  [195] _Reminiscences_, p. 178.

  [196] Conversation with M. J. Benedict, Alum Creek Settlement,
  Dec. 2, 1893. See also _Underground Railroad_, Smedley, pp. 56,
  136, 142, 174.

The arrangements for furnishing fugitives with clothing, like much
of the underground work done at the stations, came within the
province of the women of the stations. While the noted fugitive,
William Wells Brown, lay sick at the house of his benefactor,
Mr. Wells Brown, in southwestern Ohio, the family made him some
clothing, and Mr. Brown purchased him a pair of boots.[197] Women's
anti-slavery societies in many places conducted sewing-circles, as
a branch of their work, for the purpose of supplying clothes and
other necessities to fugitives. The Woman's Anti-Slavery Society of
Ellington, Chautauqua County, New York, sent a letter to William
Still, November 21, 1859, saying: "Every year we have sent a box of
clothing, bedding, etc., to the aid of the fugitive, and wishing to
send it where it would be of the most service, we have it suggested
to us, to send to you the box we have at present. You would confer
a favor ... by writing us, ... whether or not it would be more
advantageous to you than some nearer station...."[198]

  [197] _Narrative of William W. Brown, A Fugitive Slave_, written
  by himself, 2d ed., 1848, p. 102.

  [198] The letter is printed in full, together with other letters,
  in Still's _Underground Railroad Records_, pp. 590, 591.

The Women's Anti-Slavery Sewing Society of Cincinnati maintained
an active interest in underground work going on in their city by
supplying clothing to needy travellers.[199] The Female Anti-Slavery
Association of Henry County, Indiana, organized a Committee of
Vigilance in 1841 "to seek out such  females as are not
suitably provided for, who may now be, or who shall hereafter
come, within our limits, and assist them in any way they may deem
expedient, either by advice or pecuniary means...."[200]

  [199] Levi Coffin, _Reminiscences_, p. 316.

  [200] _Protectionist_, Arnold Buffum, Editor, New Garden, Ind.,
  7th mo., 1st, 1841.

In some of the large centres, money as well as clothing and food
was constantly needed for the proper performance of the underground
work. Thus, for example, at Cincinnati, Ohio, it was frequently
necessary to hire carriages in which to convey fugitives out of the
city to some neighboring station. From time to time as the occasion
arose Levi Coffin collected the funds needed for such purposes from
business acquaintances. He called these contributors "stock-holders"
in the Underground Railroad.[201] After steam railroads became
incorporated in the underground system money was required at
different points to purchase tickets for fugitives. The Vigilance
Committee of Philadelphia defrayed the travelling expenses of many
refugees in sending some to New York City, some to Elmira and a few
to Canada.[202] Frederick Douglass, who kept a station at Rochester,
New York, received contributions of money to pay the railroad fares
of the fugitives he forwarded to Canada and to give them a little
more for pressing necessities.[203]

  [201] _Reminiscences_, pp. 317, 321.

  [202] Still's _Underground Railroad Records_, p. 613.

  [203] _Ibid._, p. 598. In the fragment of a letter from which
  Mr. Still quotes, Mr. Douglass says, "They [the fugitives]
  usually tarry with us only during the night, and are forwarded to
  Canada by the morning train. We give them supper, lodging, and
  breakfast, pay their expenses, and give them a half-dollar over."

The use of steam railroads as a means of transportation of
this class of passengers began with the completion of lines of
road to the lakes. This did not take place till about 1850. It
was, therefore, during the last decade of the history of the
Underground Road that surface lines, as they were sometimes called
by abolitionists, became a part of the secret system. There were
probably more surface lines in Ohio than in any other state. The old
Mad River Railroad, or Sandusky, Dayton and Cincinnati Railroad, of
western Ohio, (now a part of the "Big Four" system), began to be
used at least as early as 1852 by instructed fugitives.[204] The
Sandusky, Mansfield and Newark Railroad (now the Baltimore and Ohio)
from Utica, Licking County, Ohio, to Sandusky, was sometimes used
by the same class of persons.[205] After the construction of the
Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati Railroad[206] as far as Greenwich
in northern Ohio, fugitives often came to that point concealed in
freight-cars. In eastern Ohio there were two additional routes by
rail sometimes employed in underground traffic: one of these appears
to have been the Cleveland and Canton from Zanesville north,[207]
and the other was the Cleveland and Western between Alliance and
Cleveland.[208] In Indiana the Louisville, New Albany and Chicago
Railroad from Crawfordsville northward was patronized by underground
travellers until the activity of slave-hunters caused it to be
abandoned.[209] Fugitives were sometimes transported across the
State of Michigan by the Michigan Central Railroad. In Illinois
there seems to have been not less than three railroads that carried
fugitives: these were the Chicago, Burlington and Quincy,[210] the
Chicago and Rock Island[211] and the Illinois Central.[212] When
John Brown made his famous journey through Iowa in the winter of
1858-1859 he shipped his company of twelve fugitives in a stock
car from West Liberty, Iowa, to Chicago, by way of the Chicago and
Rock Island route.[213] In Pennsylvania and New York there were
several lines over which runaways were sent when circumstances
permitted. At Harrisburg, Reading and other points along the
Philadelphia and Reading Railroad, fugitives were put aboard the
cars for Philadelphia.[214] From Pennsylvania they were forwarded
by the Vigilance Committee over different lines, sometimes by way
of the Pennsylvania Railroad to New York City; sometimes by way of
the Philadelphia and Reading and the Northern Central to Elmira,
New York, whence they were sent on by the same line to Niagara
Falls. Fugitives put aboard the cars at Elmira were furnished with
money from a fund provided by the anti-slavery society. As a matter
of precaution they were sent out of town at four o'clock in the
morning, and were always placed by the train officials, who knew
their destination, in the baggage-car.[215] The New York Central
Railroad from Rochester west was an outlet made use of by Frederick
Douglass in passing slaves to Canada. At Syracuse, during several
years before the beginning of the War, one of the directors of
this road, Mr. Horace White, the father of Dr. Andrew D. White,
distributed passes to fugitives. This fact did not come to the
knowledge of Dr. White until after his father's demise. He relates:
"Some years after ... I met an old 'abolitionist' of Syracuse, who
said to me that he had often come to my father's house, rattled at
the windows, informed my father of the passes he needed for fugitive
slaves, received them through the window, and then departed, nobody
else being the wiser. On my asking my mother, who survived my father
several years, about it, she said: 'Yes, such things frequently
occurred, and your father, if he was satisfied of the genuineness of
the request, always wrote off the passes and handed them out, asking
no questions."[216]

  [204] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 21.

  [205] _Ibid._, pp. 23, 57, 79.

  [206] _Ibid._, p. 74. The "Three C's" is now the Cleveland,
  Cincinnati, Chicago and St. Louis Railroad, or "Big Four" Route.

  [207] Conversation with Thomas Williams, of Pennsville, O.;
  letter of H. C. Harvey, Manchester, Kan., Jan. 16, 1893.

  [208] Letter of I. Newton Peirce, Folcroft, Pa., Feb. 1, 1893.

  [209] Letter of Sidney Speed, Crawfordsville, Ind., March 6,
  1896. Mr. Speed and his father were both connected with the
  Crawfordsville centre.

  [210] _Life and Poems of John Howard Bryant_, p. 30; letter of
  William H. Collins, Quincy, Ill., Jan. 13, 1896; _History of Knox
  County, Illinois_, p. 211.

  [211] Letter of George L. Burroughes, Cairo, Ill., Jan. 6, 1896.

  [212] _Ibid._; conversation with the Rev. R. G. Ramsey, Cadiz,
  O., Aug. 18, 1892.

  [213] J. B. Grinnell, _Men and Events of Forty Years_, p. 216.

  [214] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 174, 176, 177, 365.
  The following letter is in point:--

  "SCHUYLKILL, 11th Mo., 7th, 1857.

  WILLIAM STILL, _Respected Friend_:--There are three 
  friends at my house now, who will reach the city by the
  Philadelphia and Reading train this evening. Please meet them.

  Thine, etc.,
  E. F. PENNYPACKER."

  [215] Letter of John W. Jones, Elmira, N.Y., Jan. 18, 1897.

  [216] Letter of the Hon. Andrew D. White, Ithaca, N.Y., April 10,
  1897.

In the New England states fugitives travelled, under the instruction
of friends, by way of the Providence and Worcester Railroad from
Valley Falls, Rhode Island, to Worcester, Massachusetts, where
by arrangement they were transferred to the Vermont Road.[217]
The Boston and Worcester Railroad between Newton and Worcester,
Massachusetts, as also between Boston and Worcester, seems to
have been used to some extent in this way.[218] The Grand Trunk,
extending from Portland, Maine, through the northern parts of New
Hampshire and Vermont into Canada, occasionally gave passes to
fugitives, and would always take reduced fares for this class of
passengers.[219]

  [217] Mrs. Elizabeth Buffum Chace, _Anti-Slavery Reminiscences_,
  pp. 28, 38.

  [218] Letter of William I. Bowditch, Boston, April 5, 1893. Mr.
  Bowditch says: "Generally I passed them (the fugitives) on to
  William Jackson, at Newton. His house being on the Worcester
  Railroad, he could easily forward any one." Captain Austin
  Bearse, _Reminiscences of Fugitive-Slave Law Days in Boston_, p.
  37.

  [219] Letter of Brown Thurston, Portland, Me., Oct. 21, 1895.

The advantages of escape by boat were early discerned by slaves
living near the coast or along inland rivers. Vessels engaged in
our coastwise trade became more or less involved in transporting
fugitives from Southern ports to Northern soil. Small trading
vessels, returning from their voyages to Norfolk and Portsmouth,
Virginia, landed slaves on the New England coast.[220] In July,
1853, the brig _Florence_ (Captain Amos Hopkins, of Hallowell,
Maine) from Wilmington, North Carolina, was required, while lying
in Boston harbor, to surrender a fugitive found on board. In
September, 1854, the schooner _Sally Ann_ (of Belfast, Maine), from
the same Southern port, was induced to give up a slave known to be
on board. In October of the same year the brig _Cameo_ (of Augusta,
Maine) brought a stowaway from Jacksonville, Florida, into Boston
harbor, and, as in the two preceding cases, the slave was rescued
from the danger of return to the South through the activity and
shrewdness of Captain Austin Bearse, the agent of the Vigilance
Committee of Boston.[221] The son of a slaveholder living at
Newberne, North Carolina, forwarded slaves from that point to the
Vigilance Committee of Philadelphia on vessels engaged in the lumber
trade.[222] In November, 1855, Captain Fountain brought twenty-one
fugitives concealed on his vessel in a cargo of grain from Norfolk,
Virginia, to Philadelphia.[223]

  [220] Mrs. Elizabeth Buffum Chace, _Anti-Slavery Reminiscences_,
  pp. 27, 30.

  [221] Austin Bearse, _Reminiscences of Fugitive-Slave Law Days in
  Boston_, 1880, pp. 34-39.

  [222] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, letter of Robert Purvis,
  of Philadelphia, p. 335.

  [223] Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, pp. 165-172. For
  other cases, see pp. 211, 379-381, 437, 558, 559-565.

The tributaries flowing into the Ohio River from Virginia and
Kentucky furnished convenient channels of escape for many slaves.
The concurrent testimony of abolitionists living along the Ohio
is to the effect that streams like the Kanawha River bore many a
boat-load of fugitives to the southern boundary of the free states.
It is not a mere coincidence that a large number of the most
important centres of activity lie along the southern line of the
Western free states at points near or opposite the mouths of rivers
and creeks. On the Mississippi, Ohio and Illinois rivers north-bound
steamboats not infrequently provided the means of escape. Jefferson
Davis declared in the Senate that many slaves escaped from his state
into Ohio by taking passage on the boats of the Mississippi.[224]

  [224] See p. 312, Chapter X.

Abolitionists found it desirable to have waterway extensions of
their secret lines. Boats, the captains of which were favorable,
were therefore drafted into the service when running on convenient
routes. Boats plying between Portland, Maine, and St. John, New
Brunswick, or other Canadian ports, often took these passengers free
of charge.[225] Thomas Garrett, of Wilmington, Delaware, sometimes
sent <DW64>s by steamboat to Philadelphia to be cared for by the
Vigilance Committee.[226] It happened on several occasions that
fugitives at Portland and Boston were put aboard ocean steamers
bound for England.[227] William and Ellen Craft were sent to England
after having narrowly escaped capture in Boston.[228]

  [225] Letters of Brown Thurston, Portland, Me., Jan. 13, 1893,
  and Oct. 21, 1895.

  [226] For letters from Mr. Garrett to William Still, of the
  Acting Committee of Vigilance of Philadelphia, notifying him
  that fugitives had been sent by boat, see Still's _Underground
  Railroad Records_, pp. 380, 387.

  [227] Letter of S. T. Pickard, Portland, Me., Nov. 18, 1893.

  [228] Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, p. 368; Wilson,
  _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. II, p. 325; _New England
  Magazine_, January, 1890, p. 580.

On the great lakes the boat service was extensive. The boats of
General Reed touching at Racine, Wisconsin, received fugitives
without fare. Among these were the _Sultana_ (Captain Appleby), the
_Madison_, the _Missouri_, the _Niagara_ and the _Keystone State_.
Captain Steele of the propeller _Galena_ was a friend of fugitives,
as was also Captain Kelsey of the _Chesapeake_. Mr. A. P. Dutton
was familiar with these vessels and their officers, and for twenty
years or more shipped runaway slaves as well as cargoes of grain
from his dock in Racine.[229] The _Illinois_ (Captain Blake),
running between Chicago and Detroit, was a safe boat on which to
place passengers whose destination was Canada.[230] John G. Weiblen
navigated the lakes in 1855 and 1856, and took many refugees from
Chicago to Collingwood, Ontario.[231] The _Arrow_,[232] the _United
States_,[233] the _Bay City_ and the _Mayflower_ plying between
Sandusky and Detroit, were boats the officers of which were always
willing to help <DW64>s reach Canadian ports. The _Forest Queen_,
the _Morning Star_ and the _May Queen_, running between Cleveland
and Detroit, the _Phœbus_, a little boat plying between Toledo and
Detroit, and, finally, some scows and sail-boats, are among the old
craft of the great lakes that carried many slaves to their land of
promise.[234] A clue to the number of refugees thus transported
to Canada is perhaps given by the record of the boat upon which
the fugitive, William Wells Brown, found employment. This boat ran
from Cleveland to Buffalo and to Detroit. It quickly became known
at Cleveland that Mr. Brown would take escaped slaves under his
protection without charge, hence he rarely failed to find a little
company ready to sail when he started out from Cleveland. "In the
year 1842," he says, "I conveyed, from the first of May to the first
of December, sixty-nine fugitives over Lake Erie to Canada."[235]

  [229] Letter of A. P. Dutton, of Racine, Wis., April 7, 1896.
  As a shipper of grain and an abolitionist for twenty years in
  Racine, Mr. Dutton was able to turn his dock into a place of
  deportation for runaway slaves.

  [230] A. J. Andreas, _History of Chicago_, Vol. I, p. 606.

  [231] Letter of Mr. Weiblen, Fairview, Erie Co., Pa., Nov. 26,
  1895.

  [232] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 46.

  [233] _Ibid._, p. 50.

  [234] The names of the last six boats given, as well as several
  of the others, were obtained from freedmen in Canada, who keep
  them in grateful remembrance.

  [235] _Narrative of William W. Brown_, by himself, 1848, pp. 107,
  108.

The account of the method of the Underground Railroad could scarcely
be called complete without some notice of the rescue of fugitives
under arrest. The first rescue occurred at the intended trial of
the first fugitive slave case in Boston in 1793. Mr. Josiah Quincy,
counsel for the fugitive, "heard a noise, and, turning around,
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."[236]

  [236] Mr. Quincy's report of the case, quoted by M. G. McDougall,
  _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 35.

The prototype of deliverances thus established was, it is true,
more or less deviated from in later instances, but the general
characteristics of these cases are such that they naturally fall
into one class. They are cases in which the execution of the law
was interfered with by friends of the prisoner, who was spirited
away as quickly as possible. The deliverance in 1812 of a supposed
runaway from the hands of his captor by the New England settlers
of Worthington, Ohio, has already been referred to in general
terms.[237] But some details of the incident are necessary to bring
out more clearly the propriety of its being included in the category
of instances of violation of the constitutional provision for the
rendition of escaped slaves. It appears that word was brought
to the village of Worthington of the capture of the fugitive at
a neighboring town, and that the villagers under the direction
of Colonel James Kilbourne took immediate steps to release the
<DW64>, who, it was said, was tied with ropes, and being afoot, was
compelled to keep up as best he could with his master's horse. On
the arrival of the slave-owner and his chattel, the latter was
freed from his bonds by the use of a butcher-knife in the hands
of an active villager, and the forms of a legal dismissal were
gone through before a court and an audience whose convictions were
ruinous to any representations the claimant was able to make. The
dispossessed master was permitted to continue his journey southward,
while the <DW64> was directed to get aboard a government wagon on
its way northward to Sandusky. The return of the slave-hunter a day
or two later with a process obtained in Franklinton, authorizing
the retaking of his property, secured him a second hearing,
but did not change the result. A fugitive, Basil Dorsey, from
Liberty, Frederick County, Maryland, was seized in Bucks County,
Pennsylvania, in 1836, and carried away. Overtaken by Mr. Robert
Purvis at Doylestown, he was brought into court, and the hearing of
the case was postponed for two weeks. When the day of trial came the
counsel for the slave succeeded in getting the case dismissed on the
ground of certain objections. Thereupon the claimants of the slave
hastened to a magistrate for a new warrant, but just as they were
returning to rearrest the fugitive, he was hustled into the buggy of
Mr. Purvis and driven rapidly out of the reach of the pursuers.[238]
In October, 1853, the case of Louis, a fugitive from Kentucky on
trial in Cincinnati, was brought to a conclusion in an unexpected
way. The United States commissioner was about to pronounce judgment
when the prisoner, taking advantage of a favorable opportunity,
slipped from his chair, had a good hat placed upon his head by
some friend, passed out of the court-room among a crowd of 
visitors and made his way cautiously to Avondale. A few minutes
after the disappearance of the fugitive his absence was discovered
by the marshal that had him in charge; and although careful search
was made for him, he escaped to Canada by means of the Underground
Railroad.[239] In April, 1859, Charles Nalle, a slave from Culpeper
County, Virginia, was discovered in Troy, New York, and taken before
the United States commissioner, who remanded him back to slavery.
As the news of this decision spread, a crowd gathered about the
commissioner's office. In the meantime, a writ of habeas corpus was
served upon the marshal that had arrested Nalle, commanding that
officer to bring the prisoner before a judge of the Supreme Court.
When the marshal and his deputies appeared with the slave, the crowd
made a charge upon them, and a hand-to-hand melée resulted. Inch by
inch the progress of the officers was resisted until they were worn
out, and the slave escaped. In haste the fugitive was ferried across
the river to West Troy, only to fall into the hands of a constable
and be again taken into custody. The mob had followed, however, and
now stormed the door behind which the prisoner rested under guard.
In the attack the door was forced open, and over the body of a
<DW64> assailant, struck down in the fray, the slave was torn from
his guards, and sent on his way to Canada.[240] Well-known cases
of rescue, such as the Shadrach case, which occurred in Boston in
January, 1851, and the Jerry rescue, which occurred in Syracuse nine
months later, may be omitted here. They, like many others that have
been less often chronicled, show clearly the temper of resolute men
in the communities where they occurred. It was felt by these persons
that the slave, who had already paid too high a penalty for his
color, could not expect justice at the hands of the law, that his
liberty must be preserved to him, and a base statute be thwarted at
any cost.

  [237] See p. 38.

  [238] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 356-361.

  [239] Levi Coffin, _Reminiscences_, pp. 548-554.

  [240] This account is condensed from a report given in the _Troy
  Whig_, April 28, 1859, and printed in the book entitled, _Harriet
  the Moses of Her People_, pp. 143-149.

[Illustration: THE REPUTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD.

Mr. Coffin and his wife aided more than 3000 slaves in their
flight.]




CHAPTER IV

UNDERGROUND AGENTS, STATION-KEEPERS, OR CONDUCTORS


Persons opposed to slavery were, naturally, the friends of the
fugitive slave, and were ever ready to respond to his appeals
for help. Shelter and food were readily supplied him, and he was
directed or conveyed, generally in the night, to sympathizing
neighbors, until finally, without any forethought or management on
his own part, he found himself in Canada a free man. These helpers,
in the course of time, came to be called agents, station-keepers, or
conductors on the Underground Railroad. Of the names of those that
belonged to this class of practical emancipationists, 3,211 have
been catalogued;[241] change of residence and death have made it
impossible to obtain the names of many more. Considering the kind
of labor performed and the danger involved, one is impressed with
the unselfish devotion to principle of these emancipators. There was
for them, of course, no outward honor, no material recompense, but
instead such contumely and seeming disgrace as can now be scarcely
comprehended.

  [241] See Appendix E, pp. 403-439.

Nevertheless, they were rich in courage, and their hospitality
was equal to all emergencies. They gladly gave aid and comfort
to every <DW64> seeking freedom; and the numbers befriended by
many helpers despite penalties and abuse show with what moral
determination the work was carried on. It has been said that the
Hopkins, Salsbury, Snediger, Dickey and Kirkpatrick families,
of southern Ohio, forwarded more than 1,000 fugitives to Canada
before the year 1817.[242] Daniel Gibbons, of Lancaster County,
Pennsylvania, was engaged in helping fugitive slaves during a period
of fifty-six years. "He did not keep a record of the number he
passed until 1824. But prior to that time, it was supposed to have
been over 200, and up to the time of his death (in 1853) he had
aided about 1,000."[243] It has been estimated that Dr. Nathan M.
Thomas, of Schoolcraft, Michigan, forwarded between 1,000 and 1,500
fugitives.[244] John Fairfield, the abductor, "piloted not only
hundreds, but thousands."[245] The Rev. Charles T. Torrey went to
Maryland and "from there sent--as he wrote previous to 1844--some
400 slaves over different routes to Canada."[246] Philo Carpenter,
of Chicago, is reported to have escorted 200 fugitives to vessels
bound for Canada.[247] In a letter to William Still, in November,
1857, Elijah F. Pennypacker, of Chester County, Pennsylvania,
writes, "we have within the past two months passed forty-three
through our hands."[248] H. B. Leeper, of Princeton, Illinois,
says that the most successful business he ever accomplished in
this line was the helping on of thirty-one men and women in six
weeks' time.[249] Leverett B. Hill, of Wakeman, Ohio, assisted 103
on their way to Canada during the year 1852.[250] Mr. Van Dorn, of
Quincy, in a service of twenty-five years, assisted "some two or
three hundred fugitives."[251] W. D. Schooley, of Richmond, Indiana,
writes, "I think I must have assisted over 100 on their way to
liberty."[252] Jonathan H. Gray, Milton Hill and John H. Frazee were
conductors at Carthage, Indiana, and are said to have helped over
150 fugitives.[253] "Thousands of fugitives found rest" at Ripley,
Brown County, Ohio.[254] During the lifetime of General McIntire,
a Virginian, who settled in Adams County, Ohio, "more than 100
slaves found a safe retreat under his roof." Other helpers in the
same state rendered service deserving of mention. Ozem Gardner, of
Sharon Township, Franklin County, "assisted more than 200 fugitives
on their way in all weathers and at all times of the day and
night."[255] It is estimated by a friend of Dr. J. A. Bingham and
George J. Payne, two operators of Gallia County, that the line of
escape with which these men were connected was travelled by about
200 slaves every year from 1845 to 1856.[256] From 1844 to 1860
John H. Stewart, a  station-keeper of the same county, kept
about 100 fugitives at his house.[257] Five hundred are said to have
passed through the hands of Thomas L. Gray, of Deavertown, in Morgan
County.[258] Ex-President Fairchild speaks of the "multitudes"
of fugitives that came to Oberlin, and says that "not one was
ever finally taken back to bondage."[259] Many other stations and
station-agents that were instrumental in helping large numbers of
slaves from bondage to freedom cannot be mentioned here.

  [242] William Birney, _James G. Birney and His Times_, p. 435.

  [243] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 56.

  [244] Letter of Mrs. Pamela S. Thomas, Schoolcraft, Mich., March
  25, 1896.

  [245] Letter of Mrs. Laura S. Haviland, Englewood, Ill., June 5,
  1893.

  [246] Letter of M. M. Fisher, Medway, Mass., Oct. 23, 1893.

  [247] E. G. Mason, _Early Chicago and Illinois_, 1890, p. 110.

  [248] Letter of Sarah C. Pennypacker, Schuylkill, Pa., June 8,
  1896.

  [249] Letter of H. B. Leeper, Princeton, Ill., Dec. 19, 1895.

  [250] Letter of E. S. Hill, Atlantic, Ia., Oct. 30, 1894.

  [251] Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. II, p. 67.

  [252] Letter of W. D. Schooley, Nov. 15, 1893.

  [253] Letter of James H. Frazee, Milton, Ind., Feb. 3, 1894.

  [254] Henry Howe, _Historical Collections of Ohio_, Vol. I, p.
  335. See also _History of Brown County, Ohio_, p. 443.

  [255] _History of Franklin and Pickaway Counties, Ohio_, p. 424.

  [256] Letter of Dr. N. B. Sisson, Porter, Gallia Co., O., Sept.
  16, 1894.

  [257] Letter of Gabe N. Johnson, Ironton, O., November, 1894.

  [258] Article in the _New Lexington_ (O.) _Tribune_, signed "W.
  A. D.," fall of 1885; exact date unknown.

  [259] Henry Howe, _Historical Collections of Ohio_, Vol. II, p.
  380.

Reticent as most underground operators were at the time in regard
to their unlawful acts, they did not attempt to conceal their
principles. On the contrary, they were zealous in their endeavors to
make converts to a doctrine that seemed to them to have the combined
warrant of Scripture and of their own conscience, and that agreed
with the convictions of the fathers of the Republic. The Golden
Rule and the preamble of the Declaration of Independence they often
recited in support of their position. When they had transgressed
the Fugitive Slave Law of Congress they were wont to find their
justification in what ex-President Fairchild of Oberlin has aptly
called the Fugitive Slave Law of the Mosaic institutions:[260] "Thou
shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which hath escaped
unto thee; he shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place
which he shall choose in one of thy gates where it liketh him best;
thou shalt not oppress him."[261] They refused to observe a law
that made it a felony in their opinion to give a cup of cold water
to famishing men and women fleeing from servitude. Their faith and
determination is clearly expressed in one of the old anti-slavery
songs:--

    "'Tis the law of God in the human soul,
      'Tis the law in the Word Divine;
    It shall live while the earth in its course shall roll,
      It shall live in this soul of mine.
    Let the law of the land forge its bonds of wrong,
      I shall help when the self-freed crave;
    For the law in my soul, bright, beaming, and strong,
      Bids me succor the fleeing slave."

Theodore Parker was but the mouthpiece of many abolitionists
throughout the Northern states when he said, at the conclusion of a
sermon in 1850: "It is known to you that the Fugitive Slave Bill has
become a law.... To law framed of such iniquity I owe no allegiance.
Humanity, Christianity, manhood revolts against it.... For myself
I say it solemnly, I will shelter, I will help, and I will defend
the fugitive with all my humble means and power. I will act with
any body of decent and serious men, as the head, or the foot, or
the hand, in any mode not involving the use of deadly weapons, to
nullify and defeat the operation of this law...."[262]

  [260] Fairchild, _The Underground Railroad_, Vol. IV; _Tract No.
  87_, Western Reserve Historical Society, p. 97.

  [261] Deut. xxiii, 15, 16.

  [262] Delivered in Melodeon Hall, Boston, Oct. 6, 1850.
  The _Chronotype_, Oct. 7, 1850. See Vol. II, No. 2, of the
  _Scrap-book_ relating to Theodore Parker, compiled by Miss C. C.
  Thayer, Boston Public Library.

Sentiments of this kind were cherished in almost every Northern
community by a few persons at least. There were some New England
colonies in the West where anti-slavery sentiments predominated.
These, like some of the religious communities, as those of the
Quakers and Covenanters, became well-known centres of underground
activity. In general it is safe to say that the majority of helpers
in the North were of Anglo-American stock, descendants of the
Puritan and Quaker settlers of the Eastern states, or of Southerners
that had moved to the Northern states to be rid of slavery. The
many stations in the eastern and northern parts of Ohio and the
northern part of Illinois may be safely attributed to the large
proportion of New England settlers in those districts. Localities
where the work of befriending slaves was largely in the hands of
Quakers will be mentioned in another connection. Southern settlers
in Brown County and adjoining districts in Ohio are said to have
been regularly forwarding escaped slaves to Canada before 1817.[263]
The emigration of a number of these settlers to Bond County,
Illinois, about 1820, and the removal of a few families from that
region to Putnam County in the same state about a decade later,
helps to explain the early development of secret routes in the
southern and north central parts of Illinois.[264]

  [263] William Birney, _James G. Birney and His Times_, p. 435.

  [264] Letter of H. B. Leeper, Princeton, Ill., Dec. 19, 1895.

In the South much secret aid was rendered fugitives, no doubt,
by persons of their own race. Two  market-women in
Baltimore were efficient agents for the Vigilance Committee of
Philadelphia.[265] Frederick Douglass's connection with the
Underground Railroad began long before he left the South.[266] In
the North, people of the African race were to be found in most
communities, and in many places they became energetic workers. <DW64>
settlements in the interior of the free states, as well as along
their southern frontier, soon came to form important links in the
chain of stations leading from the Southern states to Canada.

  [265] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 355.

  [266] Letter of Frederick Douglass, Cedar Hill, Anacostia, D.C.,
  March 27, 1893. Mr. Douglass escaped from slavery in 1839.

In the early days running slaves sometimes sought and received
aid from Indians. This fact is evidenced by the introduction of
fugitive recovery clauses into a number of the treaties made between
the colonies and Indian tribes. Seven out of the eight treaties
made between 1784 and 1786 contained clauses for the return of
black prisoners, or of "<DW64>s and other property."[267] A few of
the colonies offered rewards to induce Indians to apprehend and
restore runaways. In 1669 Maryland "ordered that any Indian who
shall apprehend a fugitive may have a 'match coate' or its value.
Virginia would give '20 armes length of Roanake,' or its value,
while in Connecticut 'two yards of cloth' was considered sufficient
inducement."[268] The inhabitants of the Ottawa village of Chief
Kinjeino in northwestern Ohio were kindly disposed towards the
fugitive;[269] and the people of Chief Brant, who held an estate on
the Grand River in Ontario west of Niagara Falls, were in the habit
of receiving  refugees.[270]

  [267] M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 13, 104, 105.

  [268] M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 7, 8, and the
  references there given.

  [269] Letter of Colonel D. W. H. Howard, Wauseon, O., Aug. 22,
  1894.

  [270] See Chapter VII, p. 203.

The people of Scotch and Scotch-Irish descent were naturally liberty
loving, and seem to have given hearty support to the anti-slavery
cause in whatever form it presented itself to them. The small
number of Scotch communities in Morgan and Logan counties, Ohio,
and in Randolph and Washington counties, Illinois, were centres of
underground service.

The secret work of the English, Irish and German settlers cannot be
so readily localized. In various places a single German, Irishman,
or Englishman is known to have aided escaped slaves in coöperation
with a few other persons of different nationality, but so far as
known there were no groups made up of representatives of one or
another of these races engaged in such enterprises. At Toledo,
Ohio, the company of helpers comprised Congressman James M. Ashley,
a Pennsylvanian by birth; Richard Mott, a Quaker; James Conlisk,
an Irishman; William H. Merritt, a <DW64>; and several others.[271]
Lyman Goodnow, an operator of Waukesha, Wisconsin, says he was told
that "in cases of emergency the Germans were next best to Quakers
for protection."[272] Two German companies from Massachusetts
enlisted for the War only when promised that they should not be
required to restore runaways to their owners.[273]

  [271] Conversation with the Hon. James M. Ashley, Toledo, O.,
  August, 1894.

  [272] Narrative of Lyman Goodnow in _History of Waukesha County,
  Wisconsin_, p. 462.

  [273] See p. 355, Chapter XI.

Some religious communities and church societies were conservators
of abolition ideas. The Quakers deserve, in this work, to be placed
before all other denominations because of their general acceptance
and advocacy of anti-slavery doctrines when the system of slavery
had no other opponents. From the time of George Fox until the last
traces of the evil were swept from the English-speaking world many
Quakers bore a steadfast testimony against it.[274] Fox reminded
slaveholders that if they were in their slaves' places they would
consider it "very great bondage and cruelty," and he urged upon the
Friends in America to preach the gospel to the enslaved blacks. In
1688 German Friends at Germantown, Pennsylvania, made an official
protest "against the traffic in the bodies of men and the treatment
of men as cattle." By 1772 New England Friends began to disown
(expel) members for failing to manumit their slaves; and four years
later both the Philadelphia and the New York yearly meetings made
slaveholding a disownable offence. A similar step was taken by the
Baltimore Yearly Meeting in 1777; and meetings in Virginia were
directed, in 1784, to disown those that refused to emancipate their
slaves.[275] Owing to obstacles in the way of setting slaves free in
North Carolina, a committee of Quakers of that state was appointed
in 1822 to examine the laws of some of the free states respecting
the admission of people of color therein. In 1823 the committee
reported that there was "nothing in the laws of Ohio, Indiana, and
Illinois to prevent the introduction of people of color into those
states, and agents were instructed to remove slaves placed in their
care as fast as they were willing to go." These facts show the
sentiment that prevailed in the Society of Friends. Many Southern
Quakers moved to the North on account of their hatred of slavery,
and established such important centres of underground work as
Springboro and Salem, Ohio, and Spiceland and New Garden, Indiana.
Quakers in New Bedford and Lynn, Massachusetts, and Valley Falls,
Rhode Island, engaged in the service. The same class of people in
Maryland coöperated with members of their society in the vicinity of
Philadelphia. The existence of numerous Underground Railroad centres
in southeastern Pennsylvania and in eastern Indiana is explained by
the fact that a large number of Quakers dwelt in those regions.

  [274] S. B. Weeks, _Southern Quakers and Slavery_, p. 198.

  [275] _American Church History_, Vol. XII; see article on "The
  Society of Friends," by Professor A. C. Thomas, pp. 242-248; also
  Weeks, _Southern Quakers and Slavery_, pp. 198-219.

The Methodists began to take action against slavery in 1780. At an
informal conference held at Baltimore in that year the subject was
presented in the form of a "Question,--Ought not this conference
to require those travelling preachers who hold slaves to give
promises to set them free?" The answer given was in the affirmative.
Concerning the membership the language adopted was as follows: "We
pass our disapprobation on all our friends who keep slaves; and
advise their freedom." Under the influence of Wesleyan preachers, it
is said, not a few cases of emancipation occurred. At a conference
in 1785, however, it was decided to "suspend the execution of the
minute on slavery till the deliberations of a future conference...."
Four years later a clause appeared in the Discipline, by whose
authority is not known, prohibiting "The buying or selling the
bodies or souls of men, women, or children, with an intention to
enslave them." This provision evidently referred to the African
slave-trade. In 1816 the General Conference adopted a resolution
that "no slaveholder shall be eligible to any official station in
our Church hereafter, where the laws of the state in which he lives
will admit of emancipation, and permit the liberated slave to enjoy
freedom." Later there seems to have been a disposition on the part
of the church authorities to suppress the agitation of the slavery
question, but it can scarcely be doubted that the well-known views
of the Wesleys and of Whitfield remained for some at least the
standard of right opinion, and that their declarations formed for
these the rule of action. In 1842 a secession from the church took
place, chiefly if not altogether on account of the question of
slavery, and a number of abolitionist members of the uncompromising
type founded a new church organization, which they called the
"Wesleyan Methodist Connection of America." Slave-holders were
excluded from fellowship in this body. Within two or three years the
new organization had drawn away twenty thousand members from the
old.[276] In 1844 a much larger secession took place on the same
question, the occasion being the institution of proceedings before
the General Conference against the Rev. James O. Andrew, D.D., a
slave-holding bishop of the South. This so aggravated the Methodist
Episcopal societies in the slave states that they withdrew and
formed the Methodist Episcopal Church South. Among the members of
the Wesleyan Methodist Connection and of the older society of the
North there were a number of zealous underground operators. Indeed,
it came to be said of the Wesleyans, as of the Quakers, that almost
every neighborhood where a few of them lived was likely to be a
station of the secret Road to Canada. It is probable that some of
the Wesleyans at Wilmington, Ohio, coöperated with Quakers at that
point. In Urbana, Ohio, there were Methodists of the two divisions
engaged.[277] Service was also performed by Wesleyans at Tippecanoe,
Deersville and Rocky Fort in Tuscarawas County,[278] and at Piqua,
Miami County, Ohio.[279] In Iowa a number of Methodist ministers
were engaged in the work.[280]

  [276] H. N. McTyeire, D.D., _History of Methodism_, 1887, pp.
  375, 536, 601, 611.

  [277] Conversation with Major J. C. Brand, Urbana, O., Aug. 13,
  1894.

  [278] Conversation with Thomas M. Hazlett, Freeport, Harrison
  Co., O., Aug. 18, 1895.

  [279] Conversation with Mrs. Mary B. Carson, Piqua, O., Aug. 30,
  1895.

  [280] Letter of Professor F. L. Parker, Grinnell, Ia., Sept. 30,
  1894.

The third sect to which a considerable proportion of underground
operators belonged was Calvinistic in its creed. All the various
wings of Presbyterianism seem to have had representatives in
this class of anti-slavery people. The sinfulness of slavery
was a proposition that found uncompromising advocates among the
Presbyterian ministers of the South in the early part of this
century. In 1804 the Rev. James Gilliland removed from South
Carolina to Brown County, Ohio, because he had been enjoined by his
presbytery and synod "to be silent in the pulpit on the subject
of the emancipation of the African."[281] Other ministers of
prominence, like Thomas D. Baird, David Nelson and John Rankin,
left the South because they were not free to speak against slavery.
In 1818 the Presbyterian Church declared the system "inconsistent
with the law of God and totally irreconcilable with the gospel of
Christ." This teaching was afterwards departed from in 1845 when the
Assembly confined its protest to admitting rather mildly that there
was "evil connected with slavery," and declining to countenance
"the traffic in slaves for the sake of gain; the separation of
husbands and wives, parents and children, for the sake of filthy
lucre or the convenience of the master; or cruel treatment of
slaves in any respect." The dissatisfaction caused by this evident
compromise led to the formation of a new church in 1847 by the
"New School" Presbytery of Ripley, Ohio, and a part of the "Old
School" Presbytery of Mahoning, Pennsylvania. This organization
was called the Free Church, and by 1860 had extended as far west
as Iowa.[282] It is not strange that the region in Ohio where the
Free Presbyterian Church was founded was plentifully dotted with
stations of the Underground Railroad, and that the house of the
Rev. John Rankin, who was the leader of the movement, was known
far and wide as a place of refuge for the fugitive slave.[283] At
Savannah, Ashland County, Iberia, Morrow County, and a point near
Millersburgh, Holmes County, Ohio, the work is associated with Free
Presbyterian societies once existing in those neighborhoods.[284]
In the northern part of Adams County, as also in the northern part
of Logan County, Ohio, fugitives were received into the homes of
Covenanters. Galesburg, Illinois, with its college was founded in
1837 by Presbyterians and Congregationalists, who united to form
one religious society under the name of the "Presbyterian Church
of Galesburg." Opposition to slavery was one of the conditions of
membership in this organization from the beginning. This intense
anti-slavery feeling caused the church to withdraw from the
presbytery in 1855.[285] From the starting of the colony until the
time of the War fugitives from Missouri were conducted thither
with the certainty of obtaining protection. Thus Galesburg became,
probably, the principal underground station in Illinois.[286]
Joseph S. White, of New Castle, in western Pennsylvania, notes the
circumstance that all the men with whom he acted in underground
enterprises were Presbyterians.[287]

  [281] Wm. B. Sprague, D.D., _Annals of the American Pulpit_,
  Vol. IV, 1858, p. 137; Robert E. Thompson, D.D., _History of the
  Presbyterian Churches in the United States_, 1895, p. 122.

  [282] Robert E. Thompson, D.D., _History of the Presbyterian
  Churches in the United States_, 1895, pp. 136, 137.

  [283] Address by J. C. Leggett, in a pamphlet entitled _Rev. John
  Rankin_, 1892, p. 9.

  [284] Letter of Mrs. A. M. Buchanan, Savannah, O., 1893;
  conversation with Thomas L. Smith, Fredericksburg, Wayne Co., O.,
  Aug. 15, 1895.

  [285] Professor George Churchill, in _The Republican Register_,
  Galesburg, Ill., March 5, 1887.

  [286] Charles C. Chapman & Co., _History of Knox County,
  Illinois_, p. 210.

  [287] Joseph S. White, Note-book containing "Some Reminiscences
  of Slavery Times," New Castle, Pa., March 23, 1891.

The religious centre in Ohio most renowned for the aid of refugees
was the Congregational colony and college at Oberlin. The
acquisition of a large anti-slavery contingent from Lane Seminary in
1835 caused the college to be known from that time on as a "hotbed
of abolitionism." Fugitives were directed thither from points more
or less remote, and during the period from 1835 to 1860 Oberlin
was a busy station,[288] receiving passengers from at least five
converging lines.[289] So notorious did the place become that a
guide-board in the form of a fugitive running in the direction of
the town was set up by the authorities on the Middle Ridge road,
six miles north of Oberlin, and the sign of a tavern, four miles
away, "was ornamented on its Oberlin face with a representation
of a fugitive slave pursued by a tiger."[290] On account of the
persistent ignoring of the law against harboring slaves by those
connected with the institution, the existence of the college was
put in jeopardy. Ex-President Fairchild relates that, "A Democratic
legislature at different times agitated the question of repealing
the college charter. The fourth and last attempt was made in 1843,
when the bill for repeal was indefinitely postponed in the House
by a vote of thirty-six to twenty-nine."[291] The anti-slavery
influence of Oberlin went abroad with its students. Ex-President
W. M. Brooks, of Tabor College, Iowa, a graduate of Oberlin, says,
"The stations on the Underground Railroad in southwestern Iowa
were in the region of Civil Bend, where the colony from Oberlin,
Ohio, settled, which afterwards settled Tabor.... From this point
(Civil Bend, now Percival) fugitives were brought to Tabor after
1852; here the entire population was in sympathy with the escaped
fugitives; ... there was scarcely a man in the community who was
not ready to do anything that was needed to help fugitives on their
way to Canada."[292] The families that founded Tabor were "almost
all of them Congregationalists."[293] Professor L. F. Parker of
Grinnell, Iowa, names Oberlin students in connection with Quakers as
the chief groups in Iowa whose houses were open to fugitives.[294]
Grinnell itself was first settled by people that were mainly
Congregationalists.[295] From the time of its foundation (1854) it
was an anti-slavery centre, "well known and eagerly sought by the
few runaways who came from the meagre settlements southwest ... in
Missouri."[296]

  [288] James H. Fairchild, D.D., _The Underground Railroad_, Vol.
  IV of publications of the Western Reserve Historical Society,
  Tract No. 87, p. 111.

  [289] See the general map.

  [290] James H. Fairchild, D.D., _Oberlin, the Colony and the
  College_, p. 117.

  [291] _Ibid._, p. 116. See also Henry Howe, _Historical
  Collections of Ohio_, Vol. II, p. 383.

  [292] Letter of President W. M. Brooks, Tabor, Ia., Oct. 11, 1894.

  [293] I. B. Richman, _John Brown Among the Quakers, and Other
  Sketches_, p. 15.

  [294] Letter of Professor L. F. Parker, Grinnell, Iowa, Sept. 30,
  1894.

  [295] J. B. Grinnell, _Men and Events of Forty Years_, p. 87.

  [296] Letter of Professor L. F. Parker, Grinnell, Iowa, Sept. 30,
  1894.

There were, of course, members of other denominations that
befriended the slave; thus, it is known that the Unitarian Seminary
at Meadville, Pennsylvania, was a centre of underground work,[297]
but, in general, the lack of information concerning the church
connections of many of the company of persons with whom this chapter
deals prevents the drawing of any inference as to whether these
individuals acted independently or in conjunction with little bands
of persons of their own faith.

  [297] Conversation with Professor Henry H. Barber, of Meadville,
  Pa., in Cambridge, Mass., June, 1897.

There seems to have been no open appeal made to church organizations
for help in behalf of fugitives except in Massachusetts. In 1851,
and again in 1854, the Vigilance Committee of Boston deemed it
wise to send out circulars to the clergymen of the commonwealth,
requesting that contributions be taken by them to be applied in
mitigation of the misery caused by the enactment of the Fugitive
Slave Law. The boldness and originality of such an appeal, and
more especially the evident purpose of its framers to create
sentiment by this means among the religious societies, entitle it
to consideration. The first circular was sent out soon after the
enactment of the odious law, and the second soon after the passage
of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. The results secured by the two circulars
will be seen in the following letter from Francis Jackson, of
Boston, to his fellow-townsmen and co-worker, the Rev. Theodore
Parker.

  BOSTON, Aug. 27, 1854.

  THEODORE PARKER:

     _Dear Friend_,--The contributions of the churches in behalf of
     the fugitive slaves I think have about all come in. I herewith
     inclose you a schedule thereof, amounting in all to about $800,
     being but _little more than half as much as they contributed in
     1851_.

     The Mass. Register published in January, 1854, states the number
     of Religious Societies to be 1,547 (made up of 471 Orthodox, 270
     Methodist, and all others 239). We sent circulars to the whole
     1,547; only 78 of them have responded--say 1 in 20--from 130
     Universalist societies, nothing, from 43 Episcopal $4, and 20
     Friends $27--the Baptists--four times as many of these societies
     have given now as gave in 1851, this may be because Brynes was a
     Baptist minister.

       *       *       *       *       *

     The average amount contributed by 77 societies (deducting
     Frothingham of Salem) is $10 each; the 28th Congregationalist
     Church in this city did not take up a contribution,
     nevertheless, individual members thereof subscribed upwards
     of $300; they being infidel have not been reckoned with the
     churches.

     Of the cities and large towns scarce any have contributed. Of
     the 90 and 9 in Boston all have gone astray but 2--I have not
     heard of our circular being read in one of them; still it may
     have been. Those societies who have contributed, I judge were
     least able to do so.

  FRANCIS JACKSON.[298]

  [298] Theodore Parker's _Scrap-book_, Boston Public Library.

The political affiliations of underground helpers before 1840 were,
necessarily, with one or the other of the old parties--the Whig
or the Democratic. As the Whig party was predominantly Northern,
and as its sentiments were more distinctly anti-slavery than those
of its rival, it is fair to suppose that the small band of early
abolitionists were, most of them, allied with that party.[299]
The Missouri Compromise in 1820, one may surmise, enabled those
that were wavering in their position to ally themselves with the
party that was less likely to make demands in the interests of the
slave power. In 1840 opportunity was given abolitionists to take
independent political action by the nomination of a national Liberty
ticket. At that time, and again in 1844, many underground operators
voted for the candidates of the Liberty party, and subsequently for
the Free Soil nominees.[300]

  [299] This view agrees with the testimony gathered by
  correspondence from surviving abolitionists.

  [300] This statement is based on a mass of correspondence.

But it is not to be supposed that all friends of the fugitive
joined the political movement against slavery. Many there were
that regarded party action with disfavor, preferring the method of
moral suasion. These persons belonged to the Quakers, or to the
Garrisonian abolitionists. The Friends or Quakers refused as far as
possible to countenance slavery, and when the political development
of the abolition cause came they regretted it, and their yearly
meetings withheld their official sanction, so far as known, from
every political organization. Nevertheless, there were some members
of the Society of Friends that were swept into the current, and
became active supporters of the Liberty party.[301] The most noted
and influential of these was the anti-slavery poet, Whittier.[302]
When, in 1860, the Republican party nominated Lincoln, "a large
majority of the Friends, at least in the North and West, voted for
him."[303]

  [301] Professor A. C. Thomas on "The Society of Friends," in
  _American Church History_, Vol. XII, 1894, pp. 284, 285.

  [302] Oliver Johnson, _William Lloyd Garrison and His Times_,
  1879, p. 322.

  [303] Professor A. C. Thomas, in _American Church History_, Vol.
  XII, p. 285.

The followers of Garrison that remained steadfast to the teachings
and the example of their leader shunned all connection with
the political abolitionist movement. Garrison never voted but
once,[304] and by 1854 had gone so far in his denunciation of
slavery that he burned the Constitution of the United States
at an open-air celebration of the abolitionists at Framingham,
Massachusetts.[305] To his dying day he seems to have believed "that
the cause would have triumphed sooner, in a political sense, if the
abolitionists had continued to act as one body, never yielding to
the temptation of forming a political party, but pressing forward in
the use of the same instrumentalities which were so potent from 1831
to 1840."[306]

  [304] _Life of Garrison_, by his children, Vol. I, p. 455.

  [305] _Ibid._, Vol. III, p. 412.

  [306] Oliver Johnson, _William Lloyd Garrison and His Times_, p.
  310.

The abolitionists were ill-judged by their contemporaries, and were
frequently subjected to harsh language and occasionally to violent
treatment by persons of supposed respectability. The weight of
opprobrium they were called upon to bear tested their great strength
of character. If the probity, integrity and moral courage of this
abused class had been made the criteria of their standing they would
have been held from the outset in high esteem by their neighbors.
However, they lived to see the days of their disgrace turned into
days of triumph. "The muse of history," says Rhodes, "has done full
justice to the abolitionists. Among them were literary men, who have
known how to present their cause with power, and the noble spirit
of truthfulness pervades the abolition literature. One may search
in vain for intentional misrepresentation. Abuse of opponents and
criticism of motives are common enough, but the historians of the
abolition movement have endeavored to relate a plain, honest tale;
and the country has accepted them and their work at their true
value. Moreover, a cause and its promoters that have been celebrated
in the vigorous lines of Lowell and sung in the impassioned verse of
Whittier will always be of perennial memory."[307]

  [307] _History of the United States from the Compromise of 1850_,
  Vol. I, p. 75.

Contempt was not the only hardship that the abolitionist had to
face when he admitted the fleeing black man within his door, but
he braved also the existing laws, and was sometimes compelled
to suffer the consequences for disregarding the slaveholder's
claim of ownership. In 1842 the prosecution of John Van Zandt, of
Hamilton County, Ohio, was begun for attempting to aid nine slaves
to escape. The case was tried first in the Circuit Court of the
United States, and then taken by appeal to the Supreme Court. The
suits were not concluded when the defendant died in May, 1847. The
death of the plaintiff soon after left the case to be settled by
administrators, who agreed that the costs, amounting to one thousand
dollars, should be paid from the possessions of the defendant.[308]
The judgments against Van Zandt under the Fugitive Slave Law
amounted to seventeen hundred dollars.[309] In 1847 several members
of a crowd that was instrumental in preventing the seizure of a
 family by the name of Crosswhite, at Marshall, Michigan,
were indicted under the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793. Two trials
followed, and at the second trial three persons were convicted,
the verdict against them amounting, with expenses and costs, to
six thousand dollars.[310] In 1848 Daniel Kauffman, of Cumberland
County, Pennsylvania, sheltered a family of thirteen slaves in his
barn, and gave them transportation northward. He was tried, and
sentenced to pay two thousand dollars in fine and costs. Although
this decision was reversed by the United States Supreme Court, a new
suit was instituted in the Circuit Court of the United States and a
judgment was rendered against Kauffman amounting with costs to more
than four thousand dollars. This sum was paid, in large part if not
altogether, by contributions.[311] In 1854 Rush R. Sloane, a lawyer
of Sandusky, Ohio, was tried for enabling seven fugitives to escape
after arrest by their pursuers. The two claimants of the slaves
instituted suit, but one only obtained a judgment, which amounted to
three thousand dollars and costs.[312] The arrest of the fugitive,
Anthony Burns, in Boston, in the same year, was the occasion for
indignation meetings at Faneuil and Meionaon Halls, which terminated
in an attempt to rescue the unfortunate <DW64>. Theodore Parker,
Wendell Phillips and T. W. Higginson took a conspicuous part in
these proceedings, and were indicted with others for riot. When the
first case was taken up the counsel for the defence made a motion
that the indictment be quashed. This was sustained by the court, and
the affair ended by all the cases being dismissed.[313]

  [308] Letter of N. L. Van Sandt, Clarinda, Iowa. (Mr. N. L. Van
  Sandt is the son of John Van Zandt.) See also Wilson's _Rise
  and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. I, pp. 475, 476; T. R. Cobb,
  _Historical Sketches of Slavery_, p. 207; M. G. McDougall,
  _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 42.

  [309] See pp. 274, 275, Chapter IX.

  [310] Pamphlet proposing a "Defensive League of Freedom," signed
  by Ellis Gray Loring and others, of Boston, pp. 5, 6. See Chapter
  IX, p. 275.

  [311] _Ibid._

  [312] 5 McLean's United States Reports, p. 64 _et seq._; see also
  _The Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888; account by Rush R. Sloane,
  pp. 47-49; account by H. F. Paden, pp. 21, 22; Chapter IX, pp.
  276, 277.

  [313] _Commonwealth_, June 28, 1854; M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive
  Slaves_, pp. 45, 46; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_,
  Vol. II, pp. 443, 444. See Chapter X, pp. 331-333.

These and other similar cases arising from the attempted enforcement
of the Fugitive Slave Act in various parts of the country led to
the proposal of a Defensive League of Freedom. A pamphlet, issued
soon after the rendition of Burns, by Ellis Gray Loring, Samuel
Cabot, Jr., Henry J. Prentiss, John A. Andrew and Samuel G. Howe,
of Boston, and James Freeman Clarke, of Roxbury, Massachusetts,
stated the object of the proposed league to be "to secure all
persons claimed as fugitives from slavery, and to all persons
accused of violating the Fugitive Slave Bill the fullest legal
protection; and also indemnify all such persons against costs,
fines, and expenses, whenever they shall seem to deserve such
indemnification." The league was to act as a "society of mutual
protection and every member was to assume his portion of such
penalties as would otherwise fall with crushing weight on a few
individuals." Subscriptions were to be made by the members of the
organization, and five per cent of these subscriptions was to be
called for any year when it was needed.[314] How much service this
association actually performed, or whether, indeed, it got beyond
the stage of being merely proposed is not known; in any event, the
fact is worth noting that men of marked ability, distinction and
social connection were forming societies, like the Defensive League
of Freedom, and the various vigilance committees, for the purpose of
defeating the Fugitive Slave Act.

  [314] Pamphlet proposing a "Defensive League of Freedom," pp. 1,
  3, 11 and 12.

Among the underground helpers there are a number of notable persons
that have admitted with seeming satisfaction their complicity
in disregarding the Fugitive Slave Law. A letter from Frederick
Douglass, the famous Maryland bondman and anti-slavery orator, says:
"My connection with the Underground Railroad began long before I
left the South, and was continued as long as slavery continued,
whether I lived in New Bedford, Lynn [both in Massachusetts],
or Rochester, N.Y. In the latter place I had as many as eleven
fugitives under my roof at one time."[315] In his autobiography Mr.
Douglass declares concerning his work in this connection: "My agency
was all the more exciting and interesting because not altogether
free from danger. I could take not a step in it without exposing
myself to fine and imprisonment, ... but in face of this fact,
I can say, I never did more congenial, attractive, fascinating,
and satisfactory work."[316] Dr. Alexander M. Ross, a Canadian
physician and naturalist, who has received the decorations of
knighthood from several of the monarchs of Europe in recognition of
his scientific discoveries, spent a considerable part of his time
from 1856 to 1862 in spreading a knowledge of the routes leading to
Canada among the slaves of the South.[317] Dr. Norton S. Townshend,
one of the organizers of the Ohio State University and for years
professor of agriculture in that institution, acted as a conductor
on the Underground Railroad while he was a student of medicine
in Cincinnati, Ohio.[318] Dr. Jared P. Kirtland, a distinguished
physician and scientist of Ohio, kept a station in Poland, Mahoning
County, where he resided from 1823 to 1837.[319]

  [315] Letter of Frederick Douglass, Anacostia, D.C., March 27,
  1893.

  [316] _Life of Frederick Douglass_, 1881, p. 271.

  [317] Ross, _Recollections and Experiences of an Abolitionist_,
  pp. 30-44, 67-71, 121-132; also letters of Alexander M. Ross,
  Toronto, Ont.

  [318] Conversations with Professor N. S. Townshend, Columbus, O.

  [319] Conversation with Miss Mary L. Morse, Poland, O., Aug. 11,
  1892; letter of Mrs. Emma Kirtland Hine, Poland, O., Jan. 23,
  1897.

Harriet Beecher Stowe gained the intimate knowledge of the
methods of the friends of the slave she displays in _Uncle Tom's
Cabin_ through her association with some of the most zealous
abolitionists of southern Ohio. Her own house on Walnut Hills,
Cincinnati, was a refuge whence persons whose types are portrayed
in George and Eliza, the boy Jim and his mother, were guided by
her husband and brother a portion of the way towards Canada.[320]
Colonel Thomas Wentworth Higginson, the essayist and author,
while stationed as the pastor of a free church in Worcester,
Massachusetts, from 1852 to 1858, often had fugitives directed to
his care. In a recent letter he writes of having received on one
occasion a "consignment of a young white slave woman with two white
children" from the Rev. Samuel J. May, who had put her "into the
hands, for escort, of one of the most pro-slavery men in Worcester."
The pro-slavery man, of course, did not have a suspicion that he was
acting as conductor on the Underground Railroad.[321]

  [320] See Chapter X, pp.

  [321] Letter of T. W. Higginson, Dublin, N.H., July 24, 1896.

[Illustration: FREDERICK DOUGLASS.]

Joshua R. Giddings, for twenty years in Congress an ardent advocate
of the abolition of slavery, kept a particular chamber in his house
at Jefferson, Ohio, for the use of refugees.[322] Sometimes when
passing through Alliance, Ohio, Mr. Giddings found opportunity to
call upon his friend, I. Newton Peirce, to whom he contributed money
for the transportation of runaway slaves by rail from that point to
Cleveland.[323] What his views were of the irritating law of 1850,
he declared on the floor of the House of Representatives, February
11, 1852, in the following words: "... Let me say to Southern men;
It is your privilege to catch your own slaves, if any one catches
them.... When you ask us to pay the expenses of arresting your
slaves, or to give the President authority to appoint officers
to do that dirty work, give them power to compel our people to
give chase to the panting bondman, you overstep the bounds of the
Constitution, and there we meet you, and there we stand and there
we shall remain. We shall protest against such indignity; we shall
proclaim our abhorrence of such a law. Nor can you seal or silence
our voices."[324]

  [322] Conversation with J. Addison Giddings, Jefferson, O., Aug.
  9, 1892.

  [323] Letter of I. Newton Peirce, Folcroft, Sharon Hill P.O.,
  Pa., Feb. 1, 1893.

  [324] George W. Julian, _The Life of Joshua R. Giddings_, 1892,
  p. 289.

Thaddeus Stevens, a leading lawyer of Pennsylvania, who rendered
the cause of abolition distinguished service in Congress, where he
gained the title of the "great commoner," entered upon the practice
of his profession at Gettysburg in 1816, and soon became known as
a friend of escaping slaves. His removal to Lancaster in 1842 did
not take him off the line of flight, and he continued to act as a
helper. The woman that "kept house for him for more than twenty
years, and nursed him at the close of his life, was one of the
slaves he helped to freedom."[325]

  [325] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 36, 38, 46.

James M. Ashley, member of Congress from Ohio for over nine years,
and his successor in the House, Richard Mott, a Quaker, were
confederates in their violation of the Slave Act at Toledo, Ohio.
Mr. Ashley began his service in behalf of the blacks early in life.
As a youth of seventeen in Kentucky, he helped two companies across
the Ohio River, one company of seven persons, and the other of
five.[326] Sidney Edgerton, who was elected to Congress from Ohio
on the Free Soil ticket in 1858, and four years after was appointed
governor of Montana Territory by President Lincoln, assisted his
father in the befriending of slaves at Tallmadge, Summit County,
Ohio.[327] Jacob M. Howard, afterwards United States senator from
Michigan, was one of the principal operators at Detroit.[328]
General Samuel Fessenden, of Maine, who received the nomination of
the Liberty party for the governorship of his state, and later for
Congress, and was during forty years the leading member of the bar
in Maine, gave escaped bondmen reaching Portland a hearty welcome
to his house on India Street.[329] In Vermont there were a number
of men prominent in public affairs that were actively engaged in
underground enterprises. Colonel Jonathan P. Miller, of Montpelier,
who went to Greece, and assisted that country in its uprising in the
twenties, served as a member of the Vermont legislature in 1833, and
took part in the World's Anti-Slavery Convention in 1840, was among
the early helpers in New England. Lawrence Brainerd, for several
years candidate for governor of Vermont, and later chosen to the
United States Senate as a Free Soiler, gave shelter to the wanderers
at St. Albans, where they were almost within sight of "the Promised
Land."[330] Others were the Rev. Alvah Sabin, elected to Congress
in 1853, who kept a station at the town of Georgia, the Hon. Joseph
Poland of Montpelier, the Hon. William Sowles of Swanton, the Hon.
John West of Morristown and the Hon. A. J. Russell of Troy.[331]

  [326] Conversation with the Hon. James M. Ashley, Toledo, O.,
  July, 1894.

  [327] Conversation with ex-Governor Sidney Edgerton, Akron, O.,
  Aug. 16, 1895.

  [328] Conversation with Judge J. W. Finney, Detroit, Mich., July
  27, 1895.

  [329] Letter of S. T. Pickard, Portland, Me., Nov. 18, 1893.

  [330] Letter of Aldis O. Brainerd, St. Albans, Vt., Oct. 21, 1895.

  [331] Letter of Joseph Poland, Montpelier, Vt., April 7, 1897.

Gerrit Smith, the famous philanthropist, kept open house for
fugitives in a fine old mansion at Peterboro, New York. He was one
of the prime movers in the organization of the Liberty party at
Arcade, New York, in 1840, and was its candidate for the presidency
in 1848 and in 1852. He was elected to Congress in 1853 and served
one term. It is said that during the decade 1850 to 1860 he "aided
habitually in the escape of fugitive slaves and paid the legal
expenses of persons accused of infractions of the Fugitive Slave
Law."[332] The Rev. Owen Lovejoy, brother of the martyr Elijah P.
Lovejoy, served four terms in the national House of Representatives.
On one occasion he was taunted by some pro-slavery members of the
House with being a "<DW65>-stealer." In a speech made February 21,
1859, Mr. Lovejoy, referring to these accusations, said: "Is it
desired to call attention to this fact--of my assisting fugitive
slaves?... Owen Lovejoy lives at Princeton, Illinois, three-quarters
of a mile east of the village, and he aids every fugitive that comes
to his door and asks it. Thou invisible demon of slavery, dost thou
think to cross my humble threshold, and forbid me to give bread to
the hungry and shelter to the houseless! I bid you defiance in the
name of my God!"[333] Josiah B. Grinnell, who represented a central
Iowa district in the Thirty-eighth and the Thirty-ninth congresses,
had a chamber in his house at Grinnell that came to be called the
"liberty room." John Brown, while on his way to Canada with a
band of Missouri slaves, in the winter of 1858-1859, stacked his
arms in this room, and his company of fugitives slept there.[334]
Mr. Grinnell relates of the members of this party, "They came at
night, and were the darkest, saddest specimens of humanity I have
ever seen, glad to camp on the floor, while the veteran was a
night guard, with his dog and a miniature arsenal ready for use on
alarm...."[335]

  [332] O. B. Frothingham, _Life of Gerrit Smith; National
  Cyclopedia of American Biography_, Vol. II, pp. 322, 323.

  [333] Pamphlet of the Rev. D. Heagle, entitled _The Great
  Anti-Slavery Agitator, Hon. Owen Lovejoy_, pp. 16, 17, 34, 35.

  [334] J. B. Grinnell, _Men and Events of Forty Years_, p. 207.

  [335] _Ibid._, pp. 217, 218.

Thurlow Weed, the distinguished journalist and political manager,
even in his busiest hours had time to afford relief to the
underground applicant. One who knew Mr. Weed intimately relates the
following incident: "On one occasion when several eminent gentlemen
were waiting [to see the journalist] they were surprised and at
first much vexed, by seeing a <DW64> promptly admitted. The <DW64>
soon reappeared, and hastily left the house, when it was learned
that he was a runaway slave, and had been aided in his flight for
liberty by the man who was too busy to attend to Cabinet officers,
but had time to say words of encouragement and present means of
support to a flying fugitive."[336] Sydney Howard Gay, for several
years managing editor of the _New York Tribune_, and subsequently
on the editorial staff of the _New York Post_ and the _Chicago
Tribune_, was an efficient agent of the Underground Railroad while
in charge of the _Anti-Slavery Standard_, which he conducted in New
York City from 1844 to 1857.[337]

  [336] T. W. Barnes, _Life of Thurlow Weed_, 1884, Vol. II, p. 238.

  [337] Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. II, p. 52.

Among the clergymen that made it a part of their religious duty
to minister to the needs of the exiles from the South, were John
Rankin, Samuel J. May and Theodore Parker. Mr. Rankin, a native of
Tennessee, early developed his anti-slavery views in Kentucky, where
from 1817 to 1821 he served as pastor of two Presbyterian churches
at the town of Carlisle. During the next forty-four years he resided
at Ripley, Ohio, in a neighborhood frequented by runaways.[338]
Doubtless he became a patron of these midnight visitors at the
time of his location in Ripley. In 1828 he established himself in
a house situated upon the crest of a hill just back of the town
and overlooking the Ohio River. For many years the lights beaming
through the windows of this parsonage were hailed by slaves fleeing
from the soil of Kentucky as beacons to guide them to a haven of
safety.[339]

  [338] William Birney, _James G. Birney and His Times_, p. 435.

  [339] J. C. Leggett, in a pamphlet entitled _Rev. John Rankin_,
  1892, pp. 8, 9; see also _History of Brown County, Ohio_, p. 443.

Samuel J. May, for many years a prominent minister in the Unitarian
Church, writes: "So long ago as 1834, when I was living in the
eastern part of Connecticut, I had fugitives addressed to my
care.... Even after I came to reside in Syracuse [New York] I had
much to do as a station-keeper or conductor on the Underground
Railroad, until slavery was abolished by the proclamation of
President Lincoln.... Fugitives came to me from Maryland, Virginia,
Kentucky, Tennessee and Louisiana. They came, too, at all hours
of day and night, sometimes comfortably, yes, and even handsomely
clad, but generally in clothes every way unfit to be worn, and in
some instances too unclean and loathsome to be admitted into my
house."[340]

  [340] Recollections of the _Anti-Slavery Conflict_, p. 297.

Theodore Parker, the learned theologian and iconoclast of Boston,
often deserted his study that he might work in the cause of
humanity. In his Journal, under the date October 23, 1850, Mr.
Parker wrote: "... The first business of the anti-slavery men is to
help the fugitives; we, like Christ, are to seek and save that which
is lost."[341] In an unsigned note written in 1851 to his friend Dr.
Francis, Mr. Parker says:--

     ... I have got some nice books (old ones) coming across the
     water. But, alas me! such is the state of the poor fugitive
     slaves, that I must attend to living men, and not to dead books,
     and all this winter my time has been occupied with these poor
     souls. The Vigilance Committee appointed me spiritual counsellor
     of all fugitive slaves in Massachusetts while in peril.... The
     Fugitive Slave Law has cost me some months of time already. I
     have refused about sixty invitations to lecture and delayed the
     printing of my book--for that! Truly the land of the pilgrims is
     in great disgrace!

  Yours truly.[342]

  [341] John Weiss, _Life and Correspondence of Theodore Parker_,
  1864, p. 95.

  [342] John Weiss, _Life and Correspondence of Theodore Parker_,
  1864, p. 96.

Among the underground workers there were two whose principal object
in life seems to have been to assist fugitive slaves. These two
organizers of underground travel were Levi Coffin, of Cincinnati,
Ohio, and Thomas Garrett, of Wilmington, Delaware, both lifelong
members of the Society of Friends, both capable business men, both
able to number the unfortunates they had succored in terms of
thousands.

Thomas Garrett was born in Pennsylvania in 1789, and espoused the
cause of emancipation at the age of eighteen, when a <DW52> woman
in the employ of his father's family was kidnapped. He succeeded in
rescuing the woman from the hands of her abductors, and from that
time on made it his special mission to aid <DW64>s in their attempts
to gain freedom. In 1822 he removed to Wilmington, Delaware, and
during the next forty years his efforts in behalf of fugitives were
unremitting. He was not so fortunate as Levi Coffin in escaping the
penalties of the Fugitive Slave Law; an open violation of the law
got him into difficulty in 1848. He was tried on four counts before
Judge Taney, and his entire property was swallowed up in fines
amounting to eight thousand dollars. There is a tradition that the
presiding judge admonished Garrett to take his loss as a lesson and
in the future to desist from breaking the laws; whereupon the aged
Quaker stoutly replied: "Judge, thou hast not left me a dollar,
but I wish to say to thee, and to all in this court-room, that if
any one knows of a fugitive who wants a shelter and a friend, send
him to Thomas Garrett and he will befriend him."[343] Although
sixty years of age when misfortune befel him, Mr. Garrett was
successful in again acquiring a competence through the kindness of
fellow-townsmen in advancing him capital with which to make a fresh
start. Though satisfied, he was wont to think that his real work
in life was never finished. "The war came a little too soon for my
business. I wanted to help off three thousand slaves. I had only got
up to twenty-seven hundred!"

  [343] Lillie B. C. Wyman, in _New England Magazine_, March,
  1896, p. 112; William Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, pp.
  623-641; R. C. Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 237-245; M.
  G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 60.

Mr. Coffin was a native of North Carolina. Born in 1798, he was
while still a boy moved to assist in the escape of slaves by
witnessing the cruel treatment the <DW64>s were compelled to endure.
In 1826 he settled in Wayne County, Indiana, on the line of the
Underground Road, and such was his activity that his house at New
Garden (now Fountain City) soon became the converging point of
three principal routes from Kentucky. In 1847 Mr. Coffin removed to
Cincinnati for the purpose of opening a store where goods produced
by free labor only should be sold. His relations with the humane
work were maintained, and the genial but fearless Quaker came to
be known generally by the fictitious but happy title, President
of the Underground Railroad. It has been said of Mr. Coffin that
"for thirty-three years he received into his house more than one
hundred slaves every year."[344] In 1863 the Quaker philanthropist
assisted in the establishment of the Freedmen's Bureau. In the
following year and again in 1867, he visited Europe as agent for
the Western Freedmen's Aid Commission. When the adoption of the
Fifteenth Amendment of the Constitution was celebrated in Cincinnati
by  citizens and their friends, Mr. Coffin was one of those
called upon by the chairman to address the great meeting. In
response, the veteran station-keeper explained how he had obtained
the title of President of the Underground Road. He said, "The
title was given to me by slave-hunters, who could not find their
fugitive slaves after they got into my hands. I accepted the office
thus conferred upon me, and ... endeavored to perform my duty
faithfully. Government has now taken the work out of our hands.
The stock of the Underground Railroad has gone down in the market,
the business is spoiled, the road is now of no further use."[345]
He then amid much applause resigned his office, and declared the
operations of the Underground Railroad at an end.

  [344] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, 2d ed., p. 694.

  [345] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, p. 712.

[Illustration: MAP

showing the lines of the

UNDERGROUND RAILROAD

IN

Chester and the Neighboring Counties of Pennsylvania

_Based on R. C. Smedley's History of the Road in these Counties._]

[Illustration: "UNDERGROUND"

ROUTES TO CANADA

SHOWING THE LINES OF TRAVEL

OF FUGITIVE SLAVES

_W.H. Siebert, 1898]




CHAPTER V

STUDY OF THE MAP OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD SYSTEM


There are many features of the Underground Railroad that can best be
understood by means of a geographical representation of the system.
Such a representation it has been possible to make by piecing
together the scraps of information in regard to various routes and
parts of routes gathered from the reminiscences of a large number
of abolitionists. The more or less limited area in which each agent
operated was the field within which he was not only willing, but was
usually anxious, to confine his knowledge of underground activities.
Ignorance of one's accomplices beyond a few adjoining stations
was naturally felt to be a safeguard. The local character of the
information resulting from such precautions places the investigator
under the necessity of patiently studying his materials for what may
be called the cumulative evidence in regard to the geography of the
system. It is because the evidence gathered has been cumulative and
corroborative that a general map can be prepared. But a map thus
constructed cannot, of course, be considered complete, for it cannot
be supposed that after the lapse of a generation representatives
of all the important lines and branches could be discovered.
Nevertheless, however much the map may fall short of showing the
system in its completeness, it will be found to help the reader
materially in his attempt to realize the extent and importance of
this movement.

The underground system, in accordance with the statement of James
Freeman Clarke, is commonly understood to have extended from
Kentucky and Virginia across Ohio, and from Maryland through
Pennsylvania, New York and New England to Canada.[346] But this
description is inadequate, for it fails to include the states west
of Ohio. Henry Wilson extends the field westward by asserting that
the "territory embraced by the Middle States and all the Western
States east of the Mississippi ... was dotted over with 'stations,'"
and "covered with a network of imaginary routes, not found ... in
the railway guides or on the railway maps;"[347] and in another
place he quotes the Rev. Asa Turner, a home missionary, who went
to Illinois in 1830, who says: "Lines were formed through Iowa
and Illinois, and passengers were carried from station to station
... till they reached the Canada line."[348] The association of
Kansas with the two states just named as a channel for the escape
of runaways from the southwestern slave section, is made by Mr.
Richard J. Hinton.[349] The addition of one other state, New Jersey,
is necessary to complete the list of Northern states involved in
the Underground Railroad system.[350] This region, which forms
nearly one quarter of the present area of the Union, constituted the
irregular zone of free soil intervening between Southern slavery and
Canadian liberty.

  [346] _Anti-Slavery Days_, p. 81; M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive
  Slaves_, p. 61.

  [347] _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America_, Vol. II, p.
  66.

  [348] _Ibid._, p. 68.

  [349] _John Brown and His Men_, p. 173.

  [350] See pp. 123-125, this chapter.

The conditions that determined the number and distribution of
stations throughout this region are clearly discernible even in
the incomplete data with which we are forced to be content. It
is safe to assert that in Ohio the conditions favorable to the
development of a large number of stations, and the dissemination of
these throughout the state, existed in a measure and combination
not reproduced in the case of any other state. Ohio's geographical
boundary gave it a long line of contact with slave territory. It
bordered Kentucky with about one hundred and sixty miles of river
frontage; and Virginia with perhaps two hundred and twenty-five
miles or more, and crossings were made at almost any point. The
character of the early settlements of Ohio is a factor that must
not be overlooked. The northern and eastern parts of the state
were dotted over with many little communities where New England
ideas prevailed; the southern and southwestern parts came in
time to be well sprinkled with the homes of Quakers, Covenanters
and anti-slavery Southerners and some <DW64>s; the central and
southeastern portions contained a number of Quaker settlements. The
remote position and sparse settlement of the northwestern section
of the state probably explain the failure to find many traces of
routes in that region. Family ties, church fellowship, an aggressive
anti-slavery leadership,--journalistic and political,--the leavening
influence of institutions like Oberlin College, Western Reserve
College and Geneva College, all contributed to propagate a sentiment
that was ready to support the fleeing slave; and thus Ohio became
netted over with a large number of interlacing lines of escape for
fugitive slaves. The western portions of Pennsylvania and New York,
and the eastern portion of Indiana shared with Ohio these favorable
conditions, and one is not surprised to find many stations in these
regions. The same is true of northern and west-central Illinois,
where many persons of New England descent settled. The few lines
known in southwestern Illinois were developed by a few Covenanter
communities. The geographical position of the most southern portions
of Illinois and Indiana determined the character of the population
settling there, and thus rendered underground enterprises in those
regions more than ordinarily dangerous. There may have been stations
scattered through those parts, but if so, one can scarcely hope
now to discover them. The great number of routes in southeastern
Pennsylvania, and the stream of slave emigration flowing through
New Jersey to New York are to be attributed largely to the untiring
activity of a host of Quakers, assisted by some <DW64>s. The
coöperation of some zealous station-keepers in the neighboring slave
territory seems to account partly for the multitude of stations
that appear upon the map between the lower Susquehanna and Delaware
rivers. Whether there was any underground work done in the central
and northern parts of Pennsylvania is not known; the indications
are that there was not much; the stations said to have existed at
Milroy, Altoona, Work's Place and Smicksburg probably connected
with lines running in a northwesterly direction to Lake Erie. This
is known to have been true of the stations at Greensburg, Indiana,
Clearfield and intermediate points, which were linked in with
stations leading to Meadville and Erie. The remoteness of New York
and of the New England states from the slaveholding section explains
the comparatively small number of stations found in those states.
Iowa, which bordered on slave territory, had only a small number
of stations, for it was a new region, not long open to occupation;
and only the southern part of the state was in the direct line of
travel, which here was mostly eastward. There were a few places of
deportation in southeastern Wisconsin for fugitives that had avoided
Chicago, and followed the lakeshore or the Illinois River farther
northward. A rather narrow strip of Michigan, adjoining Indiana and
Ohio, was dotted with stations.

There were friends of the discontented slave in the South as well
as in the North, although it cannot be said, upon the basis of
the small amount of evidence at hand, that these were sufficient
in number or so situated as to maintain regular lines of escape
northward. Doubtless many acts of kindness to slaves were performed
by individual Southerners, but those were not, in most of the cases,
known as the acts of persons coöperating to help the slave from
point to point until freedom and safety should be reached. That
there were regular helpers in the South engaged in concerted action,
Samuel J. May, a station-keeper of wide information concerning
the Road, freely asserts. In 1869 he wrote, "There have always
been scattered throughout the slaveholding states individuals who
have abhorred slavery, and have pitied the victims of our American
despotism. These persons have known, or have taken pains to find
out, others at convenient distances northward from their abodes
who sympathized with them in commiserating the slaves. These
sympathizers have known or heard of others of like mind still
farther north, who again have had acquaintances in the free states
that they knew would help the fugitive on his way to liberty. Thus
lines of friends at longer or shorter distances were formed from
many parts of the South to the very borders of Canada...."[351] It
is not easy to substantiate this statement; and all that will be
attempted here is the presentation of such examples as have been
found of underground work on the part of persons living south of
Mason and Dixon's line. Mr. Stephen B. Weeks is authority for the
statement that "Vestal Coffin organized the Underground Railroad
near the present Guilford College in 1819," and that "Addison
Coffin, his son, entered its service as a conductor in early
youth...."[352] Levi Coffin, Vestal's cousin, helped many slaves
from this region to reach the North before he moved to Indiana in
1826.[353] In Delaware there seems to have been a well-defined
route upon which the houses of John Hunn, of Middletown,[354]
Ezekiel Hunn, of Camden, and Thomas Garrett, of Wilmington,[355]
were important stations. John Hunn speaks of himself as having been
"superintendent of the Underground Railroad from Wilmington down the
Peninsula."[356] Maryland also had its line--perhaps its lines--of
Road. One route ran overland from Washington, D.C., to Philadelphia.
Mr. W. B. Williams, of Charlotte, Michigan, throws some light on
this route. He says, "My uncle, Jacob Bigelow, was for several
years previous to the war a resident of Washington, D.C. He was an
abolitionist, and general manager of the Underground Railway from
Washington to Philadelphia...."[357] Mr. Robert Purvis tells of two
market-women that were agents of the Underground Road in Baltimore,
forwarding fugitives to the Vigilance Committee with which he
was connected in Philadelphia.[358] The Quaker City was also a
central station for points still farther south. Vessels engaged
in the lumber trade plying between Newberne, North Carolina, and
Philadelphia, were often supplied with slave passengers by the son
of a slaveholder living at Newberne.[359] A slave at Petersburg,
Virginia, was agent for that section of country, directing fugitives
to William Still in Philadelphia.[360] Eliza Bains, a slave-woman
of Portsmouth, Virginia, sent numbers of her people to Boston and
New Bedford by boat.[361] Frederick Douglass declared that his
connection with the Underground Railroad began long before he left
the South.[362] Harriet Tubman, the abductor, made use of stations
at Camden, Dover, Blackbird, Middleton and New Castle in the State
of Delaware on her way to Wilmington and Philadelphia.[363] The
testimony of these various witnesses seems to show that underground
routes existed in the South, but it is not sufficient in amount
to enable one to trace extended courses of travel through the
slaveholding states.

  [351] _Recollections of the Anti-Slavery Conflict_, pp. 296, 297.

  [352] _Southern Quakers and Slavery_, p. 242.

  [353] _Ibid._, p. 242. See also _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_,
  pp. 12-31.

  [354] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 238, 244.

  [355] _Ibid._, p. 326.

  [356] Letter of John Hunn, Wyoming, Del., Sept. 16, 1893.

  [357] In the _Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin_ is the facsimile of a
  letter addressed to him by a slave, pp. 171, 172.

  [358] R. C. Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 355, letter from
  Robert Purvis printed therein.

  [359] Chapter III, p. 68.

  [360] Wm. Still, _Underground Railroad_, p. 41. "The Underground
  Railroad brought away large numbers of passengers from
  Richmond, Petersburg, and Norfolk, and not a few of them lived
  comparatively within a hair's breadth of the auction block." Wm.
  Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, p. 141.

  [361] Conversation with Mrs. Elizabeth Cooley, a fugitive from
  Norfolk, Va., Boston, Mass., April 8, 1897.

  [362] Letter of Frederick Douglass, Anacostia, D.C., March 27,
  1893.

  [363] Conversation with Mrs. Tubman, Boston, Mass., April 8, 1897.

It is apparent from the map that the numerous tributaries of the
Ohio and the great valleys of the Appalachian range afforded many
tempting paths of escape. These natural routes from slavery have
been recognized and defined by a recent writer.[364] "One," he says,
"was that of the coast south of the Potomac, whose almost continuous
line of swamps from the vicinity of Norfolk, Va., to the northern
border of Florida afforded a refuge for many who could not escape
and became 'marooned' in their depths, while giving facility to
the more enduring to work their way out to the north star land.
The great Appalachian range and its abutting mountains were long
a rugged, lonely, but comparatively safe route to freedom. It was
used, too, for many years. Doubtless a knowledge of that fact, for
John Brown was always an active railroad man, had very much to do,
strategically considered, with the Captain's decision to begin
operations therein. Harriet Tubman ... was a constant user of the
Appalachian route in her efforts to aid escaping slaves.[365] ...
Underground Railroad operations culminating chiefly at Cleveland,
Sandusky, and Detroit, led by broad and defined routes through Ohio
to the border of Kentucky. Through that State, into the heart of
the Cumberland Mountains, northern Georgia, east Tennessee, and
northern Alabama, the limestone caves of the region served a useful
purpose.... The Ohio-Kentucky routes probably served more fugitives
than others in the North. The valley of the Mississippi was the
most westerly channel, until Kansas opened a bolder way of escape
from the southwest slave section." These were the main channels of
flight from the slave states; but it must be remembered that escapes
were continually taking place along the entire frontier between the
two sections of the Union, the drift of travel being constantly
towards those points where the homes of abolitionists or where <DW64>
settlements indicated initial stations on lines running north to
freedom. The border counties of the slave states were thus subject
to a steady loss of their dissatisfied bondmen. This condition
is well represented in the case of several counties of Maryland,
concerning which Mr. Smedley obtained information. He says, "The
counties of Frederick, Carroll, Washington, Hartford and Baltimore,
Md., emptied their fugitives into York and Adams counties across
the line in Pennsylvania. The latter two counties had settlements
of Friends and abolitionists. The slaves learned who their friends
were in that part of the Free State; and it was as natural for those
aspiring to liberty to move in that direction as for the waters of
brooks to move toward larger streams."[366]

  [364] R. J. Hinton, _John Brown and His Men_, pp. 172, 173.

  [365] Harriet Tubman has told the author that she did not travel
  by the mountain route. In his book entitled _The Underground
  Railroad_ (p. 37), Mr. R. C. Smedley illustrates the value of
  the Alleghanies to the slaves of the regions through which they
  extend: "William and Phœbe Wright resided during their entire
  lives in a very old settlement of Friends, near the southern
  <DW72> of South Mountain, a spur of the Alleghanies, which extends
  into Tennessee. This location placed them directly in the way to
  render great and valuable aid to fugitives, as hundreds, guided
  by that mountain range northward, came into Pennsylvania, and
  were directed to their home."

  [366] _Underground Railroad_, p. 36.

Along the southern margin of the free states began those
well-defined trails or channels that have lent themselves to
representation upon the large map given herewith. In dealing with
the tracings shown upon this map it will be best to consider the
territory as divided into three regions, the first comprising the
states of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and New York; the second, the
New England states; and the third, the five states created out of
the Northwest Territory. This arrangement will, perhaps, admit of
the introduction of some system into the discussion of what might
otherwise prove a complicated subject.

In point of time underground work seems to have developed first
in eastern Pennsylvania.[367] Regular routes of travel began to
be formed in the vicinity of Philadelphia about the middle of the
first decade of the present century. It is said that "some cases
of kidnapping and shooting of fugitives who attempted to escape
occurred in Columbia, Pa., in 1804. This incited the people of
that town, who were chiefly Friends or their descendants, to throw
around the <DW52> people the arm of protection, and even to assist
those who were endeavoring to escape from slavery.... This gave
origin to that organized system of rendering aid to fugitives
which was afterward known as the 'Underground Railroad.'" Thus
begun, the service rapidly extended, being greatly favored by the
character of the population in southeastern Pennsylvania, which was
largely Quaker, with here and there some important settlements of
manumitted slaves. It was on account of the large number of runaways
early resorting to Columbia that it became necessary to have an
understanding with regard to places of entertainment for them along
lines leading to the Eastern states and to Canada, whither most of
the fugitives were bound.[368] There seems to have been scarcely
any limitation upon the number of persons in Lancaster, Chester and
Delaware counties willing to assume agencies for the forwarding
of slaves; hence this region became the field through which more
routes were developed in proportion to its extent than any other
area in the Northern states. It will be necessary to make use of
a special map of the region in order to follow out the principal
channels of escape and to discover the centres from which the
Canada routes sprung.[369] West of the Susquehanna River Gettysburg
and York were the stations chiefly sought by slaves escaping from
the border counties of Maryland. Along the western shore of the
Chesapeake runaways passed northward to Havre de Grace, where they
usually crossed the Susquehanna, and with others from the Eastern
Shore found their way to established stations in the southern
part of Lancaster and Chester counties in Pennsylvania. From the
territory adjacent to the Delaware the movement was to Wilmington,
and thence north through Chester and Delaware counties. The routes
developed in the three regions just indicated formed three systems
of underground travel, the first of which may be called the western,
the second, the middle, and the third, the eastern system. These
systems comprised, besides the main roads indicated in heavy lines
upon the map, numerous side-tracks and branches shown by the light
lines. Their common goal was Phœnixville, the home of Elijah F.
Pennypacker, and from here fugitives were sent to Philadelphia,
Norristown, Quakertown, Reading and other stations as occasion
required. While Phœnixville may be regarded as the central station
for the three systems mentioned, it did not receive all the <DW64>s
escaping through this section, and Smedley says that "Hundreds were
sent to the many branch stations along interlacing routes, and
hundreds of others were sent from Wilmington, Columbia, and stations
westward direct to the New England States and Canada. Many of these
passed through the hands of the Vigilance Committee connected with
the anti-slavery office in Philadelphia."[370] From this point
one outlet led overland across New Jersey to Jersey City and New
York; another outlet from Philadelphia, was the Reading Railroad,
which also carried refugees from various stations along its course.
How many steam railway extensions may have been connected with
the underground tracks of southeastern Pennsylvania cannot be
discovered. One such extension was the Northern Central Railroad
from Harrisburg across the state to Elmira, New York.[371] Another
trans-state route in eastern Pennsylvania appears to have had its
origin at or near Sadsbury, Chester County, and to have run overland
to Binghamton, New York.[372] The intermediate stations along this
pathway are not known, although some disconnected places of resort
in northeastern Pennsylvania[373] may have constituted a section of
it. Lines of northern travel for fugitives also passed through Bucks
County, but Dr. Edward H. Magill, formerly President of Swarthmore
College, thinks these were "less clearly marked" than those running
through Chester and Lancaster counties. He finds that friends of
the slave in the middle section of Bucks County generally forwarded
the <DW64>s to Quakertown or even as far north, by stage or private
conveyance, as Stroudsburg. From this point they sometimes went to
Montrose or Friendsville, in Susquehanna County, near the southern
boundary of the State of New York,[374] whence, together with
fugitives from Wilkesbarre, and, perhaps, the Lehigh Valley, they
were sent on to Gerrit Smith, at Peterboro in central New York, and
thence to Canada.[375]

  [367] See pp. 33 and 34, Chapter II.

  [368] R. C. Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 26, 27, 28,
  29, 30. For a description of the routes of this region, our
  dependence is almost wholly upon Mr. Smedley, whose intimate
  knowledge of them was obtained by conversation and correspondence
  with many of the operators. _Ibid._, Preface, p. x.

  [369] The special map of these counties will be found in a corner
  of the general map.

  [370] _The Underground Railroad_, p. 209. For a description of
  the secret paths in southeastern Pennsylvania, see Smedley's
  book, pp. 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 50, 53, 77, 85, 89, 90, 100, 132,
  137, 142, 164, 172, 191, 192, 208, 217, 218, 219, etc.

  [371] Letters of Mrs. Susan L. Crane, Elmira, N.Y., Aug. 27, and
  Sept. 14 and 23, 1896; letters of John W. Jones, Elmira, N.Y.,
  Dec. 17, 1896, and Jan. 16, 1897.

  [372] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 91.

  [373] See the general map.

  [374] Article by Dr. Magill, entitled "When Men were Sold. The
  Underground Railroad in Bucks County," in _The Bucks County
  Intelligencer_, Feb. 3, 1898. Same article in the _Friends'
  Intelligencer_, Feb. 26, 1898.

  [375] Letter of Horace Brewster, Montrose, Pa., March 20, 1898.

At the other end of Pennsylvania several routes and sections of
routes have been discovered. The most important of these seem to
have been the roads resulting from the convergence of at least
three well-defined lines of escape at Uniontown in southwestern
Pennsylvania from the neighboring counties of Virginia and
Maryland. A map drawn by Mr. Amos M. Jolliffe, of Uniontown,
shows that there were two courses leading northward from his
neighborhood, both of which terminated at Pittsburgh.[376] From
this point fugitives seem to have been sent to Cleveland by rail,
or to have been directed to follow the Alleghany or the Ohio and
its tributaries north. Investigation proves that friends were
not lacking at convenient points to help them along to the main
terminals for this region, namely, Erie and Buffalo, or across
the border of the state to the much-used routes of the Western
Reserve.[377] East of the Alleghany River significant traces of
underground work are found running in a northeasterly direction from
Greensburg through Indiana County to Clearfield,[378] a distance
of seventy-five miles, and from Cumberland, Maryland, through
Bedford and Pleasantville to Altoona,[379] about the same distance.
These fragmentary routes may have had connections with some of the
fragmentary lines of western New York. From Clearfield an important
branch is known to have run northwest to Shippenville and Franklin,
and so to Erie, a place of deportation on the lake of the same
name.[380]

  [376] Letter of Mr. Jolliffe, Nov. 17, 1895.

  [377] Letter of John F. Hogue, Greenville, Pa., Nov. 25, 1895;
  letter of S. P. Stewart, Clark, Mercer Co., Pa., Dec. 26, 1895;
  letter of W. W. Walker, Makanda, Jackson Co., Ill., March
  14, 1896; note-book of Joseph S. White, of New Castle, Pa.,
  containing "Some Reminiscences of Slavery Times."

  [378] Letters of C. P. Rank, Cush Creek, Indiana Co., Pa., Dec.
  25, 1896, and Jan. 4, 1897; letter of William Atcheson, DuBois,
  Pa., Jan. 11, 1897.

  [379] Letter of Wyett Perry, Bedford, Pa., Dec. 23, 1895; letter
  of John W. Rouse, Bedford, Pa., Nov. 25, 1895; letter of William
  M. Hall, Bedford, Pa., Nov. 30, 1895.

  [380] Conversation with William Edwards, Amherstburg, Ont., Aug.
  3, 1895.

New Jersey was intimately associated with Philadelphia and the
adjoining section in the underground system, and afforded at least
three important outlets for runaways from the territory west of the
Delaware River. Our knowledge of these outlets is derived solely
from the testimony of the Rev. Thomas Clement Oliver, who, like
his father, travelled the New Jersey routes many times as a guide
or conductor.[381] Probably the most important of these routes was
that leading from Philadelphia to Jersey City and New York. From
Philadelphia the runaways were taken across the Delaware River to
Camden, where Mr. Oliver lived, thence they were conveyed northeast
following the course of the river to Burlington, and thence in
the same direction to Bordentown. In Burlington, sometimes called
Station A, a short stop was made for the purpose of changing
horses after the rapid drive of twenty miles from Philadelphia.
The Bordentown station was denominated Station B east. Here the
road took a more northerly direction to Princeton, where horses
were again changed and the journey continued to New Brunswick. Just
east of New Brunswick the conductors sometimes met with opposition
in attempting to cross the Raritan River on their way to Jersey
City. To avoid such interruption the conductors arranged with
Cornelius Cornell, who lived on the outskirts of New Brunswick,
and, presumably, near the river, to notify them when there were
slave-catchers or spies at the regular crossing. On receiving such
information they took a by-road leading to Perth Amboy, whence their
protégés could be safely forwarded to New York City. When the way
was clear at the Raritan the company pursued its course to Rahway;
here another relay of horses was obtained and the journey continued
to Jersey City, where, under the care of John Everett, a Quaker, or
his servants, they were taken to the Forty-second Street railroad
station, now known as the Grand Central, provided with tickets, and
placed on a through train for Syracuse, New York. The second route
had its origin on the Delaware River forty miles below Philadelphia,
at or near Salem. This line, like the others to be mentioned later,
seems to have been tributary to the Philadelphia route traced above.
Nevertheless, it had an independent course for sixty miles before
it connected with the more northern route at Bordentown. This
distance of sixty miles was ordinarily travelled in three stages,
the first ending at Woodbury, twenty-five miles north of Salem,
although the trip by wagon is said to have added ten miles to the
estimated distance between the two places; the second stage ended
at Evesham Mount; and the third, at Bordentown. The third route was
called, from its initial station, the Greenwich line. This station
is vividly described as having been made up of a circle of Quaker
residences enclosing a swampy place that swarmed with blacks. One
may surmise that it made a model station. Slaves were transported
at night across the Delaware River from the vicinity of Dover, in
boats marked by a yellow light hung below a blue one, and were met
some distance out from the Jersey shore by boats showing the same
lights. Landed at Greenwich, the fugitives were conducted north
twenty-five miles to Swedesboro, and thence about the same distance
to Evesham Mount. From this point they were taken to Mount Holly,
and so into the northern or Philadelphia route. Still another branch
of this Philadelphia line is known. It constitutes the fourth road,
and is described by Mr. Robert Purvis[382] as an extension of a
route through Bucks County, Pennsylvania, that entered Trenton, New
Jersey, from Newtown, and ran directly to New Brunswick and so on to
New York.

  [381] Conversation with Mr. Oliver, Windsor, Ont., Aug. 2, 1895.

  [382] Conversation with Mr. Purvis, Philadelphia, Dec. 23, 1895.

Mr. Eber M. Pettit, for many years a conductor of the Underground
Railroad in western New York,[383] asserts that the Road had four
main lines across his state, and scores of laterals,[384] but he
nowhere attempts to identify these lines for the benefit of those
less well informed than himself. Concerning what may be supposed
to have been one of the lines, he speaks as follows: "The first
well-established line of the U. G. R. R. had its southern terminus
in Washington, D.C., and extended in a pretty direct route to
Albany, N.Y., thence radiating in all directions to all the New
England states, and to many parts of this state.... The General
Superintendent resided in Albany.... He was once an active member
of one of the churches in Fredonia. Mr. T., his agent in Washington
City, was a very active and efficient man; the Superintendent
at Albany was in daily communication by mail with him and other
subordinate agents at all points along the line."[385] Frederick
Douglass, who was familiar with this Albany route during the period
of his residence in Rochester, describes it as running through
Philadelphia, New York, Albany, Rochester, and thence to Canada;
and he gives the name of the person at each station that was most
closely associated in his mind with the work of the station.
Thus, he says that the "fugitives were received in Philadelphia
by William Still, by him sent to New York, where they were cared
for by Mr. David Ruggles, and afterwards by Mr. Gibbs, ... thence
to Stephen Myers at Albany; thence to J. W. Loguen, Syracuse;
thence to Frederick Douglass, Rochester; and thence to Hiram
Wilson, St. Catherines, Canada West."[386] Not all the <DW64>s
travelling by this route went as far as Rochester; some were turned
north at Syracuse to the port of Oswego, where they took boat for
Canada.[387] The Rev. Charles B. Ray, a member of the Vigilance
Committee of New York City, and editor of _The  American_,
has left some testimony which corroborates that just given. He knew
of a regular route stretching from Washington, by way of Baltimore
and Philadelphia, to New York, thence following the Hudson to
Albany and Troy, whence a branch ran westward to Utica, Syracuse
and Oswego, with an extension from Syracuse to Niagara Falls.
New York was a kind of receiving point from which fugitives were
assisted to Albany and Troy, or, as sometimes happened, to Boston
and New Bedford, or, when considerations of safety warranted it,
were permitted to pass to Long Island.[388] The lines that are said
to have radiated from Albany are mentioned neither by Mr. Douglass
nor by Mr. Ray, but we know from other witnesses that some of the
fugitives sent to Troy found their way to places of refuge north
and east. Mr. Martin I. Townsend, of Troy, writes that fugitives
arriving at that city were supplied with money and forwarded either
to Suspension Bridge, on the Niagara River, or by way of Vermont and
Lake Champlain to Rouses Point.[389] It seems probable that another
branch of the secret thoroughfare followed the valley of the Hudson
from Troy to the farm of John Brown, near North Elba among the
Adirondacks. Mr. Richard H. Dana visited this frontier home of Brown
one summer, and was informed by his guide that the country about
there belonged to Gerrit Smith; that it was settled for the most
part by families of fugitive slaves, who were engaged in farming;
and that Brown held the position of a sort of ruler among them. The
view was therefore credited that this neighborhood was one of the
termini of the Underground Railroad."[390]

  [383] _Sketches in the History of the Underground Railroad_,
  1879, Preface, p. xvi.

  [384] _Ibid._, p. xiv.

  [385] _Ibid._, p. 34.

  [386] Letter of Frederick Douglass, Cedar Hill, Anacostia, D.C.,
  March 27, 1893.

  [387] Letter of Joseph A. Allen, Medfield, Mass., Aug. 10, 1896.

  [388] Letter of Florence and Cordelia H. Ray, Woodside, L.I.,
  April 12, 1897. See _Sketch of the Life of Rev. Chas. B. Ray_,
  written by the Misses Ray.

  [389] Letters of Martin I. Townsend, Troy, N.Y., Sept. 4 and 15,
  1896.

  [390] C. F. Adams, _Life of Richard Henry Dana_, Vol. I, p. 155;
  _History of Madison County, New York_, by Mrs. L. M. Hammond, p.
  721.

Gerrit Smith, the friend and counsellor of Brown, lived at
Peterboro, in central New York, where his house was an important
station for runaway slaves. His open invitation to fugitives to
come to Peterboro gave the post he maintained great publicity, and
many <DW64>s resorted thither. From Peterboro they were sent in
Mr. Smith's wagon to Oswego.[391] A little to the east and north
of this place of deportation there were what may perhaps be called
emergency stations at or near Mexico, New Haven, Port Ontario[392]
and Cape Vincent.[393] From the place last named, and perhaps also
from Port Ontario, fugitives took boat for Kingston.[394] A route
that came into operation much later than that with which the
Peterboro station was connected was the Elmira route. In 1844, John
W. Jones, an escaped slave from Virginia, settled in Elmira, and
began, together with Mr. Jervis Langdon, a prominent citizen of the
town, to receive fugitives. A few years later the Northern Central
Railroad was constructed, and supplied a means of travel through
western New York to Niagara Falls. Underground passengers forwarded
by rail from Philadelphia, Harrisburg and Williamsport were sent
on via the Northern Central to Canada.[395] In the counties of
New York west and south of the Elmira route the map shows some
disconnected stations and sections of Road. Not enough is known
about these to suggest with certainty their connections. It is,
however, evident that their trend is toward the short arm of the
Province of Ontario, which is separated from the United States only
by the Niagara River, with crossings favorable for fugitives at
Buffalo, Black Rock, Suspension Bridge and Lewiston. In the angle of
southwestern New York there were two routes, the objective point of
which was Buffalo. One of these, by way of Westfield and Fredonia,
hugged closely the shore of Lake Erie;[396] the other, issuing by
way of the Alleghany River from Franklin, Pennsylvania, ran through
Jamestown and Ellington to Leon, where it branched, one division
going to Fredonia and so on northward, whilst the other seems to
have followed a more direct course to Buffalo.[397]

  [391] O. B. Frothingham, _Life of Gerrit Smith_, pp. 113, 114.

  [392] Letter of O. J. Russell, Pulaski, N.Y., July 29, 1896.

  [393] Mr. George C. Bragdon writes concerning the runaways
  harbored by his father, near Port Ontario: "I believe they
  usually went to Cape Vincent, near the mouth of the St. Lawrence,
  and were taken over to Canada from there.... I believe some of
  the slaves received by him were sent on from Peterboro by Gerrit
  Smith to _Asa S. Wing_ or _James C. Jackson_ (Mexico), and came
  from them to our house. They steered clear of the villages, as
  a rule. Our farm was favorably situated for concealing them and
  helping them on." Letter of George C. Bragdon, Rochester, N.Y.,
  Aug. 11, 1896.

Mrs. Elizabeth Smith Miller, the daughter of Gerrit Smith, says
that in October, 1839, the "White Slave, Harriet," was taken by Mr.
Federal Dana from her father's house directly to Cape Vincent, and
that Mr. Dana wrote from that point: "I saw her pass the ferry this
morning into Canada." Letter received from Mrs. Miller, Peterboro,
N.Y., Sept. 21, 1896.

  [394] The fugitive Jerry McHenry, after his rescue in Syracuse,
  was hurried to Mexico, thence to Oswego, and from this point was
  transported across the lake to Kingston. May, _Some Recollections
  of Our Anti-Slavery Conflict_, pp. 378, 379.

  [395] Letters of Mrs. Susan L. Crane, Elmira, N. Y., Sept. 14
  and 23, 1896. Mrs. Crane is a daughter of Mr. Jervis Langdon
  mentioned in the text; letter of John W. Jones, Elmira, N. Y.,
  Dec. 14, 1896.

  [396] A number of the stations along the lake shore are named in
  the sketches called "Romances and Realities of the Underground
  Railroad," by H. U. Johnson, printed in the _Lakeshore and Home
  Magazine_, 1885-1887.

  [397] E. M. Pettit, in _Sketches in the History of the
  Underground Railroad_, pp. 30, 31, 32, gives an instance of the
  use of this route.

Notwithstanding the unfavorable position for this work of the New
England states, a considerable number of fugitive slaves found their
way through these states to Canada. A part of them came through
Pennsylvania and New York. Smedley states, as already noted, that
hundreds were sent from Wilmington, Columbia, and other points to
the New England states and Canada.[398] Another part came by boat
from Southern ports to the shores of New England, landing at various
places, chief among which seem to have been New Haven, New Bedford,
Boston and Portland. Such was the number of arrivals and consequent
demand for transportation to a place of safety, that these four
places became the beginnings of routes, which it has been possible
to trace on the map with more or less completeness.

  [398] See p. 120, this chapter.

The first of these may be called the Connecticut valley route.
President E. B. Andrews, of Brown University, whose father was
an active friend of slaves at Montague in western Massachusetts,
describes this route as running from New York, New Haven, or
New London up the Connecticut River valley to Canada.[399] This
is corroborated by some writer in the _History of Springfield,
Massachusetts_, where it is noted that there was a steady movement
of parties of runaways up the valley on their way to the adjacent
provinces.[400] Mr. Erastus F. Gunn, of Montague, Massachusetts,
writes that the travel along this route was largely confined to the
west side of the river, and was through Springfield, Northampton and
Greenfield into the State of Vermont.[401] Fugitives disembarking
at New Haven[402] went north through Kensington, New Britain and
Farmington, and probably by way of Bloomfield or Hartford to
Springfield. Sometimes they came up the river by steamboat to
Hartford, the head of navigation, and continued their journey
overland.[403] A trail probably much less used than the routes
just mentioned, seems to have connected the southwestern part of
Connecticut with the valley route.[404] In Massachusetts there were
ramifications from the valley route,[405] which may have terminated
among the hills in the western part of the state, for all that one
can now discover.

  [399] Letter of Mr. Andrews, Providence, R.I., April, 1895.

  [400] Pp. 470, 471.

  [401] Letter of Mr. Gunn, Montague, Mass., Nov. 23, 1895.

  [402] Letter of Simeon E. Baldwin, New Haven, Conn., Jan. 27,
  1896; letter of Simeon D. Gilbert, New Haven, Conn., Feb. 27,
  1896.

  [403] Letter of D. W. C. Pond, New Britain, Conn. Mr. Pond is one
  of the surviving agents of New Britain.

  [404] Letters of George B. Wakeman, Montour Falls, N.Y., April 21
  and Sept. 26, 1896. Letter of the Rev. Erastus Blakeslee, Boston,
  Mass., Aug. 28, 1896.

  [405] The stations, as indicated on the map, are named in
  letters from L. S. Abell and Charles Parsons, Conway, Mass.;
  C. Barrus, Springfield, Mass.; Judge D. W. Bond, Cambridge,
  Mass.; and Arthur G. Hill, Boston, Mass. See also article on
  "The Underground Railway," by Joseph Marsh, in the _History of
  Florence, Massachusetts_, pp. 165-167.

A line of Road originating at New Bedford in southeastern
Massachusetts is mentioned in connection with the line up
the Connecticut valley by the Hon. M. M. Fisher, of Medway,
Massachusetts, as one of the more common routes.[406] Mrs. Elizabeth
Buffum Chace says that slaves landing on Cape Cod went to New
Bedford, whence under the guidance of some abolitionist they were
conveyed to the home of Nathaniel P. Borden at Fall River. Between
this station and the one kept by Mr. and Mrs. Chace at Valley Falls,
Robert Adams acted as conductor; and from Valley Falls Mr. Chace
was in the habit of accompanying passengers a short distance over
the Providence and Worcester Railroad until he had placed them in
the care of some trusted employee of that road to be transferred
at Worcester to the Vermont Railroad.[407] The Rev. Joshua Young
was receiving agent at Burlington, Vermont, and testifies that
during his residence there he and his friend and parishioner, L.
H. Bigelow, did "considerable business."[408] South of Burlington
there was a series of stations not connected with the Vermont
Central Railroad extension of the New Bedford route. The names of
these stations have been obtained from Mr. Rowland E. Robinson,
whose father's house was a refuge for fugitives at Ferrisburg,
Vermont, and from the Hon. Joseph Poland, the editor of the first
anti-slavery newspaper in his state, who was himself an agent of the
Underground Road at Montpelier. The names are those of nine towns,
which form a line roughly parallel to the west boundary of the
state, namely, North Ferrisburg, Ferrisburg, Vergennes, Middlebury,
Brandon, Rutland, Wallingford, Manchester and Bennington.[409]
They constituted what may be called the west Vermont route,
Bennington being at the southern extremity, where escaped slaves
were received from Troy, New York.[410] The terminal at the northern
end of this route was St. Albans, whence runaways could be hastened
across the Canadian frontier. The valley of the lower Connecticut
seems to have yielded a sufficient supply of fugitive slaves to
sustain a vigorous line of Road in eastern Vermont. It was over this
line the travellers came that were placed in hiding in the office of
Editor Poland at Montpelier, having made their way northward with
the aid of friends at Brattleboro, Chester, Woodstock, Randolph and
intermediate points. At Montpelier the single path divided into
three branches, one extending westward and uniting with the west
Vermont route at Burlington, another running northward into the
Queen's dominions by way of Morristown and other stations, and the
third zigzagging to New Port, where a pass through the mountains
admitted the zealous pilgrims to the coveted possession of their own
liberty.[411]

  [406] Letter of Mr. Fisher, Oct. 23, 1893.

  [407] _Anti-Slavery Reminiscences_, pp. 27, 28.

  [408] Letter of Mr. Young, Groton, Mass., April 21, 1893.

  [409] Letter of Mr. Robinson, Ferrisburg, Vt., Aug. 19, 1896;
  letter of Mr. Poland, Montpelier, Vt., April 12, 1897.

  [410] Letter of Mr. Brainerd, St. Albans, Vt., Oct. 21, 1895.

  [411] Letters of Mrs. Abijah Keith, Chicago, Ill., March 28, and
  April 4, 1897; letters of Mr. Poland, April 7 and 12, 1897.

[Illustration: CAVES IN SALEM TOWNSHIP, WASHINGTON COUNTY, OHIO.

The cave on the left was a rendezvous for fugitives.]

[Illustration: HOUSE OF MRS. ELIZABETH BUFFUM CHACE,

A STATION OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD, VALLEY FALLS, RHODE ISLAND.]

Having thus sketched in the Vermont lines of Underground Railroad,
it is necessary for us to return to the consideration of the New
Bedford route, which had some accessory lines near its source.
One of these had stations at Newport and Providence, managed by
Quakers--Jethro and Anne Mitchell with others in the former, and
Daniel Mitchell in the latter.[412] Another was a short line
through Windham County, in the northeastern part of Connecticut,
to Uxbridge, where it joined the main line.[413] The Rev. Samuel
J. May, who was a resident of Brooklyn, Connecticut, in the early
thirties, had fugitives addressed to his care at that time, and he
helped them on to Effingham L. Capron while he lived in Uxbridge,
and afterwards when he settled in Worcester.[414] From Boston[415]
westward there were at least two paths to reach the New Bedford
road, one of these was by way of Newton to Worcester, and the other
through Concord to Leominster. Mr. William I. Bowditch generally
passed on the fugitives received at his house to Mr. William
Jackson, of Newton, thence they were sent by rail to Worcester.[416]
Colonel T. W. Higginson writes that fugitives were sometimes sent
from Boston to Worcester,[417] while he lived in the latter place,
and that he has himself driven them at midnight to the farm of
the veteran abolitionists, Stephen and Abby Kelley Foster, in the
suburbs of the city.[418] All along the short route, from Boston to
Leominster and Fitchburg, stations were systematically arranged,
according to the statement of Mrs. Mary E. Crocker,[419] who was
one of the helpers at Leominster.[420] This was the route taken by
Shadrach, after his rescue in Boston.[421]

  [412] Letter of James S. Rogers, Chicago, Ill., April 17, 1897.

  [413] Letters of Joel Fox, Willimantic, Conn., July 30, 1896, and
  Aug. 3, 1896.

  [414] _Some Recollections of our Anti-Slavery Conflict_, p. 297.

  [415] "In Boston there were many places where fugitives were
  received and taken care of. Every anti-slavery man was ready to
  protect them, and among these were some families not known to be
  anti-slavery." James Freeman Clarke, _Anti-Slavery Days_, p. 86.

  [416] Letter of Mr. Bowditch, Boston, April 5, 1893.

  [417] Letter of Mr. Higginson, Glimpsewood, Dublin, N.H., July
  24, 1896.

  [418] T. W. Higginson, _Atlantic Monthly_, March, 1897.

  [419] Article on "The Fugitive Slave Law and Its Workings," in
  _Fitchburg Daily Sentinel_, Oct. 31, 1893.

  [420] Letter of Mr. F. B. Sanborn, Concord, Mass., Feb. 1, 1896,
  states that "Concord was a place of resort for fugitives." Letter
  of Mr. S. Shurtleff, South Paris, Me., May 25, 1896, states that
  "The direct line of the Underground Railroad was from Boston
  through Vermont, via St. Albans."

  [421] _Atlantic Monthly_, March, 1897, p. 345; _Fitchburg Daily
  Sentinel_, Oct. 31, 1893; letter of Mr. Sanborn, Concord, Mass.,
  Feb. 1, 1896.

Boston was the starting-point of longer lines running north along
the coast; one, so far as can now be made out, turning and passing
obliquely across New Hampshire; the other following the shore into
Maine. Mr. Simeon Dodge, of Marblehead, Massachusetts, who had
intimate knowledge of the first of these courses, gives, in an
illustrative case, the names of Marblehead, Salem and Georgetown
as stations;[422] and Mr. G. W. Putnam, of Lynn, gives the names
of persons harboring slaves at two of these places.[423] A report
of the Danvers Historical Society is authority for the statement
that Mr. Dodge, together with some of the abolitionists of Salem,
maintained a secret thoroughfare to Canada,[424] which passed
through Danvers, and on through Concord, New Hampshire.[425] From
Concord fugitives were sent north to Canterbury and Meredith
Ridge[426] in two known instances, and more frequently, it appears,
to Canaan and Lyme. James Furber, who lived in Canaan for several
years, is said to have made trips to Lyme about once a fortnight
with refugees received by him.[427] From Lyme they may have gone
north by way of the Connecticut valley. At Salem the coast route
parted company with the New Hampshire route, and ran on through
Ipswich, Newburyport and Exeter[428] to Eliot, Maine, and perhaps
farther.

  [422] Letter of Mr. Dodge, March, 1893.

  [423] Letter of Mr. Putnam, Lynn, Mass., Feb. 14, 1894.

  [424] _Old Anti-Slavery Days_, p. 150.

  [425] Letter of David Mead, Davenport, Mass., Nov. 3, 1893.

  [426] Letter of Judge Mellen Chamberlain, Chelsea, Mass., Feb. 1,
  1896.

  [427] Letter of C. E. Lord, Franklin, Pa., July 6, 1896.

  [428] Letter of D. L. Brigham, Manchester, Mass., Nov. 16, 1893;
  letter of Professor Marshall S. Snow, Washington University, St.
  Louis, Mo., April 28, 1896.

Slaves sometimes reached Portland, Maine, travelling as stowaways
on vessels from Southern ports. Consequently Portland became the
centre of several hidden routes to Canada. Mr. S. T. Pickard, who
lived in the family of Mrs. Oliver Dennett in Portland, says that
Mrs. Dennett harbored runaway slaves, as did also Nathan Winslow
and General Samuel Fessenden. The fugitives that came to Portland,
he says, were on their way to New Brunswick and Lower Canada, and
some were shipped directly to England.[429] Mr. Brown Thurston, the
veteran abolitionist of Portland, is authority for the statement
that routes extended from Portland to the provinces, by water to
St. John, New Brunswick, and by rail to Montreal,[430] the road
used being the Grand Trunk.[431] An important overland route also
had its origin at Portland. Its two branches encircled Sebago Lake,
united at Bridgton, and formed a single pathway to the northwest,
and did not separate again until the eastern border of Vermont
was reached. There, at Lunenburg, one branch took its course up
the Connecticut valley to Stratford, and thence, probably, ran to
Stanstead, Quebec; while the other, passing more to the westward,
joined the easternmost of the branches from Montpelier, Vermont, at
Barton, and so entered Canada.[432] Besides, there were at least two
subsidiary routes, which were probably feeders of the "through line"
just described. One of them ran to South Paris and Lovell;[433] the
other, according to ex-President O. B. Cheney, of Bates College, who
was privy to its operations, ran to Effingham, North Parsonsfield
and Porter.[434] Both Lovell and Porter are within a few miles of
several of the stations that form a part of the Maine section of
this line, and could witnesses be found it is likely that their
testimony would sustain the view that external evidence suggests.

  [429] Letter of Mr. Pickard, Portland, Me., Nov. 18, 1893.

  [430] Letter of Mr. Thurston, Jan. 13, 1893.

  [431] Letter of Mr. Thurston, Oct. 21, 1895; letter of Aaron
  Dunn, South Paris, Me., April 9, 1896.

  [432] Letter of J. Milton Hall, April 30, 1897.

  [433] Letter of S. Shurtleff, May 25, 1896.

  [434] Letter of Mr. Cheney, Pawtuxet, R.I., April 8, 1896.

In the free states included between the Ohio and the Mississippi
rivers the number of underground trails was much greater than in
the states farther east. Bordering on the slave states, Missouri,
Kentucky and Virginia, with a length of frontier greatly increased
by the sinuosities of the rivers, the states of Ohio, Indiana and
Illinois were the most favorably situated of all the Northern
states to receive fugitive slaves. Not only the bounding rivers
themselves, but also their numerous tributaries, became channels
of escape into free territory, and connected directly with many
lines of Underground Railroad. These lines of Road are shown on
the map as starting from the Ohio or the Mississippi, but they
cannot be supposed to have abruptly originated there, for in some
instances there were points south of these streams that formed an
essential part of the system. It is impossible to bring together
here the numerous bits of testimony through the correlation of
which the multitude of lines within the old Northwest Territory has
been traced. Only a general survey, therefore, of the Underground
Railroad system in the Western states will be undertaken, while
several smaller maps of limited areas will give the details of the
multiple and complex routes found therein.

Concerning the number of paths there were in Ohio it is almost
impossible to obtain a definite and correct idea. The location of
the state was favorable to the development of new lines with the
steady increase in the number of slaves fleeing across its southern
borders; and, in the process of development, it was natural that
the various branches should intertwine and form a great network.
To disentangle the strands of this web and say how many there were
is a thing not easy to accomplish, although an anonymous writer in
1842 seems to have found little or no difficulty in arriving at a
definite conclusion. His estimate appeared in the _Experiment_ of
December 7, and is as follows: "It is evident from the statements
of the abolitionists themselves, that there exist some eighteen or
nineteen thoroughly organized thoroughfares through the State of
Ohio for the transportation of runaway and stolen slaves, one of
which passes through Fitchville, and which to my certain knowledge
has done a 'land office business.'"[435] If the number of important
initial stations fringing the southern and eastern boundaries of
Ohio be counted as the points of origin of separate routes, it
would be correct to say that there were not less than twenty-two
or twenty-three routes in Ohio, but in a count thus made one would
fail to note the instances in which, as in the case of Cincinnati,
several lines sprang from one locality.

  [435] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 67.

In the remaining portion of the Northwest Territory, the number of
lines was relatively not so great; and extended areas, as in the
western and northern parts of Indiana or the southeastern part of
Illinois, contained few or no lines so far as can now be discovered.
In western and northern Illinois the conditions were more favorable,
and the multiplicity of routes is such that on account of the
fusion, division and subdivision of roads it is impossible to say
how many lines crossed the state. In Michigan the case is not so
complicated, and one can trace with some clearness six or seven
paths leading to Detroit. Iowa, not a part, however, of the old
Northwest Territory, was traversed by lines terminating in Illinois,
and therefore deserves consideration here. In the southeastern
part of the state there were several short routes with initial
stations at Croton, Bloomfield, Lancaster and Cincinnati, all of
which had terminals no doubt along the Mississippi, though it has
been possible to complete but two of the routes. In southwestern
Iowa, Percival and the three roads branching from it are said to
have supplied means of egress for slaves from Missouri and Nebraska
through three tiers of counties ranging across the state in lines
parallel with the north boundary of Missouri. John Brown took the
northernmost of these parallel roads in the winter of 1858 and 1859,
when he led a company of twelve fugitives from Missouri through
Kansas to Percival on their way to Chicago and Detroit.

[Illustration: UNDERGROUND LINES OF MORGAN COUNTY, OHIO. Drawn by
Thomas Williams.]

Of the local maps, the first represents the lines passing through a
portion of Morgan County, in the southeastern part of Ohio. It was
drawn by Mr. Thomas Williams, whose services in behalf of runaways
made him familiar with the location of operators in the western
part of his county.[436] The area represented is twenty-five miles
in length and sixteen in width at the widest part, and contains
nineteen stations including the towns through which routes passed.
The irregular distribution of these stations, and the way in which
trips could be varied from one to another to suit the convenience
of conductors or to elude pursuers is apparent. The fugitives that
travelled over these routes crossed the Ohio River in the vicinity
of Parkersburg and Point Pleasant, in what is now West Virginia, and
proceeded north twenty or thirty miles by the help of abolitionists
before reaching Morgan County. The southern part of this county
was traversed by two parallel lines, one of which branched at
Rosseau and ran on in parallels to the northern part of the county
whence after sharp deflection to the west the branches converged
at Deavertown; the other issued from its first station in three
divergent lines, which rapidly converged at Pennsville and were
united by a single course to the first route. In case of emergency a
guide used his knowledge and discretion as to whether he should "cut
across lots," skip stations, travel by the "longest way around," or
go back on his track. The houses noted on the map as being off the
regular routes appear to have been emergency stations and hence not
so frequently used.

  [436] Corroborative evidence as regards the routes of Morgan
  County is found in letters from the following persons: E. M.
  Stanberry, McConnellsville, O., Nov. 1, 1892; T. L. Gray,
  Deavertown, O., Dec. 2, 1892; Martha Millions, Pennsville, O.,
  March 9, 1892; E. R. Brown, Sugar Grove, O.; H. C. Harvey,
  Manchester, Kan., Jan. 16, 1893.

A special map of exceeding interest and importance is that drawn by
Mr. Lewis Falley, of La Fayette, Indiana, showing the underground
lines of Indiana and Michigan about 1848. Mr. Falley's acquaintance
with the Road came about through the work of his father in the
interest of fugitives in La Fayette after 1841. Subsequently
Mr. Falley learned of the lines traversing his state through an
itinerant preacher who sometimes stopped as a guest at his father's
house. When Mr. Falley's map was received in March, 1896, the author
himself had already plotted from other testimony a number of routes
in southern and eastern Indiana and in Michigan, and a comparison
of maps was made. On Mr. Falley's map three main roads appear, the
eastern, middle and western routes. The first of these ran parallel,
roughly speaking, with the eastern boundary line of the state only
a few miles from it, and took its rise from two lesser paths, which
converged at Richmond from either side of the state line. The second
or middle route sprang from three branches that crossed the Ohio at
Madison, New Albany, and the neighborhood of Leavenworth, passed
north through Indianapolis and Logansport, and entered Michigan a
few miles east of Lake Michigan. The third or western route followed
up the Wabash River to La Fayette, where it crossed the river,
proceeded to Rensselaer, and thence northeasterly to the Michigan
line, making its entrance to Michigan at the point where the middle
route entered that state. From the two crossing-places on the
Michigan border the northern extensions of the Indiana routes found
their way to Battle Creek, from which station one trail led directly
east to Detroit, and the other, by a more northerly course, to Port
Huron. In southern Indiana the eastern route was connected with the
middle route by a branch between Greensburg and Indianapolis, and
the middle with the western by two branches, one between Salem and
Evansville, and the other between Brownstown and Bloomingdale.

[Illustration: ROUTES THROUGH INDIANA AND MICHIGAN IN 1848.

As traced by Lewis Falley.]

In the general map prepared by the author, the southern route
through Michigan to Detroit, and the eastern, middle, and a portion
of the western routes in Indiana on the map of Mr. Falley are
duplicated with more or less completeness. The initial stations
along the Ohio River correspond in the two maps almost exactly, and
many of the way-stations seen on the one map are to be found on the
other. It is not to be expected that the two maps would agree in
all particulars, and some stations occur on each that are not to be
found on the other. Such differences are due to the development of
new or the obliteration of old lines and the insufficient knowledge
of the draughtsmen. It is not known that a map similar to Mr.
Falley's has been devised for any other state or states among the
many through which well-defined underground routes extended.

[Illustration: SIMPLE ROUTE THROUGH LIVINGSTON AND LA SALLE
COUNTIES, ILLINOIS.

Drawn by William B. Fyffe.]

From a drawing made by Mr. W. B. Fyffe, an old-time station-agent
of Ottawa, Illinois, the accompanying chart of a line of escape
through Livingston and La Salle counties in Illinois is reproduced.
The portion of the trail represented is about forty miles in length,
and is remarkable for the directness of its course and the absence
of interlacing lines. At Ottawa, the northernmost station shown, the
trail loses these two characteristics, for it makes there a sharp
turn on its way to the terminus, Chicago, and at Ottawa also it
makes a junction with several other lines from the western part of
the state.[437]

  [437] For these features see the general map.

A number of noteworthy features appear on the general map. The first
deserving mention is the direction or trend of the underground
lines. The region traversed by these lines may be described as an
irregular crescent, the concavity of which is in part filled by a
portion of Ontario, Canada, which by reason of its proximity became
the goal of the great majority of runaways. In the New England
states the direction of the underground paths was, with perhaps an
exception or two, from southeast to northwest, their objective point
being Montreal. The main lines of Pennsylvania and New York ran
north until they reached the middle part of the latter state, and
then veered off almost directly west to Canada. West of Pennsylvania
the trend of the routes was in general to northeast, being in Ohio
and Indiana to the shores of Lake Erie, and in Illinois and Iowa
to the southern extremity of Lake Michigan. Through central Iowa,
northern Illinois and southern Michigan, the course of the routes
was almost directly east.

[Illustration: NETWORK OF ROUTES THROUGH GREENE, WARREN AND CLINTON
COUNTIES, OHIO.]

It is not surprising that the regions through which the simplest
and most direct routes passed should have been those at the two
extremities of the great irregular crescent of free soil, where the
number of routes was few and the activity of the stations limited.
In the states that formed the middle portion of the crescent, it
was natural that multiple and intricate trails should have been
developed. The fact that slave-owners and their agents often sallied
into this region in search of missing chattels was a consideration
given due weight by the shrewd operators, who early learned that
one of their best safeguards lay in complex routes, made by several
lines radiating from one centre, or branch connections between
routes, by paths that zigzagged from station to station. These
features were characteristic, and serve to show that the safety
of fugitives was never sacrificed by the abolitionists to any
thoughtless desire for rapid transit. From Cincinnati, Ohio, not
less than four branches of the Road radiated. One of these led to
Fountain City, Indiana, where it was joined by two other important
lines. From this point four lines diverged to the north. At Oberlin
as many as five lines converged from the south. Quincy, Illinois,
was the starting-point of four or five lines, and Knoxville, Ottawa
and Chicago in the same state each received fugitives from several
routes. The region in which the devices of multiple routes and
cross lines were most highly developed is, as far as known, in
southeastern Pennsylvania.

Some broken lines and isolated place-names occur upon the map.
For example, in Iowa, branches of the system have been traced to
Quincy, Indianola, North English and Ottumwa, but beyond these
points the connections cannot be made. Examples of such incomplete
sections will be found also in northern and central Illinois,
in central Indiana, in western New York, in central and eastern
Pennsylvania and in other states. It is not to be supposed that the
routes represented by these fragmentary lines terminated abruptly
without reaching a haven of safety, but only that the witnesses
whose testimony is essential to complete the lines have not been
discovered. In the case of the isolated place-names, a few of which
occur in the New England states, in New York, Pennsylvania, Indiana
and Illinois, the evidence at hand seemed to designate them as
stations, without indicating in any definite way the neighboring
stations with which they were probably allied.

On the general map may be noticed a few long stretches of Road that
had apparently no way-stations. Such lines are usually identical
with certain rivers, or canals, or railway systems. It has already
been seen that the Connecticut River served to guide fugitives
north on their way to Canada.[438] The Mississippi, Illinois,
Ohio, Alleghany, and Hudson rivers united stations more or less
widely separated.[439] The tow-paths of some of our western canals
formed convenient highways to liberty for a considerable number
of self-reliant fugitives, and were considered safer than public
roads. A letter from E. C. H. Cavins, of Bloomfield, Indiana,[440]
states that the Wabash and Erie Canal became a thoroughfare for
slaves, who followed it from the vicinity of Evansville, Indiana,
until they reached Ohio, probably in some instances going as far
as Toledo, though usually, as the writer believes, striking off on
one or another of several established lines of Underground Road in
central and northern Indiana. James Bayliss,[441] of Massillon,
in northeastern Ohio, states that fugitives sometimes came up the
tow-path of the canal to Massillon, knowing that the canal led to
Cleveland, whence a boat could be taken for Canada.[442]

  [438] See p. 129, this chapter.

  [439] See the language of Jefferson Davis, quoted on p. 312,
  Chapter X; letter of A. P. Dutton, Racine, Wis., April 7, 1896;
  E. M. Pettit, _Sketches in the History of the Underground
  Railroad_, pp. 29, 30, 31; letter of Florence and Cordelia H.
  Ray, referred to on p. 126, this chapter.

  [440] Letter of Mr. Cavins, Dec. 5, 1895.

  [441] Conversation with James Bayliss, Massillon, O., Aug. 15,
  1895.

  [442] Letter of Brown Thurston, Portland, Me., Oct. 21, 1895.

The identity of a few of the tracings with steam railway lines
signifies, of course, transportation by rail when the situation
admitted of it. Sometimes, when there was not the usual eagerness
of pursuit, and when the intelligence or the Caucasian cast of
features of the fugitive warranted it, the traveller was provided
with the necessary ticket and instructions, and put aboard the
cars for his destination. The Providence and Worcester and the
Vermont Central railroads furnished quick transportation from
New Bedford, Massachusetts, to Canada.[443] In southeastern
Pennsylvania the Philadelphia and Reading Railroad carried many
slaves on their way to freedom, and according to Smedley, "All who
took the trains at the Reading Railroad stations went directly
through to Canada."[444] E. F. Pennypacker often forwarded <DW64>s
from Schuylkill to Philadelphia over this road, and William Still
sent them on their northward journey.[445] Fugitives arriving at
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, sometimes took passage over the Northern
Central Railroad to Elmira, New York. Mr. Jervis Langdon and John
W. Jones, of Elmira, took care that underground passengers secured
transportation from Elmira to their destination. The fugitives were
always put in the baggage-car at four o'clock in the morning,[446]
and went through without change to the Niagara River. The old Mad
River Railroad bore many dark-skinned passengers from Urbana, if
not also from Cincinnati and Dayton, Ohio, to Lake Erie.[447] In
eastern Ohio the Cleveland and Western Railroad, from Alliance to
Cleveland, was much patronized during several years by instructed
runaways. Mr. I. Newton Peirce, then living in Alliance, had "an
understanding with all the passenger-train conductors on the C.
and W. R. R." that <DW52> persons provided with tickets bearing
the initials I. N. P. were to be admitted to the trains without
question, unless slave-catchers were thought to be aboard the
cars.[448] Indiana and Michigan are known to have had their steam
railway lines in the secret service system: in the former state
the Louisville, New Albany and Chicago Railroad was utilized by
operators at Crawfordsville;[449] in the latter the Michigan
Central supplied a convenient outlet to Detroit from stations
along its course.[450] The Chicago and Rock Island Railroad from
Peru, Lasalle County, Illinois, to Chicago was incorporated in the
service, so also was the Illinois Central from Cairo and Centralia
to the same terminus. The Chicago, Burlington and Quincy Railroad
sometimes conveyed fugitives from Quincy on the Mississippi River to
Chicago. Two men of prominence connected with this road, who secured
transportation over its rails for many Canada-bound passengers, were
Dr. C. V. Dyer, of Chicago, and Colonel Berrien, chief engineer of
the road.[451]

  [443] See p. 80, Chapter III.

  [444] _Underground Railroad_, p. 174. See also pp. 176, 177.

  [445] _Ibid._, pp. 364, 365.

  The following letter from Mr. Pennypacker to Mr. Still explains
  itself:

  "SCHUYLKILL, 11th Mo., 7th, 1857.

  WILLIAM STILL, _Respected Friend_,--There are three 
  friends at my house now, who will reach the city by the
  Philadelphia and Reading train this evening. Please meet them.

  Thine, etc.,     E. F. PENNYPACKER.

  We have within the past two months passed forty-three through
  our hands, transported most of them to Norristown in our own
  conveyance. E. F. P."

  [446] Letter of Mr. Jones, Elmira, N.Y., Jan. 16, 1897.

  [447] See p. 78, Chapter III.

  [448] Letter of Mr. Peirce, Folcroft, Delaware Co., Pa., Feb. 1,
  1893.

  [449] See p. 79, Chapter III.

  [450] _Ibid._

  [451] _Life and Poems of John Howard Bryant_, p. 30. Mr. Bryant
  made a practice of receiving fugitives in his house in Princeton,
  Ill.

Along the portion of the Atlantic coast shown on the map will
be seen long lines connecting Southern with Northern ports.
These represent routes to liberty by sea. It is reported by a
station-keeper of Valley Falls, Rhode Island, that "Slaves in
Virginia would secure passage either secretly or with the consent of
the captains, in small trading vessels, at Norfolk or Portsmouth,
and thus be brought into some port in New England, where their fate
depended on circumstances;"[452] and the reporter gives several
instances coming within her knowledge of fugitives that escaped
from Virginia to Massachusetts as stowaways on vessels.[453]
Boats engaged in the lumber trade sometimes brought refugees from
Newberne, North Carolina, to Philadelphia.[454] Captain Austin
Bearse, who was active in the rescue of stowaways from vessels
arriving in Boston harbor from the South, cites two instances in
which fugitives came by sea from Wilmington, North Carolina,
and another from Jacksonville, Florida.[455] William Still gives
a number of cases of escape by boat from Richmond and Norfolk,
Virginia, and Wilmington, North Carolina, to the Vigilance Committee
at Philadelphia.[456] <DW64>s arriving in New York City and coming
within the horizon of Isaac T. Hopper's knowledge were often sent by
water to Providence and Boston.[457]

  [452] Mrs. Elizabeth Buffum Chace, _Anti-Slavery Reminiscences_,
  p. 27.

  [453] _Ibid._, pp. 28, 30.

  [454] R. C. Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 355.

  [455] _Reminiscences of Fugitive-Slave Law Days in Boston_, pp.
  34, 36, 37.

  [456] William Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, pp. 77, 142,
  151, 163, 165, 211, etc.

  [457] Letter of James S. Rogers, Chicago, Ill., April 17, 1897.

Of the terminal stations or places of deportation along our
northeastern boundary, there are not less than twenty-four, and
probably many more. Three of them, Boston, Portland and St. Albans,
were located in the New England states. Fugitives were probably less
often sent directly to English soil from Boston than from the two
other points, and in the few instances of which we have any hint,
with perhaps one exception, the passengers so sent were put aboard
vessels sailing for England. The boats running between Portland and
the Canadian provinces were freely made use of to help slaves to
their freedom, especially as the emigrants were often provided with
passes. Sailing-vessels also furnished free passage, and carried the
majority of the passengers that went from Portland.[458] St. Albans
was the terminal of the Vermont line. Many fugitives were received
and cared for here, and were sent on by private conveyance across
the Canada border before the Vermont Central Railroad was built.
Afterwards they were sent by rail, through the intervention of the
Hon. Lawrence Brainerd, of St. Albans, who was one of the projectors
of the steam railroad and largely interested in it financially.[459]

  [458] Letter of Brown Thurston, Portland, Me., Oct. 21, 1895.

  [459] Letter of Aldis O. Brainerd, St. Albans, Vt., Oct. 21, 1895.

Along the northern boundary of New York and Pennsylvania there seem
to have been not less than ten resorts facing the Canadian frontier.
These were Ogdensburg,[460] Cape Vincent, Port Ontario, Oswego,
some port near Rochester, Lewiston, Suspension Bridge, Black Rock,
Buffalo, Dunkirk Harbor and Erie. Doubtless the most important of
these crossing-places were the four along the Niagara River, for
here the most travelled of the routes in New York terminated. The
harbors along Lake Ontario and the one on the St. Lawrence River
appear to have been the terminals of side-tracks and branches rather
than of main lines of Road.

  [460] "They crossed at Detroit and at Niagara and at Ogdensburg.
  Of those in New England, some went up through Vermont, some fled
  to Maine, and crossed over into New Brunswick." F. W. Seward,
  _Seward at Washington as Senator and Secretary of State_, Vol. I,
  p. 170.

Ohio may lay claim to eight terminal stations, all comparatively
important. The best-known of these appear to have been Ashtabula
Harbor, Painesville, Cleveland, Sandusky and Toledo, although the
other three, Huron, Lorain and Conneaut, may be supposed, from their
locations, to have done a thriving business. It is impossible to
get now a measure of the efficiency of these various ports, for
the period during which they were resorted to was a long one, and
operators were obliged to work more or less independently, and
obtained no adequate idea of the number emigrating from any one
point. Custom-house methods were not followed in keeping account
of the <DW64>s exported across the Canada frontier. All that can
be said in comparing these various ports is that Ashtabula Harbor,
Cleveland and Sandusky, each seems to have been the terminus for
four or five lines of Road, while perhaps only two or three lines
ended at Toledo and Painesville, and one each at Huron, Lorain and
Conneaut. Concerning the port at Huron we have a few observations,
made by Mr. L. S. Stow, who lived a few miles from Lake Erie on
the course of the Milan canal, and near one of the managers of the
terminal, on whose premises fugitives often awaited the appearance
of a Canada-bound boat. He says: "We used to see, occasionally,
the fugitives, who ventured out for exercise while waiting for an
opportunity to get on one of the vessels frequently passing down the
canal and river from Milan, during the season of navigation. Many
of these vessels passed through the Welland Canal on their way to
the lower Lakes, and after leaving the harbor at Huron the fugitives
were safe from the pursuit of their masters unless the vessels were
compelled by stress of weather to return to harbor."[461]

  [461] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, pp. 80, 81.

[Illustration: THE DETROIT RIVER, AT DETROIT, MICHIGAN, IN 1850,

THE FAVORITE PLACE FOR FUGITIVES TO CROSS INTO CANADA.

(From an engraving in possession of C. M. Burton, Esq., of Detroit.)]

[Illustration: HARBOR, ASHTABULA COUNTY, OHIO, IN 1860,

A PLACE OF DEPORTATION FOR FUGITIVES ON LAKE ERIE.

(From a photograph in possession of J. D. Hulbert, Esq., of Harbor,
Ohio.)]

Hundreds, nay, thousands of fugitives found crossing-places along
the Detroit River, especially at the city of Detroit. The numerous
routes of Indiana together with several of the chief routes of
western Ohio poured their passengers into Detroit, thence to be
transported by ferries and row-boats to the tongue of land pressing
its shore-line for thirty miles from Lake Erie to Lake St. Clair
upon the very borders of Michigan. The movement of slaves to this
region was a fact of which Southerners early became apprised, and
their efforts to recover their servants as these were about to
enter the Canaan already within sight were occasionally successful,
although the majority of the people of Detroit[462] and of the
surrounding districts rejoiced to see the slave-catchers outwitted.

  [462] Silas Farmer, _History of Detroit and Michigan_, p. 346.

The places of deportation remaining to be mentioned are four, along
the southwestern shore of Lake Michigan, namely, Milwaukee, Racine,
South Port and Chicago. Of these the last-named was, doubtless,
the most important, since through it chiefly were drained off the
fugitives that came from Missouri over the routes of Iowa and
Illinois. A single operator of Chicago, Mr. Philo Carpenter, is said
to have guided not less than two hundred <DW64>s to Canada-bound
vessels.[463]

  [463] Edward G. Mason, _Early Chicago and Illinois_, p. 110.

The lines of boat-service to the Canadian termini require a few
words of comment. The longest line of travel on the lakes was that
connecting the ports of Wisconsin and Illinois with Detroit or
Amherstburg,[464] and was only approached in length by the route
from Chicago to Collingwood, Ontario.[465] Five hundred miles
would be a minimum statement of the distance refugees were carried
by the boats of abolitionist captains from these westernmost
ports to their havens of refuge. On Lake Erie the routes were, of
course, much shorter, and ran up and down the lake, as well as
across it. Important routes joined Toledo, Sandusky and Cleveland
to Amherstburg and Detroit at one end of the lake, and Dunkirk,
Ashtabula Harbor, Painesville and Cleveland with Buffalo and
Black Rock at the other end of the lake. Certain boats running
on these routes came to be known as abolition boats, with ample
accommodations for underground passengers. Thus, we are told, such
passengers "depended on a vessel named the _Arrow_, which for many
years plied between Sandusky and Detroit, but always touched first
at Malden, Canada, where the fugitives were landed."[466] Frequent
use was also made of scows, sail-boats and sharpies, with which
refugees could be "set across" the lake, and landed at almost any
point along the shore. Small vessels, a part of whose "freight" had
been received from the Underground Railroad, were often despatched
to Port Burwell in the night from the warehouse of Hubbard
and Company, forwarding and commission merchants of Ashtabula
Harbor.[467] Similar enterprises were carried on at various other
points along the lake.[468] So far as known, Lake Ontario had only a
few comparatively insignificant routes: at the upper end of the lake
were two, one joining Rochester and St. Catherines, the other, St.
Catherines and Toronto; at the lower end of the lake, Oswego, Port
Ontario and Cape Vincent seem to have been connected by lines with
Kingston.

  [464] See Chapter III, pp. 82, 83.

  [465] Letter of John G. Weiblen, Fairview, Erie Co., Pa., Nov.
  26, 1895.

  [466] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 77.

  [467] Conversation with Nelson Watrous, Harbor, O., Aug. 8, 1892;
  conversation with J. D. Hulbert, Harbor, O., Aug. 7, 1892.

  [468] The following incident given by Mr. Rush R. Sloane will
  serve as an illustration: "In the summer of 1853, four fugitives
  arrived at Sandusky. ... Mr. John Irvine ... had arranged for a
  'sharpee,' a small sail-boat used by fishermen, with one George
  Sweigels, to sail the boat to Canada with this party, for which
  service Captain Sweigels was to receive thirty-five dollars. One
  man accompanied Captain Sweigels, and at eight o'clock in the
  evening this party in this small boat started to cross Lake Erie.
  The wind was favorable, and before morning Point au Pelee Island
  was reached, and the next day the four escaped fugitives were in
  Canada." The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, pp. 49, 50.

It is impossible to tell how many cities, towns and villages in
Canada became terminals of the underground system. Outside of the
interlake region of Ontario it is safe to name Kingston, Prescott,
Montreal, Stanstead and St. John, New Brunswick. Within that region
the terminals were numerous, being scattered from the southern
shore of Georgian Bay to Lake Erie, and from the Detroit and Huron
rivers to the Niagara. Owen Sound, Collingwood and Oro were the
northernmost resorts, so far as now known. Toronto, Queen's Bush,
Wellesley, Galt and Hamilton occupied territory south of these, and
farther south still, in the marginal strip fronting directly on Lake
Erie, there were not less than twenty more places of refuge. The
most important of these were naturally those situated at either end
of the strip, and along the shore-line, namely, Windsor, Sandwich
and Amherstburg, New Canaan, Colchester and Kingsville, Gosfield
and Buxton, Port Stanley, Port Burwell and Port Royal, Long Point,
Fort Erie and St. Catherines. In the valley of the Thames also many
refugees settled, especially at Chatham, Dresden and Dawn, and at
Sydenham, London and Wilberforce. The names of two additional towns,
Sarnia on the Huron River and Brantford on the Grand, complete the
list of the known Canadian terminals. This enumeration of centres
cannot be supposed to be exhaustive. A full record would take into
account the localities in the outlying country districts as well as
those adjoining or forming a part of the hamlets, towns and cities
of the whites, whither the blacks had penetrated. The untrodden
wilds of Canada, as well as her populous places, seemed hospitable
to a people for whom the hardships of the new life were fully
compensated by the consciousness of their possession of the rights
of freemen, rights vouchsafed them by a government that exemplified
the proud boast of the poet Cowper:--

    "Slaves cannot breathe in England; if their lungs
    Receive our air, that moment they are free!
    They touch our country and their shackles fall."




CHAPTER VI

ABDUCTION OF SLAVES FROM THE SOUTH


Most persons that engaged in the underground service were opposed
either to enticing or to abducting slaves from the South. This
was no less true along the southern border of the free states
than in their interior. The principle generally acted upon by the
friends of fugitives was that which they held to be voiced in the
Scriptural injunction to feed the hungry and clothe the naked. The
quaking <DW64> at the door in the dead of night seeking relief from
a condition, the miseries of which he found intolerable and for
which he was in no proper sense responsible, was a figure to be
pitied, and to be helped without delay. Under such circumstances
there was no room for casuistry in the mind of the abolitionist.
The response of his warm nature was as decisive as his favorite
passage of Scripture was imperative. The fugitive was fed,
clothed if necessary, and guided to another friend farther on.
But abolitionists were unwilling, for the most part, to involve
themselves more deeply in danger by abducting slaves from thraldom.
The Rev. John B. Mahan, one of the early anti-slavery men of
southern Ohio, expressed this fact when he said, "I am confident
that few, if any, for various reasons, would invade the jurisdiction
of another state to give aid and encouragement to slaves to escape
from their owners...."[469] And in northern Ohio, in so radical a
town as Oberlin, a famous station of the Underground Road, we are
told that there was no sentiment in favor of enticing slaves away,
and that this was never done except in one case--by Calvin Fairbank,
a student.[470]

  [469] _History of Brown County, Ohio_, p. 315.

  [470] Conversation with ex-President James H. Fairchild, Oberlin,
  O., Aug. 3, 1892.

The general disinclination to induce escapes of slaves, either by
secret invitation or by persons serving as guides, renders the
few cases conspicuous, and gives them considerable interest. When
instances of this kind became known to the slave-owners, as for
example, by the arrest and imprisonment of some over-venturesome
offender, the irritation resulting on both sides of Mason and
Dixon's line was apt to be disproportionate to the magnitude of
the cause. Nevertheless the aggravation of sectional feeling thus
produced was real, and was valued by some Northern agitators as a
means to a better understanding of the system of slavery.[471]

  [471] See the Annual Reports of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery
  Society.

The largest number of abduction cases occurred through the
activities of those well-disposed towards fugitives by the
attachments of race. There were many <DW64>s, enslaved and free,
along the southern boundaries of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio,
Indiana, Illinois and Iowa, whose opportunities were numerous for
conveying fugitives to free soil with slight risk to themselves.
These persons sometimes did scarcely more than ferry runaways across
a stream or direct them to the homes of friends residing near the
line of a free state. In the vicinity of Martin's Ferry, Ohio,
there lived a <DW52> man who frequented the Virginia shore for the
purpose of persuading slaves to run away. He was in the habit of
imparting the necessary information, and then displaying himself
in an intoxicated condition, feigned or real, to avoid suspicion.
At last he was found out, but escaped by betaking himself to
Canada.[472] In the neighborhood of Portsmouth, Ohio, slaves were
conveyed across the river by one Poindexter, a barber of the town of
Jackson.[473] In Baltimore, Maryland, two <DW52> women, who engaged
in selling vegetables, were efficient in starting fugitives on the
way to Philadelphia.[474] At Louisville, Kentucky, Wash Spradley,
a shrewd <DW64>, was instrumental in helping many of his enslaved
brethren out of bondage.[475] These few instances will suffice to
illustrate the secret enterprises conducted by <DW52> persons on
both sides of the sectional line once dividing the North from the
South.

  [472] Conversation with Mrs. Joel Woods, at Martin's Ferry, Aug.
  19, 1892.

  [473] Conversation with Judge Jesse W. Laird, Jackson, O., June,
  1895.

  [474] Conversation with Mr. Robert Purvis, at Philadelphia, Dec.
  23, 1895.

  [475] Conversation with John Evans, at Windsor, Ont., C.W., Aug.
  2, 1895; John Evans was a slave near Louisville, but was given
  his liberty in 1850, when his master became financially involved.

Another class of <DW52> persons that undertook the work of
delivering some of their race from the cruel uncertainties of
slavery may be found among the refugees of Canada. Describing the
early development of the movement of slaves to Canada, Dr. Samuel
G. Howe says of these persons, "Some, not content with personal
freedom and happiness, went secretly back to their old homes and
brought away their wives and children at much peril and cost."[476]
It has been stated that the number of these persons visiting the
South annually was about five hundred.[477] Mr. D. B. Hodge, of
Lloydsville, Ohio, gives the case of a <DW64> that went to Canada by
way of New Athens, and in the course of a year returned over the
same route, went to Kentucky, and brought away his wife and two
children, making his pilgrimage northward again after the lapse of
about two months.[478] Another case, reported by Mr. N. C. Buswell,
of Neponset, Illinois, is as follows: A slave, Charlie, belonging to
a Missouri planter living near Quincy, Illinois, escaped to Canada
by way of one of the underground routes. Ere long he decided to
return and get his wife, but found she had been sold South. When
making his second journey eastward he brought with him a family of
slaves, who preferred freedom to remaining as the chattels of his
old master. This was the first of a number of such trips made by
the fugitive Charlie.[479] Mr. Seth Linton,[480] who was familiar
with the work on a line of this Road running through Clinton County,
Ohio, reports that a fugitive that had passed along the route
returned after some months, saying he had come back to rescue his
wife. His absence in the slave state continued so long that it was
feared he had been captured, but after some weeks he reappeared,
bringing his wife and her father with him. He told of having seen
many slaves in the country and said they would be along as soon
as they could escape. The following year the Clinton County line
was unusually busy. A brave woman named Armstrong escaped with
her husband and one child to Canada in 1842. Two years later she
determined to rescue the remainder of her family from the Kentucky
plantation where she had left them, and, disguised as a man, she
went back to the old place. Hiding near a spring, where her children
were accustomed to get water, she was able to give instructions to
five of them, and the following night she departed with her flock to
an underground station at Ripley, Ohio.[481]

  [476] Howe, _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, p. 11.

  [477] Redpath, _The Public Life of Captain John Brown_, p. 229.

  [478] Letter from Mr. D. B. Hodge, Oct. 9, 1894.

  [479] Letter from Colonel N. C. Buswell, March 13, 1896.

  [480] Letter from Seth Linton.

  [481] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 39.

Equally zealous in the slaves' behalf with the groups of persons
mentioned in the last two paragraphs were certain individuals of
Southern birth and white parentage, who found the opportunity to
conduct slaves beyond the confines of the plantation states. Robert
Purvis tells of the son of a planter, who sometimes travelled into
the free states with a retinue of body-servants for the purpose
of having them fall into the hands of vigilant abolitionists. The
author has heard similar stories in regard to the sons of Kentucky
slave-owners, but the names of the parties concerned were withheld
for obvious reasons.

John Fairfield, a Virginian, devoted much time and thought to
abducting slaves. Levi Coffin, who knew him intimately, describes
him as a person full of contradictions, who, although a Southerner
by birth, and living the greater part of the time in the South, yet
hated slavery; a person lacking in moral quality, but devoted to the
interests of the slave.[482] John Fairfield's ostensible business
was, at times, that of a poultry and provision dealer; and his
views, when he was among planters, were pro-slavery. Nevertheless
his abiding interest seems to have been to despoil slaveholders
of their human property. He made excursions into various parts
of the South, and led many companies safely through to Canada.
While Laura Haviland was serving as a mission teacher in Canada
West (1852-1853), Fairfield arrived at Windsor, bringing with
him twenty-seven slaves. Mrs. Haviland, who witnessed the happy
conclusion of this adventure, testifies that it was but one of
many, and that the abductor often made expeditions into the heart
of the slaveholding states to secure his companies. On the occasion
of the arrival of the Virginian with the twenty-seven a reception
and dinner were given in his honor by appreciative friends in one
of the churches of the <DW52> people, and a sort of jubilee was
celebrated. The ecstasies of some of the guests, among them an old
<DW64> woman over eighty years of age, touched the heart of their
benefactor, who exclaimed, "This pays me for all dangers I have
faced in bringing this company, just to see these friends meet."[483]

  [482] Coffin, _Reminiscences_, pp. 304, 305; letter of Miss H. N.
  Wilson, College Hill, O., April 14, 1892.

  [483] Laura S. Haviland, _A Woman's Life Work_, p. 199.

  In a letter dated Lawrence, Kan., March 23, 1893, Mr. Fitch Reed
  gives some of the circumstances connected with the progress of
  this company through the last stages of its journey. He says: "In
  1853, there came over the road twenty-eight in one gang, with a
  conductor by the name of Fairfield, from Virginia, who had aided
  in liberating all his father's and uncle's slaves, and there was
  a reward out for him of five hundred dollars, dead or alive. They
  had fifty-two rounds of arms, and were determined not to be taken
  alive. Four teams from my house [in Cambridge, Mich.] started at
  sunset, drove through Clinton after dark, got to Ypsilanti before
  daylight. Stayed at Bro. Ray's through the day. At noon, Bro.
  M. Coe, from our station, got on the cars and went to Detroit,
  and left Ray to drive his team. Coe informed the friends of the
  situation, and made arrangements for their reception. The friends
  came out to meet them ten miles before we came to Detroit,
  piloted us to a large boarding-house by the side of the river.
  Two hundred abolitionists took breakfast with them just before
  daylight. We procured boats enough for Fairfield and his crew.
  As they pushed off from shore, they all commenced singing the
  song, 'I am on my way to Canada, where <DW52> men are free,' and
  continued firing off their arms till out of hearing. At eight
  o'clock, the ferry-boats started, and the station-keepers went
  over and spent most of the day with them."

Northern men residing or travelling in the South were sometimes
tempted to encourage slaves to flee to Canada, or even to plan and
execute abductions. Jacob Cummings, a slave belonging to a small
planter, James Smith, of southeastern Tennessee, was befriended by
a Mr. Leonard, of Chattanooga, who had become an abolitionist in
Albany, New York, before his removal to the South. Cummings was
occasionally sent on errands to Mr. Leonard's store. This gave the
Northerner the desired opportunity to show his slave customer where
Ohio and Indiana are on the map, and to advise him to go to Canada.
As Cummings had a "hard master" he did not long delay his going.[484]

  [484] Conversation with Jacob Cummings, Columbus, O., April, 1894.

The risks and costs of a long trip were not too great for the
enthusiastic abolitionist who felt that immediate rescue must be
attempted. One remarkable incident illustrates the determination
sometimes displayed in freeing a slave. Two brothers from
Connecticut settled in the District of Columbia about the year
1848. They became gardeners, and employed among their hands a
<DW52> woman, who was hired out to them by her master. Soon after
the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law (1850) she came weeping to
her employers with the news that she was to be sold "down South."
Stirred by her impending misfortune, one of the brothers had a large
box made, within which he nailed the slave-woman and her young
daughter. With the box in his market-wagon he set out on a long,
arduous trip across Maryland and Pennsylvania into New York. After
three weeks of travel he reached his journey's end at Warsaw. Here
he delivered his charge to the care of friends, among whom they
found a permanent home.[485]

  [485] Conversation with the daughter mentioned, now the wife
  of William Burghardt, Warsaw, N.Y., June, 1894. Article on the
  Underground Railroad in the _History of Warsaw, New York_.

There were ardent abolitionists living almost within sight of slave
territory that had no scruples about helping slaves across the
line and passing them on to freedom. In 1836, Dr. David Nelson, a
Virginian, who had freed his slaves and moved to Marion County,
Missouri, and had there founded Marion College, was driven into
Illinois on account of his anti-slavery views. He settled at Quincy,
and soon established the Mission Institute, which was chiefly a
school for the education of missionaries. Mr. N. A. Hunt, now
eighty-five years old but apparently of clear mind, was a student in
Mission Institute in its early years. He relates an incident showing
the spirit existing in the school, a spirit that manifested itself
a little later in the actions of Messrs Burr, Work and Thompson.
His story is that Dr. Nelson came to him one day in the spring of
1839 or 1840, and asked him to go with another student across the
Mississippi River and patrol the shore opposite Quincy. The students
were to make signals at intervals by tapping stones together, and if
their signals were answered they were to help such as needed help by
conducting them to a place of safety, a station on the Underground
Railroad, sixteen miles east of Quincy. The station could be easily
recognized, for it was a red barn. The time chosen for crossing the
river was always a Sunday night, a time known to be the best for the
persons sometimes found waiting on the other side. This detailing
of a watch from the school was regularly done, although with what
results is not known.[486]

  [486] Letter from N. A. Hunt, of Riverside, Cal., Feb. 12, 1891.

Among the students attending this Institute in 1841 were James E.
Burr and George Thompson. These young men, together with a villager,
Alanson Work, arranged with two slaves to convey them from bondage
in Missouri. The abductors found themselves surrounded by a crowd of
angry Missourians, and were speedily committed to jail in Palmyra.
To insure the conviction of the prisoners three indictments were
brought against them, one charging them with "stealing slaves,
another with attempting to steal them, and the other with intending
to make the attempt."[487] Conviction was a foregone conclusion.
Work and his companions were pronounced guilty and sentenced to
twelve years' imprisonment. These men were not required, however,
to serve out their terms. Mr. Work was pardoned after three and a
half years on the unjust condition that he return with his wife and
children to the State of Connecticut, his former residence. Mr. Burr
was released at the end of a little more than four years and six
months, and Mr. Thompson after nearly five years' imprisonment. The
anti-slavery character of Mission Institute at length brought down
upon it the wrath of the Missourians. One winter night a party from
Marion County crossed the Mississippi River on the ice, stealthily
marched to the Institute, and set it on fire.[488]

  [487] Quoted by Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in
  America_, Vol. II, p. 71.

  [488] Asbury, _History of Quincy_, p. 74. The account of the
  Burr, Work and Thompson case occupies pp. 72, 73 and 74 of
  Asbury's volume.

In southern Indiana operations similar to those of the students of
the Mission Institute were carried on by a supposedly inoffensive
pedler of notions, Joseph Sider. With his large convenient wagon
Sider traversed some of the border counties of Kentucky, supplying
goods to his customers; one of his boxes was reserved for disguises
for <DW64>s that wished to cast off the garments of slavery. Sider's
method involved the use of his vehicle for long trips to the Ohio
River, where the passengers were conveyed by boat to a place of
safety, and told to remain concealed until the wagon and team could
be transported by ferry the following morning. So simple a plan did
not excite suspicion, and served to carry fugitives rapidly forward
to some line of underground traffic.[489]

  [489] E. Hicks Trueblood, "Reminiscences of the Underground
  Railroad," in the _Republican Leader_, Salem, Ind., March 16,
  1894.

Among those invasions of the South that caused considerable
excitement at the time of their occurrence, the cases of Calvin
Fairbank, Seth Concklin and John Brown are notable; and accounts of
them cannot well be omitted from these pages, even though they may
be more or less familiar to the reader. Mr. Calvin Fairbank came of
English stock, and was born in Wyoming County, New York, in 1816.
His home training as well as his attendance at Oberlin College
furnished him with anti-slavery views, but the circumstance to which
he traced his hearty hatred of the Southern institution arose by
chance, when as a boy he was attending quarterly meeting with his
parents. "It happened that my family was assigned," he relates, "to
the good, clean home of a pair of escaped slaves. One night after
service I sat on the hearthstone before the fire, and listened to
the woman's story of sorrow.... My heart wept, my anger was kindled,
and antagonism to slavery was fixed upon me."[490] In the spring of
1837 young Fairbank was sent by his father down the Ohio River in
charge of a raft of lumber. A little below Wheeling he saw a large,
active-looking, black man on the Virginia shore, going to the woods
with his axe. He found the woodsman to be a slave, soon gained his
confidence, and set him across the river on the raft. A few days
later Mr. Fairbank moored his rude craft, and landed on the Kentucky
shore opposite the mouth of the Little Miami River. Here he was
approached by an old slave-woman, who sought the liberation of her
seven children. The matter was easily arranged, and after dark the
seven were speedily conveyed across the river.[491]

  [490] _Rev. Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times, or How the Way
  was Prepared._ Edited from his manuscript. Pp. 1-7.

  [491] _Rev. Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times_, pp. 12-14.

The rescue of Lewis Hayden and his family was the means of bringing
Mr. Fairbank to the penitentiary, while it opened to his friend
Hayden an honorable career in New England. Mr. Hayden became a
respected citizen of Boston, and helped to organize the Vigilance
Committee for the purpose of protecting the refugees that were
settling in the city; in course of time he came to serve in the
legislature of the State of Massachusetts. His wife, who survived
him, made a bequest of an estate of about five thousand dollars
to Harvard University to found a scholarship for the benefit of
deserving  students.[492] The story of Hayden's delivery and
of his own imprisonment is best told in Mr. Fairbank's words: "Lewis
Hayden ... was, when a young man, ... the property of Baxter and
Grant, owners of the Brennan House, in Lexington. Hayden's wife,
Harriet, and his son, a lad of ten years when I first knew them,
were the slaves of Patrick Baine. On a September evening in 1844,
accompanied by Miss D. A. Webster, a young Vermont lady, who was
associated with me in teaching, I left Lexington with the Haydens,
in a hack, crossed the Ohio River on a ferry at nine the next
morning, changed horses, and drove to an Underground Railroad depot
at Hopkins, Ohio, where we left Hayden and his family.... When Miss
Webster and I returned to Lexington, after two days' absence, we
were both arrested, charged by their master with helping Hayden's
wife and son to escape. We were jointly indicted, but Miss Webster
was tried first and sentenced to two years' imprisonment in the
penitentiary at Frankfort.... While my case was still pending I
learned that the governor was inclined to pardon Miss Webster, but
first insisted that I should be tried. When called up for trial in
February, 1845, I pleaded guilty, and received a sentence of fifteen
years. I served four years and eleven months, and then, August 23,
1849, was released by Governor John J. Crittenden, the able and
patriotic man who afterwards saved Kentucky to the Union."[493]

  [492] _Boston Weekly Transcript_, Dec. 29, 1893.

  [493] The _Chicago Tribune_, Sunday, Jan. 29, 1893.

In spite of his incarceration for aiding slaves to escape, and in
the face of the heavier penalties laid by the new Fugitive Slave
Law, passed shortly after his release from prison, Calvin Fairbank
was soon engaged in similar enterprises. He declares, "I resisted
its [the law's] execution whenever and wherever possible."[494] A
little more than two years after his pardon Mr. Fairbank was again
arrested, this time in Indiana, for carrying off Tamar, a young
mulatto woman, who was claimed as property by A. L. Shotwell, of
Louisville, Kentucky. Without process of law Mr. Fairbank was taken
from the State of Indiana to Louisville, where he was tried in
February, 1853. He was again sentenced to the state prison for a
term of fifteen years, and while there was frequently subjected to
the most brutal treatment. Altogether Mr. Fairbank spent seventeen
years and four months of his life in prison for abducting slaves;
he says that during his second term he received at the hands of
prison officials thirty-five thousand stripes.[495] Having served
more than twelve years of his second sentence, he was pardoned by
acting Governor Richard T. Jacob. It was a singular occurrence
that finally enabled Mr. Fairbank to regain his liberty. Among the
friends upon whose favor he could rely was the lieutenant-governor
of Kentucky, Richard T. Jacob, the son-in-law of Thomas H. Benton,
of Missouri. Mr. Jacob was a man of strong anti-slavery tendencies,
notwithstanding his political prominence and his private interests
as a wealthy planter. The governor, Thomas E. Bramlette, was opposed
to extending the executive clemency to so notorious an offender as
Mr. Fairbank. Early in 1864 General Speed S. Fry was detailed by
President Lincoln to enroll all the <DW64>s of Kentucky, but he
came into collision with Governor Bramlette, who sought to prevent
General Fry from carrying out his orders. Upon receiving information
to this effect the President summoned the executive of Kentucky to
Washington to answer to charges; and thereupon Mr. Jacob became
acting governor. On his first day in office the new executive of
Kentucky was accosted by General Fry with the remark, "Governor,
the President thinks it would be well to make this Fairbank's day."
On the morning following, the prisoner received a full and free
pardon.[496]

  [494] _Ibid._

  [495] _Rev. Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times_, pp. 138, 144.

  [496] _Rev. Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times_, pp. 11,
  104-143. See also the _Chicago Tribune_, Sunday, Jan. 29, 1893,
  p. 33.

Mr. Fairbank gives many interesting devices that he employed in
his work to throw off pursuit. "Forty-seven slaves I guided toward
the north star, in violation of the state codes of Virginia and
Kentucky. I piloted them through the forests, mostly by night;
girls, fair and white, dressed as ladies; men and boys, as
gentlemen, or servants; men in women's clothes, and women in men's
clothes; boys dressed as girls, and girls as boys; on foot or on
horseback, in buggies, carriages, common wagons, in and under loads
of hay, straw, old furniture, boxes and bags; crossing the Jordan
of the slave, swimming or wading chin deep; or in boats, or skiffs;
on rafts, and often on a pine log. And I never suffered one to be
recaptured."[497]

  [497] _Rev. Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times_, pp. 10 and 11.

About 1850, Seth Concklin, a resident of Philadelphia, learned of
the remarkable escape of Peter Still from Alabama to the Quaker
City. Here the runaway was most happily favored in finding friends.
William Still, his brother, from whom he had been separated by
kidnappers long years before, was discovered almost immediately
in the office of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society; and Seth
Concklin soon proffered himself as an agent to go into the South
and bring away Peter Still's family. The fugitive himself first
visited Alabama to see what could be done for his wife and children;
but failing to accomplish anything he gratefully accepted the
offer of the daring Philadelphian. Mr. Concklin expected to assume
the character of a slave-owner and bring the Stills away as his
servants; he found, however, that the steamboats on the Tennessee
River were too irregular to be depended on. He therefore returned
north to Indiana, and arranged for the escape of the slave family
across that state to Canada. The story of his second attempt at the
South has a tragic ending, notwithstanding its favorable beginning.
Having made a safe start and a long journey of seven days and
nights in a rowboat the whole party was captured in southwestern
Indiana. A letter from the Rev. N. R. Johnston to William Still,
written soon after the catastrophe, gives the following account of
the affair: "On last Tuesday I mailed a letter to you, written by
Seth Concklin. I presume you have received that letter. It gave an
account of the rescue of the family of your brother. If that is the
last news you have had from them I have very painful intelligence
for you. They passed on (north) from near Princeton, where I saw
them.... I think twenty-three miles above Vincennes, Ind., they
were seized by a party of men, and lodged in jail. Telegraphic
despatches were sent all through the South. I have since learned
that the marshal of Evansville received a despatch from Tuscumbia
to look out for them. By some means, he and the master, so says
report, went to Vincennes and claimed the fugitives, chained Mr.
Concklin, and hurried all off...."[498] In a postscript, the same
letter gave the rumor of Seth Concklin's escape from the boat on
which he was being carried South; but the newspapers brought reports
of a different nature. Their statements represented that the man
"Miller"--that is, Concklin--"was found drowned, with his hands and
feet in chains and his skull fractured."[499] The version of the
tragedy given by the claimant of the fugitives, McKiernon, was as
follows: "Some time last march a white man by the name of Miller
appeared in the nabourhood and abducted the above <DW64>s, was
caught at vincanes, Indi. with said <DW64>s and was thare convicted
of steling and remanded back to Ala. to Abide the penalty of the
law and on his return met his Just reward by getting drowned at
the mouth of cumberland River on the Ohio in attempting to make his
escape."[500] Just how Concklin met his death will probably always
remain a mystery. McKiernon's letter offered terms for the purchase
of the poor slaves, but they were so exorbitant that they could not
be accepted. Besides, it was not deemed proper to jeopardize the
life of another agent on a mission so dangerous.

  [498] Letter dated Evansville, Ind., March 31, 1851. Printed in
  Still's _Underground Railroad Records_, pp. 30, 31.

  [499] Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, p. 31.

  [500] Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, p. 35. Letter dated
  South Florence, Ala., Aug. 6, 1851.

It is well known that John Brown aided fugitive slaves whenever the
opportunity occurred, as did his Puritan-bred father before him.
We have no record, however, of his abducting slaves from the South
except in the case of his famous raid into Missouri in 1858. This
exploit has a peculiar interest for us, not only as one of the most
notable abductions, but as being, in a special way, the prelude of
that great plan in behalf of the enslaved that he sought to carry
out at Harper's Ferry. After Captain Brown's return from the Eastern
states to Kansas in 1858, he and his men encamped for a few days
at Bain's Fort. While here, Brown was appealed to by a slave, Jim
Daniels, the chattel of one James Lawrence, of Missouri. Daniels
had heard of Captain Brown, and, securing a permit to go about and
sell brooms, had used it in making his way to Brown's camp.[501]
His prayer was "For help to get away," because he was soon to be
sold, together with his wife, two children and a <DW64> man.[502]
Such a supplication could not be made in vain to John Brown. On
the following night (December 20) Brown's raid into Missouri was
made. Brown himself gives the account of it:[503] "Two small
companies were made up to go to Missouri and forcibly liberate the
five slaves, together with other slaves. One of these companies
I assumed to direct. We proceeded to the place, surrounded the
buildings, liberated the slaves, and also took certain property
supposed to belong to the estate.

  [501] Conversation with Samuel Harper and his wife, Jane Harper,
  the two surviving members of the company of slaves escorted to
  Canada by Brown in March, 1859. Their home since has been in or
  about Windsor. I found them there in the early part of August,
  1895.

  [502] Halloway, _History of Kansas_. Quoted from John Brown's
  letters, January, 1859 (pp. 539-545).

  [503] In a letter written by Brown, January, 1859, to the _New
  York Tribune_, in which paper it was published. It was also
  published in the _Lawrence_ (Kansas) _Republican_. See Sanborn's
  _Life and Letters of John Brown_, p. 481.

[Illustration:

  SAMUEL HARPER AND WIFE,
  OF WINDSOR, ONTARIO,

the two survivors of the company of slaves abducted by John Brown
from Missouri in the winter of 1858-1859.

(From a recent photograph.)]

[Illustration: ELLEN CRAFT.

Disguised as a young planter, she escaped to Boston in 1848,
bringing her husband with her as a valet.

(From a portrait in possession of the Hon. Simeon Dodge, of
Marblehead, Mass.)]

"We, however, learned before leaving that a portion of the articles
we had taken belonged to a man living on the plantation as a
tenant, and who was supposed to have no interest in the estate. We
promptly returned to him all we had taken. We then went to another
plantation, where we found five more slaves; took some property and
two white men. We moved all slowly away into the territory for some
distance and then sent the white men back, telling them to follow us
as soon as they chose to do so. The other company freed one female
slave, took some property, and, as I am informed, killed one white
man (the master) who fought against liberation...."[504]

  [504] Sanborn, _Life and Letters of John Brown_, pp. 482, 483;
  also Redpath, _The Public Life of Captain John Brown_, pp. 219,
  220.

The company responsible for the shooting of the slave-owner, David
Cruse, was in charge of Kagi and Charles Stephens, also known as
Whipple. When this party came to the house of Mr. Cruse the family
had retired. There was no hesitation, however, on the part of the
strangers in requesting quarters for the night. Mrs. Cruse, her
suspicions fully aroused, handed her husband his pistol. Jean
Harper, the slave-woman that was taken from this house, asserts that
her master would certainly have fired upon the intruders had not
Whipple used his revolver first, with deadly effect. When the two
squads came together the march back to Bain's Fort was begun. On
the way thither Brown asked the slaves if they wanted to be free,
and then promised to take them to a free country. Thus was Brown
led to undertake one of his boldest adventures, one of the boldest
indeed in the history of the Underground Road. With a mere handful
of men he purposed to escort his band of freedmen on a journey of
twenty-five hundred miles to Canada, in the dead of winter, and
surrounded by the dangers that the publicity of his foray and the
announcement of a reward of three thousand dollars for his arrest
were likely to bring upon him. Brown and his company tarried only
one day at Bain's Fort; then proceeded northward by way of Topeka
to the place of his friend, Dr. Doyle, five miles beyond, and
then by way of Osawattomie, Holton and the house of Major J. B.
Abbot near Lawrence, into Nebraska. Lawrence was reached January
24, 1859. At Holton a party of pursuers, two or three times as
large as Brown's company, was dispersed in instant and ridiculous
flight, and four prisoners and five horses were taken. The trip,
after leaving Holton, was made amidst great perils. Under an escort
of seventeen "Topeka boys" Brown pressed rapidly on to Nebraska
City. At this point the passage of the Missouri was made on the
ice, and the liberators with their charges arrived at Tabor in the
first week of February. Here, Brown met with rebuff, "contrary to
his expectation, and contrary to the whole former attitude of the
people," we are told, "he was not welcomed, but, at a public meeting
called for the purpose, was severely reprimanded as a disturber of
the peace and safety of the village. Effecting a hasty departure
from Tabor, and taking advantage of the protection offered by a few
friendly families on the way, he and his party of fugitives came,
on February 20, 1859, to Grinnell, Iowa, where they were cordially
received by the Hon. J. B. Grinnell, who entertained them in his
house. Brown's next stop was made at Springdale, which place he
reached on February 25. Here the fugitives were distributed among
the Quaker families for safety and rest before continuing the
journey to Canada. But soon rumors were afloat of the coming of
the United States marshal, and it became necessary to secure for
the <DW64>s railroad transportation to Chicago. Kagi and Stephens,
disguised as sportsmen, walked to Iowa City, enlisted the services
of Mr. William Penn Clark, an influential anti-slavery citizen of
that place, and by his efforts, supplemented by those of Hon. J.
B. Grinnell, a freight car was got and held in readiness at West
Liberty. The <DW64>s were then brought down from Springdale (distant
but six miles) and, after spending a night in a grist-mill near the
railway station, were ready to embark."[505] They were stowed away
in the freight-car by Brown, Kagi and Stephens, and the car was made
fast to a train from the West on the Chicago and Rock Island Road.
"On reaching Chicago, Brown and his party were taken into friendly
charge by Allen Pinkerton, the famous detective, and started for
Detroit. On March 10 they were in Detroit and practically at their
journey's end."[506] On the twelfth the freedmen were, under Brown's
direction, ferried across the Detroit River to Windsor, Canada.

  [505] Irving B. Richman, _John Brown among the Quakers, and Other
  Sketches_, pp. 46, 47, 48.

  [506] Irving B. Richman, _John Brown among the Quakers, and Other
  Sketches_, pp. 46, 47, 48.

The trip from southern Kansas to the Canadian destination had
consumed three weeks. The restoration of twelve persons to "their
natural and inalienable rights with but one man killed"[507] was a
result which Brown seems to have regarded as justifiable, but one
the tragedy of which he certainly deplored.[508] The manner in which
this result had been accomplished was highly dramatic, and created
great excitement throughout the country, especially in Missouri.
Brown's biographer, James Redpath, writing in 1860, speaks thus
of the consternation in the invaded state: "When the news of the
invasion of Missouri spread, a wild panic went with it, which in a
few days resulted in clearing Bates and Vernon counties of their
slaves. Large numbers were sold south; many ran into the Territory
and escaped; others were removed farther inland. When John Brown
made his invasion there were five hundred slaves in that district
where there are not fifty <DW64>s now."[509] The success of the
expedition just narrated was well fitted to increase confidence
in John Brown's determination, and to arouse enthusiasm among his
numerous refugee friends in Canada. The story of the adventure was
not unlikely to penetrate the remote regions of the South, and
perhaps find lodgment in the retentive memories of many slaves.
The publication in the _New York Tribune_ of his letter defending
his abduction of the Missouri chattels just as he was beginning
his journey east shows that Brown was not unwilling to have his
act widely known. It was almost the middle of March when Brown
arrived in Canada; his letter had been made public in January;
it had had ample time for circulation. Before he left Kansas he
said significantly, "He would soon remove the seat of the trouble
elsewhere,"[510] and it was but six months after his arrival in
Canada that the attack on Harper's Ferry was made.

  [507] Sanborn, _The Life and Letters of John Brown_, p. 483. See
  the letter of "The Parallels."

  [508] Hinton, _John Brown and His Men_, p. 221.

  [509] Redpath, _The Public Life of Captain John Brown_, p. 221.

  [510] Hinton, _John Brown and His Men_, p. 222, note.

For more than ten years John Brown had cherished a plan for the
liberation of the slaves, in which abduction was to be in a measure
employed. This plan he had revealed to Frederick Douglass as early
as 1847. It is given in Douglass' words: "'The true object to be
sought,' said Brown, 'is first of all to destroy the money value of
slave property; and that can only be done by rendering such property
insecure. My plan then is to take at first about twenty-five picked
men, and begin on a small scale; supply them arms and ammunition;
post them in squads of five on a line of twenty-five miles, the
most persuasive and judicious of whom shall go down to the fields
from time to time, as opportunity offers, and induce the slaves to
join them, seeking and selecting the most restless and daring.'...
With care and enterprise he thought he could soon gather a force
of one hundred hardy men.... When these were properly drilled, ...
they would run off the slaves in larger numbers, retain the brave
and strong ones in the mountains, and send the weak and timid to
the North by the Underground Railroad: his operations would be
enlarged with increasing numbers, and would not be confined to one
locality.... 'If,' said Brown, 'we could drive slavery out of _one
county_, ... it would weaken the system throughout the state.' The
enemy's country would afford subsistence, the fastnesses of the
Alleghanies abundant protection, and a series of stations through
Pennsylvania to the Canadian border a means of egress for timid
slaves."[511]

  [511] _Life of Frederick Douglass_, 1881, pp. 280, 281 and 318,
  319. Also Hinton, _John Brown and His Men_, pp. 30, 31, 32.

The plot, as disclosed eleven years later to Richard J. Hinton
(September, 1858) by Brown's lieutenant, Kagi, contains some
additional details of interest. Hinton says: "The mountains of
Virginia were named as the place of refuge, and as a country
admirably adapted in which to carry on a guerilla warfare. In the
course of the conversation, Harper's Ferry was mentioned as a point
to be seized--but not held--on account of the arsenal. The white
members of the company were to act as officers of different guerilla
bands, which, under the general command of John Brown, were to be
composed of Canadian refugees, and the Virginian slaves who would
join them.... They anticipated, after the first blow had been
struck, that, by the aid of the free and Canadian <DW64>s who would
join them, they could inspire confidence in the slaves, and induce
them to rally. No intention was expressed of gathering a large
body of slaves, and removing them to Canada. On the contrary, Kagi
clearly stated, in answer to my inquiries, that the design was to
make the fight in the mountains of Virginia, extending it to North
Carolina and Tennessee, and also to the swamps of South Carolina,
if possible. Their purpose was not the expatriation of one or a
thousand slaves, but their liberation in the states wherein they
were born, and were now held in bondage.... Kagi spoke of having
marked out a chain of counties extending continuously through South
Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi. He had traveled over
a large portion of the region indicated, and from his own personal
knowledge and with the assistance of the Canadian <DW64>s who had
escaped from those States, they had arranged a general plan of
attack.... They expected to be speedily and constantly reinforced;
first, by the arrival of those men who, in Canada, were anxiously
looking and praying for the time of deliverance, and then by the
slaves themselves.... The constitution adopted at Chatham [in the
spring of 1858] was intended as the framework of organization
among the emancipationists, to enable the leaders to effect a more
complete control of their forces...."[512] A comparison of these two
versions of Brown's plan of liberation leads to the conclusion that
the abduction of slaves to the North was a measure to which the
liberator never attached more importance than as a means of ridding
his men of the care of helpless slaves; the brave he would use in
organizing an insurrection amid the mountains of the Southern states
that should wipe away the curse of slavery from the country.

  [512] Hinton, _John Brown and His Men_, Appendix, pp. 673, 674,
  675. Also Redpath, _The Public Life of Captain John Brown_, pp.
  203, 204, 206.

It will be remembered that the occasion, if not the cause, of
John Brown's raid into Missouri was the solicitation of aid by a
slave for himself and companions. Such prayers for succor were not
infrequently addressed to abolitionists by those in bonds or by
their refugee friends. In the anti-slavery host there were many
whose principles wavered not under any test applied to them, and
whose impulses urged them upon humanitarian missions, however hemmed
in by difficulties and dangers. Among those who heard and answered
the cry of the slave were the Rev. Charles T. Torrey, Captain
Jonathan Walker, Mrs. Laura S. Haviland, Captain Daniel Drayton,
Richard Dillingham, William L. Chaplin and Josiah Henson.

The variety of persons represented in this short, incomplete list
is interesting: Mr. Torrey was a Congregational clergyman of New
England stock, and had been educated at Yale College; Messrs. Walker
and Drayton were masters of sailing vessels, and came from the
states of Massachusetts and New Jersey respectively; Mrs. Haviland
was a Wesleyan Methodist, who founded a school or institute in
southeastern Michigan for both white and <DW52> persons; Richard
Dillingham was a Quaker school-teacher in Cincinnati, Ohio; William
L. Chaplin began his professional life as a lawyer in eastern
Massachusetts, but soon became the editor of an anti-slavery
newspaper; and Josiah Henson was a fugitive slave, one of the
founders of the Dawn Institute in Canada West. With the exception of
the last named they were white persons, whose sense of the injustice
of slavery caused them to take a stand that shut them out of that
conventionally respectable society to which their birth, education
and talents would have admitted them.

In 1838 Charles T. Torrey resigned from the pastorate of a
Congregational church in Providence, Rhode Island, and relinquished
ease and quiet to engage in the anti-slavery struggle then
agitating the country. He became a lecturer and a newspaper
correspondent, and, early in the forties, the editor of a paper
called _The Patriot_, at Albany, New York. While acting as
Washington correspondent for several Northern papers he attended
a convention of slave-owners at Annapolis, Maryland, in 1842, and
was thrust into jail on the score of being an abolitionist. He was
released after several days, having been placed under bonds to
keep the peace. While in prison he solemnly reconsecrated himself
to the work of freeing the slaves. Within a year from this time
a refugee entreated Mr. Torrey to help him bring his wife and
children from Virginia. The errand was undertaken, but came to a
most mournful end. Arrested and imprisoned, Mr. Torrey with others
attempted to break jail; he was betrayed, however, and at length,
December 30, 1843, sentenced to the penitentiary for six years.
Under the severities of prison life Mr. Torrey's health gave way.
His pardon was sought by friends, but mercy was withheld from a
man the depth of whose conviction made recantation impossible. In
December, 1844, he wrote: "I cannot afford to concede any truth
or principle to get out of prison. I am not rich enough." While
his trial was pending he wrote his friend, Henry B. Stanton: "If I
am a guilty man, I am a very guilty one; for I have aided nearly
four hundred slaves to escape to freedom, the greater part of
whom would probably, but for my exertions, have died in slavery."
Concerning this confession Henry Wilson writes: "This statement was
corroborated by the testimony of Jacob Gibbs, a <DW52> man, who
was Mr. Torrey's chief assistant in his efforts."[513] On May 9,
1846, Mr. Torrey died in prison. In death as in life, the lesson
of the clergyman's career proclaimed but one truth, the injustice
of slavery. When the remains of Mr. Torrey were conveyed to Boston
for interment in the beautiful cemetery at Mt. Auburn, the use of
Park Street Church, at first granted, was later refused to the
brother-in-law of the dead minister, although as a worshipper he
was entitled to Christian courtesy. Tremont Temple was procured for
the funeral services, and was thronged by a multitude eager to
do honor to a life of self-sacrifice, and show disapproval of the
affront to the dead. A large meeting in Faneuil Hall on the evening
of the funeral day paid tribute to the memory of the liberator. The
occasion was made memorable by a poem by James Russell Lowell, and
addresses by General Fessenden of Maine, Henry B. Stanton and Dr.
Walter Channing. Whittier wrote: "His work for the poor and helpless
was well and nobly done. In the wild woods of Canada, around many
a happy fireside and holy family altar, his name is on the lips
of God's poor. He put his soul in their soul's stead; he gave his
life for those who had no claim on his love save that of human
brotherhood."[514]

  [513] Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America_, Vol.
  II, p. 80.

  [514] Quoted by Wilson, in his _History of the Rise and Fall of
  the Slave Power in America_, Vol. II, p. 80.

In 1844, the year after Mr. Torrey's disastrous attempt to abduct
a slave-family, Captain Jonathan Walker was made a victim of the
law on account of friendly offices undertaken in behalf of some
trusting <DW64>s. Once, while on the coast of Florida, Mr. Walker
consented to ferry seven slaves from Pensacola to one of the
neighboring Bahama Islands, where they might enjoy the freedom
vouchsafed by English law. In the open boat used for the purpose
Captain Walker suffered sunstroke, and on this account his craft was
overhauled, and the escaping party was taken into custody. After two
trials Captain Walker was condemned to punishments that remind one
strongly of the barbarous penalties inflicted upon offenders in the
reign of Charles the First of England: he was sentenced to stand
in the pillory; to be branded on the hand with the letters S. S.
(slave-stealer); to pay a fine and serve a term of imprisonment for
each slave assisted; to pay the costs of prosecution; and to stand
committed until his fines should be paid. His treatment in prison
was brutal, but he was not obliged to endure it long, for, by the
intervention of friends, his fines were paid, and he was released
in the summer of 1848. Subjected to indignities and disgrace in the
South, Captain Walker was the recipient of many demonstrations of
approval on his return to the North. Whittier blazoned his stigmas
into a prophecy of deliverance for the slave. In a poem of welcome
the distinguished Quaker wrote:

    "Then lift that manly right hand, bold ploughman of the wave,
    Its branded palm shall prophesy 'Salvation to the Slave.'
    Hold up its fire-wrought language that whoso reads may feel
    His heart swell strong within him, his sinews change to steel."[515]

These words were set to music by Mr. George W. Clark, and sung by
him with thrilling effect at many anti-slavery gatherings throughout
New England. Mr. Walker became at once a conspicuous witness against
the slave power in the great trial that was then going forward at
the bar of public opinion. At Providence, Rhode Island, his return
from the Florida prison was heralded, and a large reception was
given him, attended by the Hon. Owen Lovejoy, brother of the martyr
Lovejoy, Milton Clark, the white slave, and Lewis, his brother.
It is said that three thousand people crowded the seats, aisles
and doorways of the reception hall. In company with Mr. George W.
Clark, Captain Walker was drafted into the work of arousing the
masses, and the two agitators received a cordial hearing at many New
England meetings. Doubtless the recital of the Captain's experiences
intensified anti-slavery feeling throughout the Northern states.[516]

  [515] _Liberator_, Aug. 15, 1845, "The Branded Hand," quoted in
  part by Wilson, _History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power
  in America_, Vol. II, p. 83; Whittier's _Poetical Works_, Vol.
  III, Riverside edition, 1896, p. 114.

  [516] Reminiscences written by George W. Clark, by request, have
  been used to secure an intimate acquaintance with some of the men
  engaged in the underground service.

About 1847, Mrs. Laura S. Haviland accepted a mission to find
the family of one John White, a slave, who had escaped from the
South and was serving as a farm-hand in the neighborhood of Mrs.
Haviland's school in southeastern Michigan. Mrs. Haviland went to
Cincinnati where she consulted with the Vigilance Committee, and
thence to Rising Sun, Indiana, to secure the services of several
of John White's  friends. Here a plan was formed for Mrs.
Haviland to go into Kentucky to the plantation where the family
lived, and, disguised as a berry picker, see the wife, inform her
of her husband's whereabouts, and offer to assist in her rescue.
Accomplishing this errand and returning across the border into
Indiana, Mrs. Haviland awaited the slave-woman's appearance; but her
escape had been prevented by the vigilance evoked on account of the
operations of counterfeiters in Kentucky. Then John White started
South intent on saving his wife and children from slavery, but his
efforts also were unsuccessful, and he was thrown into a Kentucky
jail. However, he was soon released by Laura Haviland, who purchased
him for three hundred and fifty dollars.[517]

  [517] Laura S. Haviland, _A Woman's Life Work_, pp. 91-110.

In the summer of 1847, Captain Daniel Drayton sailed to Washington
with a cargo of oysters, and while his boat was lying at the wharf
he was cautiously approached by a <DW64>, who wanted to get passage
North for a woman and five children. The <DW64> said the woman was
a slave but that she had, under an agreement with her master, more
than paid for her liberty, and when she asked for her "free papers"
the master only answered by threatening to sell her South.[518]
Captain Drayton allowed the woman and her children and a niece
to stow themselves on board his vessel, and he soon landed them
at Frenchtown, to the great joy of the woman's husband, who was
awaiting them there.

  [518] _Personal Memoir of Daniel Drayton_, 1853, p. 23.

It was by the suggestion of these fugitives that Captain Drayton
undertook his important expedition with the schooner Pearl in 1848.
On the evening of April 18 his boat was made fast at one of the
Washington docks ready to receive a company of fugitives. The time
seemed auspicious. The establishment of the new French Republic
was being celebrated in the city by a grand torchlight procession,
and slaves were left for the most part to their own devices. Thus
favored, a large number escaped to the small craft of Captain
Drayton and were carefully stowed away. The start was made without
incident, and the vessel continued quietly on her course to the
mouth of the Potomac; there, contrary winds were encountered, and
the _Pearl_ was brought to shelter in Cornfield Harbor, one hundred
and forty miles from Washington. The disappearance of seventy-six
slaves at one time caused great excitement at the Capitol. The
method of their departure was revealed by a  hackman, who
had driven two of the fugitives to the wharf. An armed steamer was
sent in pursuit, and the _Pearl_ was obliged to surrender. Her
arrival under guard at Washington was the occasion for rejoicing
to an infuriated mob of several thousand persons. The slaves were
committed to jail as runaways; their helpers were with difficulty
protected from murderous violence, and were escorted to the city
prison. Under instructions from the district attorney twenty-four
indictments were found against both Captain Drayton and his mate,
Mr. Sayres. When the trial began in July, the list of indictments
presented comprised forty-one counts against each of these
prisoners. Three persons were prosecuted; and the aggregate amount
of their bail was two hundred and twenty-eight thousand dollars.
After two trials the accused were heavily sentenced, and remanded
to jail until their fines should be paid. The sentence passed upon
Captain Drayton required the payment of fines and costs together
amounting to ten thousand and sixty dollars, and until paid the
prisoner must remain in jail indefinitely.[519] His accomplices were
treated with equal severity. Such penalties were accounted monstrous
by the friends of the convicted, and efforts were constantly made
to have the sentences mitigated or revoked. In 1852 Senator Sumner
interested himself in behalf of the imprisoned liberators; and
President Fillmore was induced to grant them an unconditional pardon.

  [519] _Personal Memoir of Daniel Drayton_, p. 102.

The occurrence of these events at the national capital during
a session of Congress, gave them a significance they would not
otherwise have had. That they would become the subject of much
fierce debate was assured by the presence in Congress of such
champions as Messrs. Giddings and Hale for the anti-slavery party,
and Messrs. Foote, Toombs, Calhoun and Davis for the pro-slavery
party. Mr. Calhoun expressed the view of the South when, speaking
upon a resolution brought before the Senate by Mr. Hale, April 20,
he recorded himself as being in favor of an act making penal "these
atrocities, these piratical attempts, these wholesale captures,
these robberies of seventy odd of our slaves at a single grasp."
In this and in similar utterances made at the time, he foreshadowed
the determination of the South to have a law that would restrain if
possible from all temptations to aid or abet the escape of slaves.
The result of this determination is seen in the Fugitive Slave Law
of 1850.

This notable voyage of the _Pearl_, which caused so great an
excitement at the time, has been frequently chronicled, while the
experiences of the young Quaker, Richard Dillingham, have been
seldom recounted, though marked by the same elements of daring
and resignation. In December, 1848, the close of the year of the
_Pearl_'s adventure, Mr. Dillingham was solicited by some <DW52>
people in Cincinnati, Ohio, to go to Tennessee and bring away their
relatives, who were slaves under a "hard master" at Nashville. He
entered upon the project, made his way into the very heart of the
South and arranged with the slaves for their escape. At the time
appointed his three protégés were placed in a closed carriage and
driven rapidly away, Mr. Dillingham following on horseback. The
party got as far as Cumberland bridge, where they were betrayed by
a <DW52> man in whom confidence had been placed, and the fugitives
and their benefactor were arrested. Mr. Dillingham was committed
to jail, and his bail was fixed at seven thousand dollars. At his
trial, which occurred April 12, 1849, Dillingham confessed, and
asked for clemency, urging by way of explanation the dependence
of his aged parents upon him as a stay and protection. As to the
crime for which he was held he said frankly: "I have violated your
laws.... But I was prompted to it by feelings of humanity. It has
been suspected ... that I was leagued with a fraternity who are
combined for the purpose of committing such offences as the one with
which I am charged. But ... the impression is false, I alone am
guilty, I alone committed the offence, and I alone must suffer the
penalty...." Yielding to his plea for clemency the jury returned a
verdict for three years in the penitentiary, the mildest sentence
allowed by the law for the offence. The _Nashville Daily Gazette_
of April 13 did not conceal the fact that Mr. Dillingham belonged
to a respectable family, and stated that he was not without the
sympathy of those who attended the trial.[520] The prisoner himself
was most grateful for the consideration shown him, and, in a letter
to his betrothed written two days after his trial, he spoke of his
short sentence with the deepest gratitude and thankfulness toward
the court and jury and the prosecutors themselves. "My sentence," he
added, "is far more lenient than my most sanguine hopes have ever
anticipated."[521] The termination of the imprisonment of Dillingham
was most melancholy. Separated from his aged parents, to whom he was
devoted, and from the woman that was to have become his wife, his
health soon proved unequal to the severe experiences of prison life;
his keepers after nine months gave him respite from heavy work about
the prison, and assigned him the place of steward in the hospital.
He had not long been in his new station when cholera broke out
among the convicts, and his services were in constant demand. His
strength was soon exhausted, and about the first of August, 1850, he
succumbed to the dread epidemic raging in the prison.[522]

  [520] A. L. Benedict, _Memoir of Richard Dillingham_, 1852, p.
  18. Also Harriet Beecher Stowe, _A Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin_, pp.
  58, 59.

  [521] A. L. Benedict, _Memoir of Richard Dillingham_, p. 18.

  [522] This account of Richard Dillingham is based on the _Memoir_
  written by his friend, A. L. Benedict, a Quaker, and published
  in 1852. Abridged versions of this memoir will be found in the
  _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, Appendix, pp. 713-718; and Howe's
  _Historical Collections of Ohio_, Vol. II, p. 590.

It was the year in which young Dillingham came to his melancholy
end that Mr. William L. Chaplin was found guilty of an offence
similar to that for which Dillingham suffered.[523] When Mr.
Charles T. Torrey, editor of the _Albany Patriot_, was sent to the
Maryland penitentiary for aiding slaves to escape, Mr. Chaplin
assumed control of Mr. Torrey's paper. Like his predecessor, Mr.
Chaplin spent part of his time in the city of Washington reporting
congressional proceedings for the _Patriot_, and like him could not
be deaf to an entreaty in behalf of slaves. In 1850 Mr. Chaplin
was prevailed upon to attempt the release from bondage of two
<DW64>s, one the property of Robert Toombs, the other, of Alexander
H. Stephens. The sequel to this enterprise is thus recounted by
Mr. George W. Clark, an intimate friend of General Chaplin's:
"Suspicion was somehow awakened and watch set; the General was
intercepted, arrested and imprisoned, and the attempt failed. The
General gave bail, Secretary Seward being on his bond for five
thousand dollars. While passing through Baltimore on his return
home he was rearrested and put into ... prison there, on a charge
of aiding slaves to escape from that state. The bonds required
were twenty thousand dollars.... It was arranged that William R.
Smith, a noble and generous-hearted Quaker, and George W. Clark
should traverse the State and appeal to the friends of humanity for
contributions to save the General from the fate we feared awaited
him, for if his case went to trial he would probably be sentenced
to fifteen years in their State Prison, which would no doubt amount
to a death sentence. William R. Smith and I went to work in live
earnest. An abolition merchant, Mr. Chittenden of New York, gave us
three thousand dollars, the always giving Gerrit Smith gave us five
thousand, other friends gave us two thousand, but we still lacked
ten thousand.... We were in great distress and anxiety over the
extreme situation when the generous Gerrit Smith voluntarily came
again to the rescue and advanced the other ten thousand dollars."
It was in this way, through the most open-handed generosity of his
friends, that Mr. Chaplin was enabled to go free after being in jail
only five months. Prudence dictated the sacrificing of the excessive
bail rather than the braving of fortune through a trial certain to
end in conviction.

  [523] Wilson, _History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in
  America_, Vol. II, pp. 80-82.

We have thus far considered the recorded efforts toward the
abduction of slaves made by six persons in response to the entreaty
of the slaves concerned or of some of their friends. It is
noteworthy that in the case of five of these persons their efforts,
first or last, were calamitous, and that all were white persons. We
come now to the case of Josiah Henson, exceptional in the series,
by reason of the uniform success of his endeavors, and because
of his race connections. Born and bred a slave, Henson at length
resolved to extricate himself and family from the abjectness of
their situation. "With a degree of prudence, courage and address,"
says Mrs. Harriet Beecher Stowe, "which can scarcely find a parallel
in any history, he managed with his wife and two children to escape
to Canada. Here he learned to read, and, by his superior talent
and capacity for management, laid the foundation for the fugitive
settlement of Dawn...."[524] The possession of the qualities
indicated in this characterization of Mr. Henson rendered him equal
to such emergencies as arose in his missions to the South in search
of friends and relatives of Canadian refugees.

  [524] _A Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin_, 1853, Boston edition of 1896,
  pp. 274, 275; also _Father Henson's Story of His Own Life_, 1858,
  chaps. xii, xiii.

Mr. Henson has left us the record of two journeys to the Southern
states, made at the instance of James Lightfoot, a refugee of Fort
Erie, Ontario.[525] Lightfoot had a number of relatives in slavery
near Maysville, Kentucky, and was ready to use the little property
he had accumulated during the short period of his freedom in
securing the liberation of his family. Beginning the journey alone,
Mr. Henson travelled on foot about four hundred miles through New
York, Pennsylvania and Ohio, to his destination. The fact that the
Lightfoots decided it to be unsafe to make their escape at this
time did not prevent their visitor from agreeing to come a year
later for them, nor did it prevent him from returning to Canada
with companions. He went nearly fifty miles into the interior of
Kentucky, where, as he learned, there was a large party eager to
set out for a land of freedom, but waiting until an experienced
leader should appear. In Bourbon County he found about thirty
fugitives collected from different states, and with these he started
northward. Mr. Henson gives his itinerary in the following words:
"We succeeded in crossing the Ohio River in safety, and arrived in
Cincinnati the third night after our departure. Here we procured
assistance; and, after stopping a short time to rest, we started for
Richmond, Indiana. This is a town which had been settled by Quakers,
and there we found friends indeed, who at once helped us on our way,
without loss of time; and after a difficult journey of two weeks
through the wilderness, reached Toledo, Ohio, ... and there we took
passage for Canada."[526] In the autumn of the year following this
abduction Mr. Henson again visited Kentucky. This time several of
the Lightfoots were willing to go North with him, and a Saturday
night after dark was chosen as the time for setting out. In spite
of some untoward happenings during the early part of the journey,
and of pursuit even to Lake Erie, the daring guide and his party
of four or five were put aboard a sailing-vessel and safely landed
on Canadian soil. "Words cannot describe," writes Mr. Henson, "the
feelings experienced by my companions as they neared the shore;
their bosoms were swelling with inexpressible joy as they mounted
the seats of the boat, ready eagerly to spring forward, that they
might touch the soil of the freeman. And when they reached the shore
they danced and wept for joy, and kissed the earth on which they
first stepped, no longer the _Slave_, but the _Free_." Mr. Henson
asserts, that "by similar means to those above narrated," he was
"instrumental in delivering one hundred and eighteen human beings"
from bondage.[527]

  [525] _Father Henson's Story of His Own Life_, chaps. xvi, xvii.

  [526] _Father Henson's Story of His Own Life_, pp. 149, 150.

  [527] _Ibid._, pp. 162, 163.

Important and interesting among the abductors are the few
individuals that we must call, for want of a better designation, the
devotees of abduction. We have already considered a person of this
type in the odd character, John Fairfield, the Virginian. There are
several other persons known to have been not less zealous than he
in their violation of what were held in the South to be legitimate
property rights. The names of these adventurous liberators are Rial
Cheadle, Alexander M. Ross, Elijah Anderson, John Mason and Harriet
Tubman.

Rial Cheadle appears to have been a familiar figure among the
abolitionists of southeastern Ohio. Mr. Thomas L. Gray, a reputable
citizen of Deavertown, Ohio, for many years engaged in underground
operations in Morgan County, vouches for the extended and aggressive
work of Cheadle, who frequently stopped at Mr. Gray's house for
rest and refreshment on his midnight trips to Zanesville and
stations farther on.[528] Cheadle seems to have been a man of
eccentricities, if not of actual aberration of mind; or his oddities
may have been assumed to prevent himself being taken seriously by
those he wanted to despoil. He is said to have lived in Windsor
Township, Morgan County, Ohio, on the site of the present village
of Stockport, and to have engaged in teaching and other occupations
for a time; finally, however, he devoted himself to the work of
the Underground Road. He indulged himself in old-time minstrelsy,
composing songs, which he sang for the entertainment of himself
and others, and he thereby increased, doubtless, the reputation
for harmless imbecility, which he seems to have borne among those
ignorant of his purpose. He paid occasional visits to Virginia. "As
a result it is said the slaves were frequently missing, but as his
arrangements were carefully made the object of his visit was usually
successful.... His habits were so well known to those who gave food
and shelter to the <DW64> that they were seldom unprepared for a
nocturnal visit from him.... After the Emancipation, he said he was
like Simeon of old, 'ready to depart.' He died in 1867."[529]

  [528] The _New Lexington_ (Ohio) _Tribune_, winter of 1885-1886.
  Some information in regard to Cheadle appears in a series of
  articles on the Underground Railroad contributed to this paper by
  Mr. Gray.

  [529] _History of Morgan County, Ohio_, 1886, published by
  Charles Robertson, M.D., article on the Underground Railroad.

A man differing greatly from Rial Cheadle in all respects, save
the intensity of his compassion for the slave, was the abductor
Alexander M. Ross. Born in 1832 in the Province of Ontario, Canada,
Mr. Ross sought, when a young man, to inform himself upon the
question of American slavery, not only from the teachings of some
of the foremost anti-slavery leaders of England and the United
States, but also from the recital of their experiences by a number
of fugitive slaves that had found an asylum in the province of his
birth. While he was engaged in making inquiries among the refugees,
_Uncle Tom's Cabin_ was published, and brought conviction to many
minds. "To me," writes Mr. Ross, "it was a command. A deep and
settled conviction impressed me that it was my duty to help the
oppressed to freedom.... My resolution was taken to devote all
my energies to let the oppressed go free."[530] In accordance
with this resolution young Ross left Canada in November, 1856. He
visited Gerrit Smith, at Peterboro, New York, who was ever ready
to encourage the liberation of the slave, and who went with him to
Boston, New York and Philadelphia, and westward into the states of
Ohio and Indiana. The purpose of these travels was, evidently, to
acquaint the intending liberator with the means to be employed by
him in his new work, and with the persons in connection with whom
he was to operate. Indeed, Mr. Ross distinctly says, in speaking
of these visits, "I was initiated into a knowledge of the relief
societies, and the methods adopted to circulate information among
the slaves of the South; the routes to be taken by the slaves, after
reaching the so-called free states; and the relief posts, where
shelter and aid for transportation could be obtained."[531] His
chief supporters, besides Gerrit Smith, were Theodore Parker and
Lewis Tappan.[532]

  [530] Dr. Alexander Milton Ross, _Recollections and Experiences
  of an Abolitionist; from 1855 to 1865_, 2d ed., 1876, p. 3. The
  first edition of this book was issued in 1867. For this and other
  works of Mr. Ross see _Prominent Men of Canada_, pp. 118, 119,
  120.

  [531] Ross, _Recollections and Experiences of an Abolitionist_,
  p. 5.

  [532] _Ibid._, p. 8.

During his expeditions Mr. Ross spread the knowledge of Canada among
the slaves in the neighborhood of a number of Southern cities,
such as Richmond, Virginia, Nashville, Tennessee, Columbus and
Vicksburg, Mississippi, Selma and Huntsville, Alabama, Augusta,
Georgia, and Charleston, South Carolina. His method of procedure
was fixed in its details only after his arrival upon the scene of
action; an ostensible interest or purpose was kept to the fore, and
the real business of spreading the gospel of escape was reserved
for clandestine conferences with slaves chosen on the score of
intelligence and trustworthiness. These persons were informed how
Canada could be best reached, and were told to spread with care
the information among their fellows. If any decided within a few
days that they would act upon the advice given them, explicit
instructions were repeated to them, and they were supplied
with compasses, knives, pistols, money and such provisions as
they needed. Thus equipped, they were started on their long
and dangerous journey. Occasionally, when circumstances seemed
to require it, Mr. Ross would personally guide the party to a
station of the Underground Road, or even accompany it to Canada;
otherwise he betook himself in haste to some new field of labor.
The unimpeachable character of Mr. Ross, and the early appearance
of the first edition of his _Recollections_ make his reminiscences
especially valuable and worth quoting. Mr. Ross began his work
at Richmond early in the year 1857. His narrative of his first
venture is as follows: "On my arrival in Richmond, I went to the
house of a gentleman to whom I had been directed, and who was known
at the North to be a friend of freedom. I spent a few weeks in
quietly determining upon the best plans to adopt. Having finally
decided upon my course, I invited a number of the most intelligent,
active and reliable slaves to meet me at the house of a 
preacher, on a Sunday evening. On the night appointed for this
meeting, forty-two slaves came to hear what prospect there was
for an escape from bondage.... I explained to them my ... purpose
in visiting the slave states, the various routes from Virginia to
Ohio and Pennsylvania, and the names of friends in border towns who
would help them on to Canada. I requested them to circulate this
information discreetly among all upon whom they could rely.... I
requested as many as were ready to accept my offer, to come to the
same house on the following Sunday evening, prepared to take the
'Underground Railroad' to Canada.

[Illustration: DR. ALEXANDER M. ROSS,

AN ABDUCTOR OF SLAVES.

(His distinguished services as a naturalist are attested by his
medals, bestowed by European princes.)]

[Illustration: HARRIET TUBMAN,

"THE MOSES OF HER PEOPLE."

Herself a fugitive, she abducted more than 300 slaves, and also
served as a scout and nurse for the Union forces.]

"On the evening appointed nine stout, intelligent young men declared
their determination to gain their freedom, or die in the attempt.
To each I gave a few dollars in money, a pocket compass, knife,
pistol, and as much cold meat and bread as each could carry with
ease. I again explained to them the route.... I never met more apt
students than these poor fellows.... They were to travel only by
night, resting in some secure spot during the day. Their route was
to be through Pennsylvania, to Erie on Lake Erie, and from thence to
Canada.... I learned, many months after, that they all had arrived
safely in Canada. (In 1863 I enlisted three of these brave fellows
in a  regiment in Philadelphia, for service in the war that
gave freedom to their race.)"[533]

  [533] Ross, _Recollections and Experiences of an Abolitionist_,
  pp. 10, 11, 12.

Mr. Ross was a naturalist, and his tastes in this direction
furnished him many good pretexts for excursions. A journey into the
far South was made in the guise of an ornithologist. Describing his
trip to the cotton states Mr. Ross says: "Finally my preparations
were completed, and, supplied with a shot-gun and materials for
preserving bird-skins, I began my journey into the interior of the
country.... Soon after my arrival at Vicksburg I was busily engaged
in collecting ornithological specimens. I made frequent visits to
the surrounding plantations, seizing every favorable opportunity to
converse with the more intelligent slaves. Many of these <DW64>s
had heard of Canada from the <DW64>s brought from Virginia and the
border slave states; but the impression they had was, that Canada
being so far away, it would be useless to try and reach it. On
these excursions I was usually accompanied by one or two smart,
intelligent slaves, to whom I felt I could trust the secret of my
visit. In this way I succeeded in circulating a knowledge of Canada,
and the best means of reaching that country, to all the plantations
for many miles around Vicksburg.... I continued my labors in the
vicinity of Vicksburg for several weeks and then went to Selma,
Alabama."[534]

  [534] _Ibid._, pp. 37, 38, 39.

"In the ways described in these selections Mr. Ross induced
companies of slaves to exchange bondage for freedom. How many he
thus liberated we have, of course, no means of knowing. The risks
he ran were such as to put his life in danger almost constantly.
Betrayal would have ended, probably, in a lynching; and the
disappearance simultaneously of a band of fugitives and the unknown
naturalist was a coincidence not only sure to be noticed, but also
widely published, thus increasing the dangers many fold. It is
unnecessary to recount the occasions upon which the scientist found
himself in danger of falling a victim to his zeal in befriending
slaves. Suffice it to say, his adventures all had a fortunate
termination. Mr. Ross is best known by his numerous works relating
to the flora and fauna of Canada, for which he received recognition
among learned men, and decoration at the hands of European
princes."[535]

  [535] Mr. Richard J. Hinton in his book entitled _John Brown and
  His Men_, p. 171, while writing of Captain Brown's convention
  at Chatham, Canada West, mentions Mr. Ross in the following
  words: "Dr. Alexander M. Ross of Toronto, Canada, physician and
  ornithologist, who is still living, honored by all who know
  him, then a young (white) man who devoted himself for years to
  aiding the American slave, was a frequent visitor to this section
  (Chatham). He was a faithful friend of John Brown, efficient as
  an ally, seeking to serve under all conditions of need and peril."

  More or less extended notices of Dr. Ross and his work have
  appeared during the past few years; for example, in the _Toronto
  Globe_, Dec. 3 and 10, 1892; in the _Canadian Magazine of
  Politics, Science, Art and Literature_, May, 1896; and in the
  _Chicago Daily Inter-Ocean_, March 18, 1896.

Elijah Anderson, a <DW64>, has been described by Mr. Rush R. Sloane,
an underground veteran of northwestern Ohio, as the "general
superintendent" of the underground system in this section of Ohio.
Mr. Anderson's work began before the enactment of the Fugitive Slave
Law of 1850, and continued until the time of his incarceration in
the state prison at Frankfort, Kentucky, where he died in 1857.
During this period his activity must have been unceasing, for he
is quoted as having said in 1855 that he had conducted in all more
than a thousand fugitives from slavery to freedom, having brought
eight hundred away after the passage of the act of 1850. Not all of
these persons were piloted to Sandusky, although that city was the
point to which Anderson usually conveyed his passengers. After the
opening of the Cleveland and Cincinnati Railroad he took many to
Cleveland.[536]

  [536] The _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 44.

The last two of the devotees of abduction to be considered in this
chapter are persons that were themselves fugitive slaves, John Mason
and Harriet Tubman.

Our only source of information about John Mason is an account
printed in 1860, by the Rev. W. M. Mitchell, a  missionary
sent to minister to the refugees of Toronto by the American Baptist
Free Mission Society.[537] This may be accepted as a credible source.
The author has printed in the little book in which the account
appears testimonials that serve to identify him, but better
than these are the references found in the body of the book to
underground matters pertaining to southern Ohio that have been made
familiar through other channels of information. The statements
of Mr. Mitchell, thus supported, lend the color of probability
to other statements of his not corroborated by any information
now to be obtained, especially since these are in keeping with
known manifestations of liberating zeal. We may therefore use the
narrative relating to John Mason with a certain degree of assurance
as to its accuracy.

  [537] See p. 3, Chapter I.

While engaged in Underground Railroad operations in Ohio Mr.
Mitchell became acquainted with John Mason, a fugitive slave from
Kentucky. He had obtained his liberty but was not content to
see his fellows go without theirs, and "was willing," wrote Mr.
Mitchell, "to risk the forfeiture of his own freedom, that he might,
peradventure, secure the liberty of some. He commenced the perilous
business of going into the State from whence he had escaped and
especially into his old neighborhood, decoying off his brethren
to Canada.... This slave brought to my house in nineteen months
265 human beings whom he had been instrumental in redeeming from
slavery; all of whom I had the privilege of forwarding to Canada by
the Underground Railroad.... He kept no record as to the number he
had assisted in this way. I have only been able, from conversations
with him on the subject, to ascertain about 1,300, whom he delivered
to abolitionists to be forwarded to Canada. Poor man! he was finally
captured and sold. He had been towards the interior of Kentucky,
about fifty miles; it was while returning with four slaves that he
was captured.... Daylight came on them, they concealed themselves
under stacks of corn, which served them for food, as well as
protection from the weather and passers-by.... Late in the afternoon
of that day, in the distance was heard the baying of <DW64>-hounds
on their track; escape was impossible.... When the four slaves saw
their masters they said, 'J. M., we can't fight.' He endeavored
to rally their courage ... but to no purpose.... Their leader
resisted, but both his arms were broken, and his body otherwise
abused.... Though he had changed his name, as most slaves do on
running away, he told his master's name and to him he was delivered.
He was eventually sold and was taken to New Orleans.... Yet in one
year, five months, and twenty days, I received a letter from this
man, John Mason, from Hamilton, Canada West. Let a man walk abroad
on Freedom's Sunny Plains, and having once drunk of its celestial
'stream whereof maketh glad the city of our God,' afterward reduce
this man to slavery, it is next to an impossibility to retain him in
slavery."[538]

  [538] Mitchell, _The Underground Railroad_, p. 20 _et seq._

Harriet Tubman, like John Mason, did not reckon the value of her own
liberty in comparison with the liberty of others who had not tasted
its sweets. Like him, she saw in the oppression of her race the
sufferings of the enslaved Israelites, and was not slow to demand
that the Pharaoh of the South should let her people go. She was
known to many of the anti-slavery leaders of her generation; her
personality and her power were such that none of them ever forgot
the high virtues of this simple black woman. Governor William H.
Seward, of New York, wrote of her: "I have known Harriet long,
and a nobler, higher spirit or a truer, seldom dwells in human
form."[539] Gerrit Smith declared: "I am convinced that she is not
only truthful, but that she has a rare discernment, and a deep and
sublime philanthropy."[540] John Brown introduced her to Wendell
Phillips in Boston, saying, "I bring you one of the best and bravest
persons on this continent--General Tubman as we call her."[541]
Frederick Douglass testified: "Excepting John Brown, of sacred
memory, I know of no one who has willingly encountered more perils
and hardships to serve our enslaved people than you have. Much that
you have done would seem improbable to those who do not know you as
I know you...."[542] Mr. F. B. Sanborn said: "She has often been in
Concord, where she resided at the houses of Emerson, Alcott, the
Whitneys, the Brooks family, Mrs. Horace Mann, and other well-known
persons. They all admired and respected her, and nobody doubted the
reality of her adventures...."[543] The Rev. S. J. May knew Harriet
personally, and speaks with admiration, not only of the work she did
in emancipating numbers of her own people, but also of the important
services she rendered the nation during the Civil War both as a
nurse and as "the leader of soldiers in scouting-parties and raids.
She seemed to know no fear and scarcely ever fatigue. They called
her their Moses."[544]

  [539] Sarah H. Bradford, _Harriet the Moses of Her People_, p.
  76. See also Appendix, p. 137. These testimonials were given
  in 1868 and were printed in connection with a short biography
  of Harriet in the year mentioned. The first edition of this
  biography has not been accessible to me, but it is mentioned by
  the Rev. Samuel J. May in his _Recollections of the Anti-Slavery
  Conflict_, published the following year. The second edition of
  the book appeared in 1886.

  [540] _Ibid._, p. 139.

  [541] Hinton, _John Brown and His Men_, p. 173.

  [542] Mrs. Bradford, _Harriet the Moses of Her People_, p. 135.

  [543] _Ibid._, pp. 136, 137.

  [544] _Ibid._, p. 406.

The name, Moses, was that by which this woman was commonly known.
She earned it by the qualities of leadership displayed in conducting
bands of slaves through devious ways and manifold perils out of
their "land of Egypt." She first learned what liberty was for
herself about the year 1849. She made her way from Maryland, her
home as a slave, to Philadelphia, and there by industry gathered
together a sum of money with which to begin her humane and
self-imposed labors. In December, 1850, she went to Baltimore and
abducted her sister and two children. A few months later she brought
away another company of three persons, one of whom was her brother.
From this time on till the outbreak of the War of the Rebellion her
excursions were frequent. She is said to have accomplished nineteen
such trips, and emancipated over three hundred slaves.[545] As may
be surmised, she had encouragement in her undertakings; but her main
dependence was upon her own efforts. All her wages were laid aside
for the purpose of emancipating her people. Whenever she had secured
a sufficient sum, she would disappear from her Northern home, work
her passage South, and meet the band of expectant slaves, whom she
had forewarned of her coming in some mysterious way.

  [545] James Freeman Clarke, _Anti-Slavery Days_, pp. 81, 82. Also
  M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 62.

Her sagacity was one of her most marked traits; it was displayed
constantly in her management of her little caravans. Thus she would
take the precaution to start with her pilgrims on Saturday night
so that they could be well along on their journey before they were
advertised. Posters giving descriptions of the runaways and offering
a considerable reward for their arrest were a common means of making
public the loss of slave property. Harriet often paid a <DW64> to
follow the man who posted the descriptions of her companions and
tear them down. When there were babies in the party she sometimes
drugged them with paregoric and had them carried in baskets. She
knew where friends could be found that would give shelter to her
weary freedmen. If at any stage of the journey she were compelled
to leave her companions and forage for supplies she would disclose
herself on her return through the strains of a favorite song:--

    Dark and thorny is de pathway,
      Where de pilgrim makes his ways;
    But beyond dis vale of sorrow,
      Lie de fields of endless days.

Sometimes when hard pressed by pursuers she would take a train
southward with her companions; she knew that no one would suspect
fugitives travelling in that direction. Harriet was a well-known
visitor at the offices of the anti-slavery societies in Philadelphia
and New York, and at first she seems to have been content if her
protégés arrived safely among friends in either of these cities;
but after she comprehended the Fugitive Slave Law she preferred
to accompany them all the way to Canada. "I wouldn't," she said,
"trust Uncle Sam wid my people no longer."[546] She knew the
need of discipline in effecting her rough, overland marches, and
she therefore required strict obedience of her followers. The
discouragement of an individual could not be permitted to endanger
the liberty, and safety of the whole party; accordingly she
sometimes strengthened the fainting heart by threatening to use her
revolver, and declaring, "Dead <DW65>s tell no tales, you go on or
die." She was not less lenient with herself. The safety of her
companions was her chief concern; she would not allow her labors to
be lightened by any course likely to increase the chances of their
discovery. On one occasion, while leading a company, she experienced
a feeling that danger was near; unhesitatingly she decided to ford a
river near by, because she must do so to be safe. Her followers were
afraid to cross, but Harriet, despite the severity of the weather
(the month was March), and her ignorance of the depth of the stream,
walked resolutely into the water and led the way to the opposite
shore. It was found that officers were lying in wait for the party
on the route first intended.

  [546] Mrs. Bradford, _Harriet the Moses of Her People_, p. 39.

Like many of her race Harriet was a thorough-going mystic. The
Quaker, Thomas Garrett, said of her: "... I never met with any
person, of any color, who had more confidence in the voice of God,
as spoken to her soul. She has frequently told me that she talked
with God, and he talked with her, every day of her life, and she
has declared to me that she felt no more fear of being arrested
by her former master, or any other person, when in his immediate
neighborhood, than she did in the State of New York, or Canada, for
she said she never ventured only where God sent her. Her faith in
the Supreme Power truly was great."[547] This faith never deserted
her in her times of peril. She explained her many deliverances as
Harriet Beecher Stowe accounted for the power and effect of _Uncle
Tom's Cabin_. She insisted it was all God's doing. "Jes so long as
he wanted to use me," said Mrs. Tubman, "he would take keer of me,
an' when he didn't want me no longer, I was ready to go. I always
tole him, I'm gwine to hole stiddy on to you, an' you've got to see
me trou."[548]

  [547] Mrs. Bradford, _Harriet the Moses of Her People_, pp. 83,
  84.

  [548] _Ibid._, p. 61.

In 1857, Mrs. Tubman made what has been called her most venturesome
journey. She had brought several of her brothers and sisters from
slavery, but had not hit upon a method to release her aged parents.
The chief difficulty lay in the fact that they were unable to walk
long distances. At length she devised a plan and carried it through.
A homemade conveyance was patched together, and an old horse
brought into use. Mr. Garrett describes the vehicle as consisting of
a pair of old chaise-wheels, with a board on the axle to sit on and
another board swinging by ropes from the axle on which to rest their
feet. This rude contrivance Harriet used in conveying her parents to
the railroad, where they were put aboard the cars for Wilmington;
and she followed them in her novel vehicle. At Wilmington, Friend
Garrett was sought out by the bold abductor, and he furnished her
with money to take all of them to Canada. He afterwards sold their
horse and sent them the money. Harriet and her family did not long
remain in Canada; Auburn, New York, was deemed a preferable place;
and here a small property was bought on easy terms of Governor
Seward, to provide a home for the enfranchised mother and father.

Before Harriet had finished paying for her bit of real estate, the
Civil War broke out. Governor Andrew of Massachusetts, appreciating
the sagacity, bravery and kindliness of the woman, soon summoned her
to go into the South to serve as a scout, and when necessary as a
hospital nurse. That her services were valuable was the testimony
of officers under whom she served; thus General Rufus Saxton wrote
in March, 1868: "I can bear witness to the value of her services in
South Carolina and Florida. She was employed in the hospitals and as
a spy. She made many a raid inside the enemies' lines, displaying
remarkable courage, zeal and fidelity."[549]

  [549] Mrs. Bradford, _Harriet the Moses of Her People_, Appendix,
  p. 142.

At the conclusion of the great struggle Harriet returned to Auburn,
where she has lived ever since. Her devotion to her people has never
ceased. Although she is very poor and is subject to the infirmities
of old age, infirmities increased in her case by the effects of ill
treatment received in slavery, she has managed to transform her
house into a hospital, where she provides and cares for some of the
helpless and deserving of her own race.[550]

  [550] Lillie B. C. Wyman, in the _New England Magazine_, March,
  1876, pp. 117, 118. Conversation with Harriet Tubman, Cambridge,
  Mass., April 8, 1897.




CHAPTER VII

LIFE OF THE  REFUGEES IN CANADA


The passengers of the Underground Railroad had but one real refuge,
one region alone within whose bounds they could know they were
safe from reënslavement; that region was Canada. The position of
Canada on the slavery question was peculiar, for the imperial act
abolishing slavery throughout the colonies of England was not
passed until 1833; and, legally, if not actually, slavery existed
in Canada until that year. The importation of slaves into this
northern country had been tolerated by the French, and later, under
an act passed in 1790, had been encouraged by the English. It is a
singular fact that while this measure was in force slaves escaped
from their Canadian masters to the United States, where they found
freedom.[551] Before the separation of the Upper and Lower Provinces
in 1791, slavery had spread westward into Upper Canada, and a few
hundred <DW64>s and some Pawnee Indians were to be found in bondage
through the small scattered settlements of the Niagara, Home and
Western districts.

  [551] "A case of this kind," says Dr. S. G. Howe, "was related
  to us by Mrs. Amy Martin. She says: "My father's name was James
  Ford.... He ... would be over one hundred years old, if he were
  now living.... He was held here (in Canada) by the Indians as a
  slave, and sold, I think he said, to a British officer, who was a
  very cruel master, and he escaped from him, and came to Ohio, ...
  to Cleveland, I believe, first, and made his way from there to
  Erie (Pa.), where he settled.... When we were in Erie, we moved a
  little way out of the village, and our house was ... a station of
  the U. G. R. R." _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, by
  S. G. Howe, 1864, pp. 8, 9.

The Province of Upper Canada took the initiative in the restriction
of slavery. In the year 1793, in which Congress provided for the
rendition by the Northern states of fugitives from labor, the
first parliament of Upper Canada enacted a law against the
importation of slaves, and incorporated in it a clause to the
effect that children of slaves then held were to become free at
the age of twenty-five years.[552] Nevertheless, judicial rather
than legislative action terminated slavery in Lower Canada, for a
series of three fugitive slave cases occurred between the first
day of February, 1798, and the last day of February, 1800. The
third of these suits, known as the Robin case, was tried before the
full Court of King's Bench, and the court ordered the discharge
of the fugitive from his confinement. Perhaps the correctness of
the decisions rendered in these cases may be questioned; but it is
noteworthy that the provincial legislature would not cross them, and
it may therefore be asserted that slavery really ceased in Lower
Canada after the decision of the Robin case, February 18, 1800.[553]

  [552] Act of 30th Geo. III.

  [553] See the article entitled "Slavery in Canada," by J. C.
  Hamilton, LL.B., in the _Magazine of American History_, Vol. XXV,
  pp. 233-236.

[Illustration: A GROUP OF REFUGEE SETTLERS, OF WINDSOR, ONTARIO.

MRS. ANNE MARY JANE HUNT, MANSFIELD SMITH, MRS. LUCINDA SEYMOUR,
HENRY STEVENSON, BUSH JOHNSON.

(From a recent photograph.)]

The seaboard provinces were but little infected by slavery. Nova
Scotia, to which probably more than to any other of these, refugees
from Southern bondage fled, had by reason of natural causes, lost
nearly, if not quite all traces of slavery by the beginning of
our century. The experience of the eighteenth century had been
sufficient to reform public opinion in Canada on the question
of slavery, and to show that the climate of the provinces was a
permanent barrier to the profitable employment of slave labor.

During the period in which Canada was thus freeing herself from the
last vestiges of the evil, slaves who had escaped from Southern
masters were beginning to appeal for protection to anti-slavery
people in the Northern states.[554] The arrests of refugees from
bondage, and the cases of kidnapping of free <DW64>s, which were
not infrequent in the North, strengthened the appeals of the hunted
suppliants. Under these circumstances, it was natural that there
should have arisen early in the present century the beginnings of a
movement on the northern border of the United States for the purpose
of helping fugitives to Canadian soil.[555]

  [554] M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 20.

  [555] _Ibid._, p. 60; R. C. Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p.
  26.

Upon the questions how and when this system arose, we have both
unofficial and official testimony. Dr. Samuel G. Howe learned upon
careful investigation, in 1863, that the early abolition of slavery
in Canada did not affect slavery in the United States for several
years. "Now and then a slave was intelligent and bold enough," he
states, "to cross the vast forest between the Ohio and the Lakes,
and find a refuge beyond them. Such cases were at first very rare,
and knowledge of them was confined to few; but they increased early
in this century; and the rumor gradually spread among the slaves
of the Southern states, that there was, far away under the north
star, a land where the flag of the Union did not float; where the
law declared all men free and equal; where the people respected
the law, and the government, if need be, enforced it.... Some, not
content with personal freedom and happiness, went secretly back to
their old homes, and brought away their wives and children at much
peril and cost. The rumor widened; the fugitives so increased, that
a secret pathway, since called the Underground Railroad, was soon
formed, which ran by the huts of the blacks in the slave states,
and the houses of good Samaritans in the free states.... Hundreds
trod this path every year, but they did not attract much public
notice."[556] Before the year 1817 it is said that a single little
group of abolitionists in southern Ohio had forwarded to Canada by
this secret path more than a thousand fugitive slaves.[557] The
truth of this account is confirmed by the diplomatic negotiations
of 1826 relating to this subject. Mr. Clay, then Secretary of
State, declared the escape of slaves to British territory to be
a "growing evil"; and in 1828 he again described it as still
"growing," and added that it was well calculated to disturb the
peaceful relations existing between the United States and the
adjacent British provinces. England, however, steadfastly refused
to accept Mr. Clay's proposed stipulation for extradition, on the
ground that the British government could not, "with respect to the
British possessions where slavery is not admitted, depart from the
principle recognized by the British courts that every man is free
who reaches British ground."[558]

  [556] S. G. Howe, _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp.
  11, 12.

  [557] William Birney, _James G. Birney and His Times_, p. 435.

  [558] Mr. Gallatin to Mr. Clay, Sept. 26, 1827, _Niles'
  Register_, p. 290.

During the decade between 1828 and 1838 many persons throughout the
Northern states, as far west as Iowa, had coöperated in forming
new lines of Underground Railroad with termini at various points
along the Canadian frontier. A resolution submitted to Congress in
December, 1838, was aimed at these persons, by calling for a bill
providing for the punishment, in the courts of the United States,
of all persons guilty of aiding fugitive slaves to escape, or of
enticing them from their owners.[559] Though this resolution came to
nought, the need of it may have been demonstrated to the minds of
Southern men by the fact that several companies of runaway slaves
were organized, and took part in the Patriot War of this year in
defence of Canadian territory against the attack of two or three
hundred armed men from the State of New York.[560]

  [559] _Congressional Globe_, Twenty-fifth Congress, Third
  Session, p. 34.

  [560] The Patriot War defeated a foolhardy attempt to induce
  the Province of Upper Canada to proclaim its independence. The
  refugees were by no means willing to see a movement begun, the
  success of which might "break the only arm interposed for their
  security." _J. W. Loguen as a Slave and as a Freeman_, p. 344.

Each succeeding year witnessed the influx into Canada of a larger
number of  emigrants from the South. At length, in 1850,
the Fugitive Slave Law called forth such opposition in the North
that the Underground Railroad became more efficient than ever. The
secretary of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society wrote in 1851
that, "notwithstanding the stringent provisions of the Fugitive
Bill, and the confidence which was felt in it as a certain cure
for escape, we are happy to know that the evasion of slaves was
never greater than at this moment. All abolitionists, at any of
the prominent points of the country, know that applications for
assistance were never more frequent."[561] This statement is
substantiated by the testimony of many persons who did underground
service in the North.

  [561] _Nineteenth Annual Report of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery
  Society_, January, 1851, p. 67.

From the other end of the line, the Canadian terminus, we have
abundant evidence of the lively traffic both before and after the
new act. Besides the later investigations of Dr. Howe we have the
statement of a contemporary, still living. Anthony Bingey, of
Windsor, Ontario, aided the Rev. Hiram Wilson and the Rev. Isaac
J. Rice, two graduates of Hamilton College, in the conduct of a
mission for refugees. Mr. Bingey first settled at Amherstburg, at
the mouth of the Detroit River, where he kept a receiving station
for fugitives, was in an excellent place for observation, and was
allied with trained men, who gave themselves, in the missionary
spirit, to the cause of the fugitive slave in Canada. When Mr.
Bingey first went to Amherstburg, in 1845, it was a rare occurrence
to see as many as fifteen fugitives arrive in a single company. In
the course of time runaways began to disembark from the ferries and
lake boats in larger numbers, a day's tale often running as high
as thirty. Through the period of the Mexican War, and down to the
beginning of Fillmore's administration, many of the fugitives from
the South had settled in the States, but after 1850 many, fearing
recapture, journeyed in haste to Canada, greatly increasing the
number daily arriving there.[562] That there was no tendency towards
a decline in the movement is suggested by two items appearing in the
_Independent_ during the year 1855. According to the first of these
(quoted from the _Intelligencer_ of St. Louis, Missouri): "The evil
(of running off slaves) has got to be an immense one, and is daily
becoming more aggravated. It threatens to subvert the institution
of slavery in this state entirely, and unless effectually checked
it will certainly do so. There is no doubt that ten slaves are now
stolen from Missouri to every one that was 'spirited' off before the
Douglas bill."[563] It is significant that the ardent abolitionists
of Iowa and northwestern Illinois were vigorously engaged in
Underground Railroad work at this time. The other item declared
that the number of fugitives transported by the "Ohio Underground
Line" was twenty-five per cent greater than in any previous year;
"indeed, many masters have brought their hands from the Kanawha
(West Virginia), not being willing to risk them there."[564]

  [562] Interview with Elder Anthony Bingey, Windsor, Ontario, July
  31, 1895. On this point Dr. S. G. Howe says: "Of course it [the
  Fugitive Slave Law] gave great increase to the emigration,
  and free born blacks fled with the slaves from a land in which
  their birthright of freedom was no longer secure." _Refugees from
  Slavery in Canada West_, p. 15.

  [563] _Independent_, Jan. 18, 1855.

  [564] _Independent_, April 6, 1855; see also _Von Holst's
  Constitutional and Political History of the United States_, Vol.
  V, p. 63, note.

That portion of Canada most easily reached by fugitives was the
lake-bound region lying between New York on the east and Michigan
on the west, and presenting a long and inviting coast-line to
northern Ohio, northwestern Pennsylvania and western New York. Lower
Canada was often reached through the New England states and by
way of the coast-line routes. The fugitive slaves entering Canada
were principally from the border slave states, Missouri, Kentucky,
Virginia, Maryland and Delaware. Some, however, favored by rare good
fortune and possessed of more than ordinary sagacity or aided by
some venturesome friend, had made their way from the far South, from
the Carolinas, Alabama, Georgia and Tennessee, even from Louisiana.

The fugitives who reached Canada do not seem to have been notable;
on the whole they were a representative body of the slave-class. An
observer on a Southern plantation could hardly have selected out
would-be fugitives, as being superior to their fellows. If he had
questioned them all about their desire for liberty he would have
found habitual runaways agreeing with their fellows that they were
content with their present lot. The average slave was shrewd enough
under ordinary circumstances to tell what he thought least likely
to arouse suspicion. That such discretion did not signify lack of
desire for freedom is shown not only by the numerous escapes, but
by the narratives of fugitives. Said Leonard Harrod: "Many a time
my master has told me things to try me; among others he said he
thought of moving up to Cincinnati, and asked me if I did not want
to go. I would tell him, 'No! I don't want to go to none of your
free countries!' Then he'd laugh, but I did want to come--surely
I did. A <DW52> man tells the truth here,--there he is afraid
to."[565] "I have known slaves to be hungry," said David West, "but
when their master asked them if they had enough, they would through
fear say, 'Yes.' So if asked if they wish to be free, they will say
'No.' I knew a case where there was a division of between fifty
and sixty slaves among heirs, one of whom intended to set free her
part. So wishing to consult them she asked of such and such ones
if they would like to be free, and they all said 'No,' for if they
had said yes, and had then fallen to the other heirs, they would be
sold,--and so they said, 'No,' against their own consciences."[566]
"From the time I was a little boy it always ground my feelings to
know that I had to work for another man," said Edward Walker, of
Windsor, Ontario.[567] When asked to help hunt two slave-women,
Henry Stevenson, a slave in Odrain County, Missouri, at first
declined, knowing that his efforts to find them would bring upon
him the wrath of the other slaves. "I wouldn't go," he related;
"the  folks would 'a' killed me." In his refusal he was
supported by a white man, who had the wisdom to observe that "'Twas
a bad policy to send a <DW65> to hunt a <DW65>." Nevertheless,
Stevenson's trustworthiness had been so often tested that he was
taken along to help prosecute the search, and even accompanied the
party of pursuers to Chicago, where he disappeared by the aid of
abolitionists and was afterward heard of in Windsor, Ontario.[568]
Elder Anthony Bingey, of the same place, said, "I never saw the day
since I knew anything that I didn't want to be free. Both Bucknel
and Taylor [his successive masters] liked to see their slaves happy
and well treated, but I always wanted to be free."[569]

  [565] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, 1856, p. 340.

  [566] _Ibid._, p. 91.

  [567] _Detroit Sunday News Tribune_, quoted by the _Louisville
  Journal_, Aug. 12, 1894.

  [568] Conversation with Henry Stevenson, Windsor, Ont., July,
  1895.

  [569] Conversation with Elder Anthony Bingey, Windsor, Ont., July
  31, 1895.

The manifestations of delight by fugitives when landed on the
Canada shore is another part of the evidence of the sincerity of
their aspirations for freedom. Captain Chapman, the commander of a
vessel on Lake Erie in 1860, was requested by two acquaintances at
Cleveland to put ashore on the Canada side two persons, who were,
of course, fugitives, and he gives the following account of the
landing: "While they were on my vessel I felt little interest in
them, and had no idea that the love of liberty as a part of man's
nature was in the least possible degree felt or understood by them.
Before entering Buffalo harbor, I ran in near the Canada shore,
manned a boat, and landed them on the beach.... They said, 'Is
this Canada?' I said, 'Yes, there are no slaves in this country';
then I witnessed a scene I shall never forget. They seemed to be
transformed; a new light shone in their eyes, their tongues were
loosed, they laughed and cried, prayed and sang praises, fell upon
the ground and kissed it, hugged and kissed each other, crying,
'Bress de Lord! Oh! I'se free before I die!'"[570]

  [570] E. M. Pettit, _Sketches in the History of the Underground
  Railroad_, pp. 66, 67. See also Chapter I, p. 14, and Chapter VI,
  p. 178.

The state of ignorance in which the slave population of the South
was largely kept must be regarded as the admission by the master
class that their slaves were likely to seize the boon of freedom,
unless denied the encouragement towards self-emancipation that
knowledge would surely afford. The fables about Canada brought to
the North by runaways well illustrate both the ignorance of the
slave and the apprehensions of his owner. William Johnson, who fled
from Hopkins County, Virginia, had been told that the Detroit River
was over three thousand miles wide, and a ship starting out in the
night would find herself in the morning "right whar she started
from." In the light of his later experience Johnson says, "We knowed
jess what dey tole us and no more."[571] Deacon Allen Sidney,
an engineer on his master's boat, which touched at Cincinnati,
had a poor opinion of Canada because he had heard that "nothin'
but black-eyed peas could be raised there."[572] John Evans, who
travelled through the Northern country, and even in Canada, with
his Kentucky master, was insured against the temptation to seize
his liberty by the warning to let no "British <DW65>" get near him
lest he should be slain "jess like on de battle-field."[573] John
Reed heard the white people in Memphis, Tennessee, talk much of
Canada, but he adds "they'd put some extract onto it to keep us from
comin'."[574]

  [571] Conversation with William Johnson, at Windsor, Ont., July
  31, 1895.

  [572] Conversation with Allen Sidney, Windsor, Ont.

  [573] Conversation with John Evans, Windsor, Ont., Aug. 2, 1895.

  [574] Conversation with John Reed, Windsor, Ont.

Although many disparaging things said about Canada at the South were
without the shadow of verity, there were still hardships enough to
be met by those who settled there. The provinces constituted for
them a strange country. Its climate, raw, open and variable, and
at certain periods of the year severe, increased the sufferings of
a people already destitute. The condition in which many of them
arrived beyond the borders, especially those who migrated before
the forties, is vividly told by J. W. Loguen in his account of his
first arrival at Hamilton, Canada West, in 1835. Writing to his
friend, Frederick Douglass, under date of May 8, 1856, he says:
"Twenty-one years ago--I stood on this spot, penniless, ragged,
lonely, homeless, helpless, hungry and forlorn.... Hamilton was
a cold wilderness for the fugitive when I came there."[575] The
experience of Loguen corroborates what Josiah Henson said of the
general condition of the fugitives as he saw them in 1830: "At that
time they were scattered in all directions and for the most part
miserably poor, subsisting not unfrequently on the roots and herbs
of the fields.... In 1830 there were no schools among them and no
churches, only occasionally preaching."[576]

  [575] _The Rev. J. W. Loguen as a Slave and as a Freeman_, 1859,
  told by himself; chap. xxiv, pp. 338, 340.

  [576] _Father Henson's Story of His Own Life_, 1858, p. 209.

The whole previous experience of these pioneers was a block to their
making a vigorous initiative in their own behalf. Extreme poverty,
ignorance and subjection were their inheritance. Their new start in
life was made with a wretched prospect, and it would be difficult
to imagine a free lot more discouraging and hopeless. Yet it was
brightened much by the compassionate interest of the Canadian
people, who were so tolerant as to admit them to a share in the
equal rights that could at that time be found in America only in the
territory of a monarchical government. By the year 1838 the fugitive
host of Canada West began to profit by organized efforts in its
behalf. A mission of Upper Canada was established. It was described
as including "the <DW52> people who have emigrated from the United
States and settled in various parts of Upper Canada to enjoy the
inalienable rights of freedom."[577] During the winter of 1838-1839,
this enterprise conducted four schools, while the Rev. Hiram Wilson,
who seems to have been acting under other auspices, was supervising
during the same year a number of other schools in the province.[578]

  [577] _Mission of Upper Canada_, Vol. I, No. 17, Wed., July 31,
  1839.

  [578] _Ibid._

From this time on much was done in Canada to help the ransomed slave
meet his new conditions. It was not long before the benevolent
interest of friends from the Northern states followed the refugees
to their very settlements as it had succored them on their way
through the free states. In 1844 Levi Coffin and William Beard made
a tour of inspection in Canada West. This was the first of several
trips made by these two Quakers "to look after the welfare of the
fugitives"[579] in that region. The Rev. Samuel J. May made two such
trips, "the first time to Toronto and its neighborhood, the second
time to that part of Canada which lies between Lake Erie and Lake
Huron."[580] John Brown did not fail to keep himself informed by
personal visits how the fugitives were faring there.[581] Men less
prominent but not less interested among underground magnates were
drawn to see how their former protégés were prospering; such were
Abram Allen, a Hicksite Friend of Clinton County, Ohio, and Reuben
Goens, a South Carolinian by birth, who became an enthusiastic
coworker with the Quakers at Fountain City, Indiana, in aiding
slaves to the Dominion.

  [579] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, p. 253.

  [580] May, _Recollections of the Anti-Slavery Conflict_, p. 303.

  [581] Hinton, _John Brown and His Men_, p. 175.

These efforts were helpful to multitudes of <DW64>s. Some insight
into the work that was being accomplished is afforded by Levi
Coffin, who gives a valuable account of his Canadian trip,
September to November, 1844. Among the first places he visited was
Amherstburg, more commonly known at that time by the name of Fort
Malden: "While at this place, we made our headquarters at Isaac
J. Rice's missionary buildings, where he had a large school for
<DW52> children. He had labored here among the <DW52> people,
mostly fugitives, for six years. He was a devoted, self-denying
worker, had received very little pecuniary help, and had suffered
many privations. He was well situated in Ohio, as pastor of a
Presbyterian church, and had fine prospects before him, but believed
that the Lord called him to this field of missionary labor among
the fugitive slaves who came here by hundreds and by thousands,
poor, destitute, ignorant, suffering from all the evil influences
of slavery. We entered into deep sympathy with him in his labors,
realizing the great need there was here for just such an institution
as he had established. He had sheltered at this missionary home many
hundreds of fugitives till other homes for them could be found.
This was the great landing-point, the principal terminus of the
Underground Railroad of the West."[582] Later Mr. Coffin and his
companion "visited the institution under the care of Hiram Wilson,
called the British and American Manual Labor Institute for <DW52>
children."[583] "The school was then," he reports, "in a prosperous
condition." Mr. Coffin continues: "From this place we proceeded
up the river Thames to London, visiting the different settlements
of <DW52> people on our way, and then went to the Wilberforce
Colony.... I often met fugitives who had been at my house ten or
fifteen years before, so long ago that I had forgotten them, and
could recall no recollection of them until they mentioned some
circumstance that brought them to mind. Some of them were well
situated, owned good farms, and were perhaps worth more than their
former masters.... We found many of the fugitives more comfortably
situated than we expected, but there was much destitution and
suffering among those who had recently come in. Many fugitives
arrived weary and footsore, with their clothing in rags, having
been torn by briers and bitten by dogs on their way, and when
the precious boon of freedom was obtained, they found themselves
possessed of little else, in a country unknown to them and a climate
much colder than that to which they were accustomed. We noted the
cases and localities of destitution, and after our return home took
measures to collect and forward several large boxes of clothing and
bedding to be distributed by reliable agents to the most needy."[584]

  [582] Coffin, _Reminiscences_, pp. 249, 250.

  [583] _Ibid._, p. 251.

  [584] Coffin, _Reminiscences_, pp. 252, 253.

The government of Canada was not in advance of the public sentiment
of the provinces when it gave the incoming blacks considerate
treatment. It was early a puzzle in Mr. Clay's mind why Ontario
and the mother country should yield unhindered entrance to such a
class of colonists; his opinion of the character of the absconding
slaves and of the unadvisability of their being received by Canada
was expressed in a despatch of 1826 to the United States minister
at London: "They are generally the most worthless of their class,
and far, therefore, from being an acquisition which the British
government can be anxious to make. The sooner, we should think, they
are gotten rid of the better for Canada."[585] But the Canadians
did not at any time adopt this view. Dr. Howe testified in 1863
that "the refugees have always received ... from the better class
of people, good-will and justice, and from a few, active friendship
and important assistance."[586] The attitude of the Canadian
government toward this class of immigrants was always one of welcome
and protection. Not only was there no obstruction put in the way
of their settling in the Dominion, but rather there was the clear
purpose to see them shielded from removal and to foster among them
the accumulation of property.

  [585] _Niles' Register_, Vol. XXV, p. 289.

  [586] Howe, _Refugees in Canada West_, p. 68.

In the matter of the acquirement of land no discrimination was made
by the Canadian authorities against the fugitive settlers. On the
contrary these unpromising purchasers were encouraged to take up
government land and become tillers of the soil. In 1844 Levi Coffin
found that "Land had been easily obtained and many had availed
themselves of this advantage to secure comfortable homesteads.
Government land had been divided up into fifty-acre lots, which they
could buy for two dollars an acre, and have ten years in which to
pay for it, and if it was not paid for at the end of that time they
did not lose all the labor they had bestowed on it, but received a
clear title to the land as soon as they paid for it."[587]

  [587] Levi Coffin, _Reminiscences_, pp. 252, 253.

In 1848 or 1849 a company was formed in Upper Canada, under the
name of the Elgin Association, for the purpose of settling 
families upon crown or clergy reserve lands to be purchased in the
township of Raleigh. It was intended thus to supply the families
settled with stimulus to moral improvement.[588] To whom is to
be attributed the origin of this enterprise is not altogether
clear; one writer ascribes it to the influence of Lord Elgin,
Governor-General of Canada from 1849 to 1854, and asserts that a
tract of land of eighteen thousand acres was allotted for a refugee
settlement in 1848;[589] another says it was first projected by the
Rev. William King, a Louisiana slaveholder, in 1849.[590] Mr. King's
own statement is that a company of fifteen slaves he had himself
emancipated became the nucleus of the settlement in 1849; and
that under an act of incorporation procured by himself in 1850 an
association was formed to purchase nine thousand acres of land and
hold it for fugitive settlers.[591]

  [588] Benjamin Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 292.

  [589] George Bryce, _Short History of the Canadian People_, p.
  403.

  [590] Benjamin Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 291.

  [591] S. G. Howe, _Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp.
  107, 108.

The Canadian authorities facilitated the efforts made by the friends
of the fugitives to provide this class such supplies as could be
gathered in various quarters, and they entered into an arrangement
with the mission-agent, the Rev. Hiram Wilson, to admit all supplies
intended for the refugees free of customs-duty. Mr. E. Child, a
mission-teacher, educated at Oneida Institute, New York, received
many boxes of such goods at Toronto;[592] and at a hamlet called
"the Corners," a few miles from Detroit, a Mr. Miller kept a depot
for "fugitive goods." Supplies were also shipped to Detroit direct
for transmission across the frontier.[593]

  [592] _History of Knox County, Illinois_ (published by Charles C.
  Chapman and Co.), p. 203. Here it is stated: "Mr. Wilson arranged
  with the authorities to have all supplies for the fugitive
  slaves admitted free of customs duty. Many were the large
  well-filled boxes of what was most needed by the wanderer taken
  from the wharf at Toronto during that winter [1841] by E. Child,
  mission-teacher. He was then a student at Oneida Institute, N.Y.,
  but for many years has resided in Oneida, this county. He went
  into Canada for the purpose of teaching the fugitives."

  [593] Conversation with Jacob Cummings, a fugitive from
  Tennessee, now living in Columbus, O. Mr. Cummings was at one
  time a collecting agent for a settlement at Puce, Ont. He told
  the author, "While agent, I was sent to Sandusky. I would
  collect goods for the settlement, and ship it to Detroit, marked
  'Fugitive Goods.' Brother Miller, at the Corners, a little place
  about fifteen miles from Detroit, would take care of these, and
  Canada wouldn't charge any duty on 'fugitive goods.'"

The circumstances attending the settlement of the refugees from
slavery in Canada were favorable to their kindly reception by the
native peoples. It was generally known that they had suffered many
hardships on their journey northward, and that they usually came
with nought but the unquenchable yearning for a liberty denied them
by the United States. The movement to Canada had begun when the
inter-lake portion of Ontario was largely an unsettled region; and
indeed, during the period of the refugees' immigration, much of the
interior was in the process of clearing. Moreover, the movement
was one of small beginnings and gradual development. It brought
into the country what it then needed--agricultural labor to open up
government land and to help the native farmers.

In the elbow of land lying between Lake Ontario and Lake Erie, the
fugitives were early received by the Indians under Chief Brant,
having possessions along the Grand River and near Burlington Bay.
Finding hospitality on these estates, the <DW64>s not infrequently
adopted the customs and mode of life of their benefactors, and
remained among them.[594]

  [594] J. C. Hamilton, _Magazine of American History_, Vol. XXV,
  p. 238.

In the territory extending westward along the lake front white
settlers were working their clearings, which were beginning to
take on the aspect of cultivated farms. But farm hands were not
plentiful, and the fugitive slaves were penniless, and eager to
receive wages on their own account. Mr. Benjamin Drew, who made
a tour of investigation among these people in 1855, and wrote
down the narratives of more than a hundred  refugees,
gives testimony to show that in some quarters at least, as in the
vicinity of Colchester, Dresden and Dawn, the number of laborers
was not equal to the demand, and that the <DW64>s readily found
employment.[595] It was not to be expected that the field-hands and
house-servants of the South could work to the best advantage in
their new surroundings; a gentleman of Windsor told Mr. Drew that
immigrants whose experience in agricultural pursuits had been gained
in Pennsylvania and other free states were more capable and reliable
than those coming directly to Canada from Southern bondage.[596] But
such was the disposition of the white people in different parts of
Canada, and such the demand for laborers in this developing section,
that the Canada Anti-Slavery Society could say of the refugees, in
its _Second Report_ (1853): "The true principle is now to assume
that every man, unless disabled by sickness, can support himself
and his family after he has obtained steady employment. All that
able-bodied men and women require is a fair chance, friendly advice
and a little encouragement, perhaps a little assistance at first.
Those who are really willing to work can procure employment in a
short time after their arrival."[597]

  [595] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, pp. 311, 368.

  [596] _Ibid._, p. 322.

  [597] Quoted by Drew, p. 326.

The fact that there were large tracts of good land in the portion of
Canada accessible to the fugitive was a fortunate circumstance, for
the desire to possess and cultivate their own land was wide-spread
among the escaped slaves. This eagerness drew many of them into the
Canadian wilderness, there to cut out little farms for themselves,
and live the life of pioneers. The extensive tract known as the
Queen's Bush, lying southwest of Toronto and stretching away to
Lake Huron, was early penetrated by refugees. William Jackson, one
of the first  settlers in this region, says that he entered
it in 1846, when scarcely any one was to be found there, that other
fugitive slaves soon followed in considerable numbers and cleared
the land, and that in less than two years as many as fifty families
had located there. The land proved to be good, was well timbered
with hard wood, and farms of from fifty to a hundred acres in extent
were soon put in cultivation.[598] In some other parts of Canada the
same tendency to spread into the outlying districts and secure small
holdings appeared among the <DW52> people. Mr. Peter Wright, the
reeve of the town of Colchester, noted this fact, and attributed the
clearance of much land for cultivation to fugitive slaves.[599] That
such land did not always remain in the possession of this class of
pioneers was due to their ignorance of the forms of conveyancing,
and doubtless sometimes to the sharp practices of unscrupulous
whites.[600]

  [598] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 190.

  [599] _Ibid._, p. 367.

  [600] _Ibid._, pp. 367, 369; Austin Steward, _Twenty-two Years a
  Slave, and Forty Years a Freeman_, p. 272.

[Illustration: REV. THEODORE PARKER,

A LEADING MEMBER OF THE VIGILANCE COMMITTEE OF BOSTON.]

[Illustration: COL. T. W. HIGGINSON,

ONE OF THE PRIME MOVERS IN THE ATTEMPTED RESCUE OF BURNS.]

[Illustration: DR. SAMUEL G. HOWE,

who made a valuable report on the life of fugitive settlers in
Canada in behalf of the United States Freedman's Inquiry Commission
in 1863.]

[Illustration: BENJAMIN DREW,

who studied the condition of the  refugees in Canada in 1855,
and wrote an interesting book on the subject.]

Encouragement was not lacking to induce refugees to take up land;
several fugitive aid societies were organized for this purpose,
and procured tracts of land and founded colonies upon them. The
most important of the colonies thus formed were the Dawn Settlement
at Dresden, the Elgin Settlement at Buxton and the Refugees'
Home near Windsor.[601] These three communities deserve special
consideration, inasmuch as they illustrate an interesting movement
in which benevolent persons in Canada, England and the United States
coöperated to improve the condition of the refugees.

  [601] Howe, _Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 68, 69.

The Dawn Settlement, the first of the three established, may be
said to have had its beginning in the organization of a school
called the British and American Institute.[602] The purpose to
found such a school seems to have been cherished by the missionary,
the Rev. Hiram Wilson, and his coworker, Josiah Henson, as early
as 1838; but the plan was not undertaken until 1842.[603] In that
year a convention of <DW52> persons was called to decide upon the
expenditure of some fifteen hundred dollars collected in England by
a Quaker named James C. Fuller; and they decided, under suggestion,
to start "a manual-labor school, where children could be taught
those elements of knowledge which are usually the occupations of a
grammar-school; and where the boys could be taught, in addition, the
practice of some mechanic art, and the girls could be instructed in
those domestic arts which are the proper occupation and ornament
of her sex."[604] It was decided to locate the school at Dawn,
and accordingly three hundred acres of land were purchased there,
upon which were erected log buildings and schoolhouses, and soon
the work of instruction was begun. It was "an object from the
beginning, of those who ... managed the affairs of the Institute,
to make it self-supporting, by the employment of the students, for
certain portions of their time, on the land."[605] The advantages of
schooling on this basis attracted many refugee settlers to Dresden
and Dawn. The Institute also gave shelter to fugitive slaves "until
they could be placed out upon the wild lands in the neighborhoods to
earn their own subsistence."

  [602] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 308.

  [603] _The Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, as narrated
  by Himself_, 1852, p. 115. See also _Father Henson's Story of
  His Own Life_, 1858, p. 171. Mr. Drew ascribes the honor of the
  original conception of this Institute to the Rev. Hiram Wilson.
  (See _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 311.) Mr. Henson, after
  asserting that he and Mr. Wilson called the convention of 1838,
  continues, "I urged the appropriation of the money to the
  establishment of a manual-labor school...." (_Father Henson's
  Story of His Own Life_, p. 169.) It appears that both Wilson and
  Henson were placed on the committee on site. As they were friends
  and coworkers, it is safe to accord them equal shares in the
  undertaking.

  [604] _Father Henson's Story of His Own Life_, p. 169.

  [605] _The Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, as narrated
  by Himself_, p. 115.

The Rev. Mr. Wilson served the Institute during the first seven
years of its existence, teaching its school, and ministering to
such refugees as came. The number of "boarding-scholars" with
which he began was fourteen, and at that time "there were no
more than fifty <DW52> persons in all the vicinity of the tract
purchased."[606] In 1852 there were about sixty pupils attending the
school, and the settlers on the land of the Institute had increased
to five hundred;[607] while other colonies in the same region had,
collectively, a population of between three thousand and four
thousand <DW52> people.[608] From what has been said it is easy
to see that the influence of Dawn Institute was considerable; its
managers were not content that it should instruct the children of
<DW52> persons only; they extended the advantages of the school
to the children of whites and Indians as well. Adult students were
also admitted, and varied in number from fifty-six to one hundred
and sixteen.[609] The good results of the policy thus pursued
are apparent in the character and habits of the communities that
developed under the influence of the Institute.

  [606] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 311.

  [607] _First Annual Report of the Anti-Slavery Society of
  Canada_, p. 17. See also Drew's _North-Side View_, p. 311.

  [608] _Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, as narrated by
  Himself_, p. 118.

  [609] _Ibid._, p. 117.

Concerning these communities Mr. Drew observed: "The <DW52> people
in the neighborhood of Dresden and Dawn are generally prosperous
farmers--of good morals.... But here, as among all people, are a
few persons of doubtful character, who have not been trained 'to
look out for a rainy day,'--and when these get a little beforehand
they are apt to rest on their oars.... Some of the settlers are
mechanics,--shoemakers, blacksmiths and so forth. About one-third
of the adult settlers are in possession of land which is, either in
whole or in part, paid for."[610] In 1855, the year in which these
observations were made, the Institute had already passed the zenith
of its usefulness, and its buildings were fast falling into a state
of melancholy dilapidation. The cause of this decline is probably to
be found in the bad feeling, neglect and failure arising out of a
divided management.[611]

  [610] _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 309.

  [611] _Father Henson's Story of His Own Life_, pp. 182-186.

The origin of the Elgin Settlement is discussed above; whether or
not it was projected by Lord Elgin in 1848, it is certain that
in 1849 the Rev. William King, a Presbyterian clergyman from
Louisiana, had manumitted and settled slaves on this tract. This
company, fifteen in number, formed the nucleus of a community named
Buxton, in honor of Thomas Fowell Buxton, the philanthropist, and
the rapid growth of the settlement thus begun seems to have led to
the incorporation of the Elgin Association in August, 1850. It is
probable that Mr. King early became the chief agent in advancing
the interests of the settlers, his support being derived mainly
from the Mission Committee of the Presbyterian Church of Canada.
The plan that was carried out under his management provided for the
parcelling of the land into farms of fifty acres each, to be had by
the colonists at the government price, two dollars and fifty cents
per acre, payable in twelve annual instalments. No houses inferior
to the model of a small log house prescribed by the improvement
committee were to be erected,[612] although settlers were permitted
to build as much better as they chose. A court of arbitration was
established for the adjudication of disputes, and a day-school and
Sunday-school gave much needed instruction.

  [612] The dimensions of the model house-were twenty-four by
  eighteen feet, and twelve feet high.

The growth of the Elgin Settlement is set forth in a series of
reports, which afford many interesting facts about the enterprise.
The number of families that entered the settlement during the first
two years and eight months is given as seventy-five;[613] a year
later this number was increased to one hundred and thirty families,
comprising five hundred and twenty persons;[614] the year following
there were a hundred and fifty families in Buxton;[615] and eight
years later, in 1862, when Dr. Howe visited Canada, he was informed
by Mr. King that the population of the settlement was "about one
thousand,--men, women and children," and that two thousand acres
had been deeded in fee simple to purchasers, one-third of which had
been paid for, principal and interest. The impressions of Dr. Howe
are well worth quoting: "Buxton is certainly a very interesting
place. Sixteen years ago it was a wilderness. Now, good highways
are laid out in all directions through the forest; and by their
side, standing back thirty-three feet from the road, are about two
hundred cottages, all built on the same pattern, all looking neat
and comfortable. Around each one is a cleared place, of several
acres, which is well cultivated. The fences are in good order,
the barns seem well-filled; and cattle and horses, and pigs and
poultry, abound. There are signs of industry and thrift and comfort
everywhere; signs of intemperance, of idleness, of want, nowhere.
There is no tavern, and no groggery; but there is a chapel and a
schoolhouse.

  [613] _Third Annual Report_, September, 1852, quoted by Drew in
  _North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 293.

  [614] _Fourth Annual Report_, September, 1853. See Drew's work,
  p. 294.

  [615] _Fifth Annual Report_, September, 1854; Drew's work, p. 295.

"Most interesting of all are the inhabitants. Twenty years ago most
of them were slaves, who owned nothing, not even their children.
Now they own themselves; they own their houses and farms; and they
have their wives and children about them. They are enfranchised
citizens of a government which protects their rights.... The present
condition of all these colonists, as compared with their former one
is very remarkable."[616] Mr. King told Dr. Howe that only three
of the whole number that settled in the colony had their first
instalment on their farms paid for them by friends;[617] and he
summed up his experience as follows: "This settlement is a perfect
success.... Here are men who were bred in slavery, who came here
and purchased land at the government prices, cleared it, bought
their own implements, built their own houses after a model, and have
supported themselves in all material circumstances, and now support
their schools, in part.... I consider that this settlement has
done as well as a white settlement would have done under the same
circumstances."[618]

  [616] Howe, _Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 70, 71.

  [617] _Ibid._, p. 108.

  [618] _Ibid._, p. 110.

The colony known as Refugees' Home was the outgrowth of a suggestion
of Henry Bibb, who was himself a fugitive slave. Soon after the
passage of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, he proposed the formation
of "a society which should 'aim to purchase thirty thousand acres of
government land ... in the most suitable sections of Canada ... for
the homeless refugees from American slavery to settle upon.'" The
association, organized in the summer of 1852, set about carrying out
Bibb's plan and accomplishing a work similar to the objects of the
Elgin Association. The money required for the purchase of land was
to be obtained partly through contributions and partly through sales
of the farms first marketed. Each family of colonists was to have
twenty-five acres, "five of which" it was to "receive free of cost,
provided" it should "within three years from the time of occupancy,
clear and cultivate the same." For the remaining twenty acres the
original price--two dollars an acre--was to be paid in nine equal
annual payments. Those obtaining land from the Association, whether
by purchase or gift, were to hold it for fifteen years before having
the right to dispose of it.

In the first year of the association's existence forty lots of
twenty-five acres each were taken up, and arrangements were made
for a school and church. Mrs. Laura S. Haviland was employed as a
teacher in the fall of 1852, and at once opened both a day-school
and a Sunday-school. She also organized an unsectarian or Christian
Union Church, which later entered the Methodist Episcopal
denomination. The material condition of the settlers Mrs. Haviland
describes for us in a few words. She says: "They had erected a
frame-house for school and meeting purposes. The settlers had built
for themselves small log houses, and cleared from one to five acres
each on their heavily timbered land, and raised corn, potatoes and
other garden vegetables. A few had put in two and three acres of
wheat, and were doing well for their first year."[619]

  [619] Laura S. Haviland, _A Woman's Life Work_, pp. 192, 196, 201.

The three colonies described in the foregoing pages are typical of
a number of communities settled upon lands purchased in Canada for
their use, and regulated by rules drawn up by the associations that
had sprung into existence for the benefit of the homeless refugees.
The assumption upon which these associations proceeded was that
they were to deal with a class of persons who, notwithstanding
their present destitution, were desirous of living worthily in the
state of freedom to which they had just attained, a class needing
direction, instruction and opportunity for self-help rather than
sustained charity. It was intended that fugitives should not be left
to work out alone their own salvation, but that the deficiencies of
ignorance and inexperience should be mitigated for those willing
to profit by the good offices of the missions. The fugitive aid
society did not, as we have already seen, try to prevent the
fugitives from settling together in the form of communities; on
the contrary, such colonization was the inevitable result of their
procedure, and doubtless to them it seemed desirable. Such is the
suggestion contained in the arrangement under which farms were sold
to purchasers by the Elgin and Refugees' Home associations: settlers
on the tract of the former agreed to hold their farms for at least
ten years without transferring their rights; settlers on the land
of the latter were to keep their holdings for a minimum of fifteen
years without transfer. In the dealings of the Home Association this
restriction, we are told, caused some dissatisfaction.

Whether this segregation of the <DW52> people in localities more
or less apart from the white population of Canada was a good thing
for the refugees has been questioned. Dr. S. G. Howe studied the
life of this class in Canada in 1862 as the representative of the
United States Freedman's Inquiry Commission, and wrote a report
which is indispensable for a knowledge of the conditions surrounding
the  settlers in the provinces. He summarizes his judgment
as follows: "The <DW64>s, going into an inhabited and civilized
country, should not be systematically congregated in communities.
Their natural affinities are strong enough to keep up all desirable
relations without artificial encouragement. Experience shows that
they do best when scattered about, and forming a small proportion of
the whole community.

"Next, the discipline of the colonies, though it only subjects the
<DW64>s to what is considered useful apprenticeship, does prolong a
dependence which amounts almost to servitude; and does not convert
them so surely into hardy, self-reliant men, as the rude struggle
with actual difficulties, which they themselves have to face and to
overcome, instead of doing so through an agent.

"Taken as a whole, the colonists have cost to somebody a great deal
of money and a great deal of effort; and they have not succeeded
so well as many who have been thrown entirely upon their own
resources....

"It is just to say that some intelligent persons, friends of the
<DW52> people, believe that in none of the colonies, not even in
Buxton, do they succeed so well, upon the whole, as those who are
thrown entirely upon their own resources."[620]

  [620] _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 69, 70.

Upon examination, these objections do not seem to be well grounded.
It is noteworthy that of the prime movers in the organization of
the three colonies we have considered, two, Josiah Henson and Henry
Bibb, were themselves fugitive slaves; the third, the Rev. William
King, had been at one time a slave-owner, and the fourth, the Rev.
Hiram Wilson, was a missionary among the refugees for many years.
These men were persons of wide observation and experience among
fugitive slaves. It is safe to say that there were no men in Canada
that knew better the disadvantages under which the average fugitive,
just arrived from the South, was called upon to begin the struggle
for a livelihood. And it will be admitted that there were none in
or out of Canada more zealous and self-sacrificing in promoting
the refugee's interests. These men evidently believed that the
fugitive was not in a condition to do the best for himself upon his
first arrival on free soil, that he needed to be delivered in some
degree from the weight of his ignorance, and guided in his wholesome
ambition to secure a home.

To the eyes of some Canadian observers those runaways who had
lingered a while in the Northern states before crossing the border
into Canada appeared to be more vigorous, independent and successful
in all undertakings than their less experienced brethren. Whatever
superiority they may have possessed that is not assignable to
natural endowment, cannot safely be set down to the unchecked play
upon them of rough experiences, or to their facing and vanquishing
great discouragements unaided. The runaway slaves that lived in
the free states were not as a class left to fight their way to
attainable success alone. They settled among friends in anti-slavery
neighborhoods, whether in city or country, and were stimulated by
the practical interest manifested by these persons in their welfare.
They were thus enabled to benefit by those educative influences
that the missions of Canada were organized to supply. It is not
improbable that some of the refugees whose self-reliant behavior
called out the approval of Dr. Howe and others belonged to this
group of partly disciplined fugitives. Dr. Howe must have seen many
such persons, for his journey in Canada West was not made until
1862, after the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 had driven many of them
from the states into the provinces. Drew remarks pertinently: "The
Fugitive Slave Bill drove into Canada a great many who had resided
in the free states. These brought some means with them, and their
efforts and good example have improved the condition of the older
settlers."[621]

  [621] _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 367.

The other group of Canadian refugees--those whose passage had been
direct from the condition of abject dependence, where the whole
routine of life had been determined by the master or overseer, to
the condition of active independence and responsibility, where
the readiness to take hold and to care for one's own interests
were required--this group doubtless contained persons of ability
and energy; but they must have been in the minority. During the
later years of its history the Underground Railroad made flight
comparatively easy for all who once got out of the slave states, so
that frail women and young children often went through to Canada
with little or no difficulty. There were of course many individuals
of extraordinary ability, who had enjoyed in slavery a wider range
of experience than was vouchsafed the average slave; but such people
could take care of themselves anywhere. Here we are concerned with
the large number that needed to have the way pointed out to them if
they were ever to become the possessors of their own homes; they
were not sufficiently informed to originate and carry on successful
building and loan associations for themselves, but they certainly
could profit by an institution devised to serve the same purpose. If
it be admitted that ownership of land and all that that implies was
a good thing for the refugee, then it is difficult to see how that
idea could have been better inculcated far and wide than through the
methods employed by the Canadian organizations.

Besides enabling refugees to secure homes for themselves there were
other offices the associations conceived to be a part of their duty,
and the performance of which is set forth in their records. The
first and most urgent of these was to supply immediate relief to the
wayworn travellers continually arriving; with this was combined the
necessity of helping these persons to find employment. The British
and American Institute at Dawn was obliged to conduct, as part of
its work, what would now be called perhaps a supply and employment
bureau. Josiah Henson, one of the founders of the Institute,
describing this branch of the work, says: "Many of these poor
creatures arrive destitute of means, and often in want of suitable
clothing, and these, as far as possible, have been supplied them.
Since the passage of the late Fugitive Slave Bill, ... they have
arrived in large numbers at the Institute, and have been drafted
off among their brethren who had been previously settled, and who
are now making every effort and sacrifice to meet their destitute
circumstances."[622] Henry Bibb, of the Refugees' Home, as early as
1843 saw the need of maintaining a stock of supplies at Windsor out
of which to relieve the immediate necessities of fugitives.[623]
The missionary, Isaac J. Rice, kept a similar supply room at
Amherstburg.[624] It appears from all this that the recognition of
the deplorable destitution of arriving fugitives was general among
the aid societies and their representatives, and that prompt action
was taken to meet wants that could brook no delay.

  [622] _The Life of Josiah Henson, as narrated by Himself_, p. 117.

  [623] Conversation with the Rev. Jacob Cummings, a refugee now
  living at Columbus, O.

  [624] _Ibid._

Another service performed by these colonization societies was that
of providing superior schools for the <DW52> people; education for
all that could take it was one of the cardinal features of their
programme. The state of public sentiment in some places in Canada
was such that <DW52> children were either altogether excluded from
the public schools, or, if allowed to enter, they were annoyed
beyond endurance by the rude behavior of their fellow-pupils.
In some places they braved the prejudice against them, but the
numbers courageous enough to do this were insignificant. Under
such circumstances the best that could be done by the friends of
the black race was to open schools under private management. That
the societies were not averse to mixed schools is shown by the fact
that white pupils were admitted in various instances to classes
formed primarily for <DW52> children.[625] This need of schools
did not appeal alone to the colonization societies. It was seen
and responded to by other organizations; thus the English Colonial
Church and School Society thought it advisable to locate schools at
London,[626] Amherstburg,[627] Colchester[628] and perhaps other
places; and certain religious bodies of the United States felt
it incumbent on them to support school-teachers (ten or more) in
different parts of Canada.[629] Besides the schools thus provided
a few were conducted by individuals; as examples of this latter
class may be named a private school at Chatham taught by Alfred
Whipper,[630] a <DW52> man, and another at Windsor managed by Mrs.
Mary E. Bibb, the wife of Henry Bibb mentioned above.[631]

  [625] _First Annual Report of the Anti-Slavery Society of
  Canada_, 1852, Appendix, p. 22.

  [626] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 148.

  [627] _Ibid._, p. 349.

  [628] _Ibid._, p. 369.

  [629] _First Annual Report of the Anti-Slavery Society of
  Canada_, 1852, p. 22.

  [630] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 236.

  [631] _Ibid._, p. 322.

The supervision of the colonies maintained by their respective
associations does not appear to have been unduly strict.
Occasionally controversies came up over what was thought by the
refugees to be improper assumption of authority by some agent
or representative of the association, but an examination of the
terms under which land was taken by the intending settlers brings
to light only such rules as were meant to foster intelligence,
morality and sobriety among the colonists. The aid societies were
not only zealous for education. They also provided against those
evil influences to which they thought the <DW64>s were most likely
to succumb. Thus, for example, in the case of the Buxton[632] and
Refugees' Home settlements the manufacture and sale of intoxicants
were forbidden. Such regulations seem to have been sustained by
the sentiment of the communities for which they were made, and
are not known to have been the source of opposition. Indeed, the
directors of Buxton specially commended the habits of sobriety
prevalent among the people whose best interests they were striving
to promote,[633] and the Rev. William King found satisfaction in the
fact that a saloon opened on the borders of that settlement could
not find customers enough to support it, and closed its doors within
a twelvemonth. His testimony relating to the standard of social
purity mantained by the colonists was creditable in its showing,
and indicated a high sense of morality scarcely to be expected
among a people stained by the gross practices of slave-life.[634]
Of the <DW52> people in the neighborhood of Dawn Institute the
reports were equally good. Mr. Drew found them to be "generally
very prosperous farmers--of good morals, and mostly Methodists and
Baptists."[635] Mr. Henson related with evident pride that out of
the three thousand or four thousand <DW52> people congregated in
the settlements about Dawn not one had "been sent to jail for any
infraction of the laws during the last seven years (1845-1852)."[636]

  [632] _Ibid._, pp. 294, 325.

  [633] _Third Annual Report (1852)_, quoted by Drew, p. 293.

  [634] Howe, _Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 109, 110.

  [635] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 309.

  [636] _The Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, as narrated
  by Himself_, p. 118.

The widest range of dissatisfaction appeared at the Refugees' Home,
where the fugitives are reputed to have been unduly burdened.
Thomas Jones, not a colonist, and without any personal grievances
to complain of, voiced the feeling to Mr. Drew. After relating
some annoying changes made in the regulations as to the time in
which clearings were to be made, as to the size of the houses to be
erected and so forth, he declared that the settlers "doubt about
getting deeds, ... The restrictions in regard to liquor, and not
selling [their land] under so many years, nor the power to will ...
property to ... friends, only to children if ... [they] have any,
make them dissatisfied. They want to do as they please." From
this it appears that the population of Refugees' Home was not
altogether content with the local government under which it lived,
but apparently the complaints made were to be attributed more to the
unjust changes in the charter of the colony than to the moral régime
the Home Association sought to enforce.

In general we may say, then, that in so far as the three colonies
considered were typical of the whole class, there was nothing
inherent in the provisions of their constitutions or in the
nature of their organizations to place their members in a kind of
servitude. As property owners, these citizens became subject to
legitimate obligations, which might have been differently arranged,
but could scarcely have been less onerous or of better intention.
The requirement that ownership should be for a period of ten or
fifteen years, made by the Elgin and Refugees' Home societies,
was perhaps annoying; but the explanation, if not the full
justification, of such a demand lay in the evident desire of the
societies to give all purchasers ample time in which to make their
payments, and in the irresponsibility of the class with which they
were dealing.

It is impossible to tell how many landed colonies there were in
Canada. Dr. Howe, perhaps the best contemporary observer, speaks
indefinitely of benevolent persons that formed organizations at
various periods for the relief and aid of the refugees, and says
that these organizations generally took the form of societies for
procuring tracts of land and settling colonies upon them, but he
gives no further details.[637] Whatever their number, it is quite
certain that these colonies comprised but a small part of the
refugee population. The natural tendency was for fugitives to drift
at once to the towns, where there was immediate prospect of relief
and employment. In this way many of the Canadian centres came to
have an increasing proportion of  inhabitants. The towns
first receiving such additions were naturally those of mercantile
importance in the lake traffic of the decades before the Civil War.
Thus, Amherstburg and Windsor, Port Stanley and Port Burwell, St.
Catherines, Hamilton and Toronto, and Kingston and Montreal, early
became important places of resort for escaped slaves.

  [637] Howe, _Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, p. 69.

The movement was normally from these and other centres on the lake
shore, or near it, to the interior. How rapid it was we can only
judge by the few chance indications that remain. During Drew's
travels in Canada West he learned that in 1832 the town of Chatham
was a mere hamlet comprising a few houses and two or three shops,
although the oldest deed of the place on record is dated 1801.
Steamboats did not begin to ply on the river Sydenham between
Chatham and Detroit until 1837. But long before this year, and, in
fact, at the first settlement of the town, <DW52> people began to
come in.[638] When Levi Coffin made his first trip to Canada, in
1844, he visited a number of settlements of <DW52> people scattered
along the river Thames north of Dawn, and found the colony at
Wilberforce already established.[639] This colony had been founded
as early as 1830, and because it was originally settled by a group
of emancipated slaves, it soon began to attract new settlers from
the incoming stream of runaways. By 1846 the more distant interior
was invaded. In that year the long strip of country stretching
from the western extremity of Lake Ontario across to Lake Huron,
and designated on the general map as Queen's Bush, was entered by
pioneers who had escaped from slavery. This region was not surveyed
until about 1848, and by that time there were as many as fifty
families located there.[640] Some time during the years 1845 to
1847, the Rev. R. S. W. Sorrick went as far north as Oro, where
he found "some fifty persons settled, many comfortable and doing
well, but many [suffering] a great deal from poverty."[641] The
surveying of the tract called Queen's Bush, and the subsequent
arranging of the terms of payment for land already occupied, caused
a number of  settlers to sell their clearings in "the Bush"
and move away. Some of these, it appears, went south to Buxton, but
some went north to the shores of Georgian Bay and located at Owen
Sound.[642] From this testimony it is certain that by 1850 fugitive
slaves had found their way in considerable numbers throughout the
inter-lake portion of Canada West.

  [638] _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 235.

  [639] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, p. 521.

  [640] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 189.

  [641] _Ibid._, p. 190.

  [642] Drew, _North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 190.

Farther east, the Province of Quebec attracted <DW64>s from the
Southern states as early as the thirties; and they began to make
pilgrimages northward by way of secret lines of travel through
New England. By 1850, there were at least five or six of these
lines, all well patronized, considering their remoteness from
slaveholding territory. Maritime routes, by way of ports along the
New England coast to New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and even Cape
Breton Island, seem also to have existed. A case is cited by the
Rev. Austin Willey in his book, entitled _Anti-Slavery in the State
and Nation_, in which more than twenty  refugees were sent
from Portland to New Brunswick at one time, soon after the rescue
of Shadrach in Boston, in 1851. It is reported that there are still
settlements of ex-slaves in Nova Scotia, near Halifax;[643] and the
statement has recently been made that "there are at least two <DW64>
families living in Inverness County, Cape Breton, who are, in all
probability, the descendants of fugitive slaves."[644]

  [643] A statement to this effect, which appeared in the _Marine
  Journal_ of New York, is quoted in _McClure's Magazine_ for May,
  1897, p. 618.

  [644] See the letter signed "D. F.," printed in _McClure's
  Magazine_, May, 1897, p. 618.

As regards this movement into the Eastern provinces, no detailed
information can be had. Even in the Western lake-bound region,
it was the towns that were the most accessible for the traveller
desirous of studying the condition of fugitives; most visitors
contented themselves with the briefest memorials of their visits;
and those whose accounts are at the same time helpful and extended,
describe or even mention only a limited number of abiding-places
of escaped slaves. Though Drew notices in his book but thirteen
communities, and Dr. Howe refers to eleven only, numerous other
places are mentioned by other observers. Sketching his first visit
to Canada, Mr. Coffin writes: "Leaving Gosfield County, we made our
way to Chatham and Sydenham, _visiting the various neighborhoods of
 people_. We spent several days at the settlement near Down's
Mills, and visited the institution under the care of Hiram Wilson,
called the British and American Manual Labor Institute.... From
this place we proceeded up the river Thames to London, _visiting
the different settlements of <DW52> people on our way_, and then
went to the Wilberforce colony."[645] After naming a list of
twelve towns near which refugees had settled, Josiah Henson says:
"Others are scattered in small numbers in different townships, and
at Toronto there are about four hundred or five hundred variously
employed...."[646] Such testimony goes to show that the refugee
population of Canada was widely distributed, both in the cities and
towns and in the country.

  [645] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, p. 251. The italics are my
  own.

  [646] _The Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, as narrated
  by Himself_, p. 100.

If the information at hand in regard to the distribution of the
refugees is unsatisfactory, it can hardly be expected that the
numbers can now be ascertained. The official figures of the
successive Canadian censuses are untrustworthy. Dr. Howe, who
studied them, concluded that, "It is impossible to ascertain the
number of exiles who have found refuge in Canada since 1800.... It
is difficult, moreover, to ascertain the present number (1862). The
census of 1850 is confused. It puts the number in Upper Canada at
2,502 males and 2,167 females. But in a note it is stated, '_there
are about 8,000 <DW52> persons in Western Canada_.' This word
"about" is an admission of the uncertainty; and as if to make that
uncertainty greater, the same census in another part puts the number
in Western Canada at 4,669." The census of 1860 Dr. Howe found to be
equally unreliable. In giving the <DW52> population as 11,223, it
underrated the number greatly, as he discovered by looking into the
records of several cities and by making inquiry of town officers. In
this manner he learned that the number of <DW52> people living in
St. Catherines was about 700, although the census showed only 472;
in Hamilton, probably more than 500, despite the government showing
of only 62; in Toronto, 934, although the census gave but 510; in
London, Canada West, as the mayor estimated, there were 75 families
of <DW52> people, whereas the census showed only 36 persons. "There
has been no movement of the <DW52> population," Dr. Howe tells
us, "sufficient to explain such discrepancies; and the conclusion
is that the census of 1850, and that of 1860, included some of the
<DW52> people in the white column."[647]

  [647] Howe, _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 15,
  16.

If the information contained in the census reports of the Canadas
relating to the refugee population of the provinces is misleading,
so also is it true that little value can be attached to the
estimates made at various times by visitors to the communities of
fugitives, most of whom had inadequate data upon which to base their
conclusions. These estimates not only differ widely, but sometimes
leave room for doubt as to what geographical area and period of time
they are intended to cover. Coffin in 1844 was told that there were
about forty thousand fugitives in Canada;[648] but eight years later
Henson estimated the number at between twenty thousand and thirty
thousand, and daily increasing.[649] In the same year (1852) the
Anti-Slavery Society of Canada in its _First Annual Report_ stated
that there were about thirty thousand  residents in Canada
West.[650] The Rev. Hiram Wilson said from the lecture platform that
there were sixty thousand fugitives in Canada, and Elder Anthony
Bingey, a coworker with Mr. Wilson, who heard this estimate given
by his friend, informed the writer that Mr. Wilson had travelled
over the country from Toronto westward and was as competent a judge
as could be found in Ontario.[651] John Brown attended a conference
at Chatham in the spring of 1858, and his biographer, Mr. R. J.
Hinton, thinks there were probably not less than seventy-five
thousand fugitives living in Canada West at that time.[652] The
Rev. W. M. Mitchell, a <DW64> missionary writing in 1860, was of
the opinion that there were sixty thousand <DW52> people in Upper
Canada, that fifteen thousand of these were free-born, and that the
remaining forty-five thousand were fugitive slaves from the United
States.[653] The Rev. Dr. Willes, Professor of Divinity in Toronto
College, is quoted as having said that there were about sixty
thousand emancipated slaves in Canada, the most of whom had escaped
from bondage.[654] Dr. Howe came to the conclusion in 1863 that the
whole number of slaves enfranchised by residence in the provinces
was between thirty and forty thousand. He thought that at the time
of his visit the population did not fall below fifteen thousand nor
exceed twenty thousand; although other observers, he said, estimated
it as ranging from twenty thousand to thirty thousand.[655]

  [648] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, p. 253.

  [649] _The Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, as narrated
  by Himself_, Appendix, p. 99.

  [650] Quoted by Howe in _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada
  West_, p. 17.

  [651] Conversation with Mr. Bingey, Windsor, Ont., July 31, 1895.

  [652] _John Brown and His Men_, p. 171.

  [653] _The Underground Railroad_, p. 127.

  [654] _Ibid._, p. 166.

  [655] _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 15, 17.

Besides the diversity of the figures here presented, it should
be noted that most of the estimates refer only to Canada West;
and further that they take no account of the losses under a high
death-rate, due to the action of the new climatic conditions upon
the settlers. Travellers were not in possession of the elements
necessary for a computation, the resident missions were tempted to
overstate, and the Canadian officials did not know how to secure
data, and, perhaps, did not try to secure them fully. One can only
say that the numerous lines of Underground Railroad would not have
been taxed beyond their capacity to convey a number of refugees
equal to the highest estimate given above during the period these
lines are known to have been active.

The great majority of escaped slaves were possessed of but little
more than the boon of freedom when they arrived in what was for
them "the promised land." Church missions, anti-slavery societies
and colonies found in them worthy subjects for their benefactions,
which were intended to put the recipients in the way of earning
their own livelihood. The need of clothing, shelter and employment
was provided for as promptly as circumstances would allow, and the
fugitives soon came to realize that the efforts made in their behalf
were to help them attain that independence of which they had been so
long deprived.

As the region to which the refugees had recourse in largest numbers
was well covered with forests, and was beginning to be cleared
for tillage, a common occupation among them was that of the
woodsman. Many were able to hire themselves to the native farmers
to cut timber, while many others, who arranged to lease or buy
land, went to work to clear garden patches and little farms for
themselves. Josiah Henson sought to develop a lumber industry in
the neighborhood of Dawn by setting up a sawmill on the farm of
the British and American Institute, and shipping its products to
Boston and New York.[656] Such work, in a climate to which they were
unaccustomed, was an experience beyond the strength of some of the
fugitives; and their exposure to the cold of the Canadian winter
sowed the seeds of consumption in many.[657]

  [656] _Father Henson's Story of His Own Life_, p. 173 _et seq._

  [657] This is substantiated by the testimony of various Canadian
  refugees.

Farming appears to have been the occupation naturally preferred
by the refugees, and probably the majority of them looked forward
to owning farms.[658] It was the pursuit their masters followed,
and for which they themselves were best adapted. The way to it was
open through the demand for farm-hands on the part of many white
settlers, and the special encouragement frequently needed was
supplied by the example and aid of one or another of the colonies.

  [658] _First Annual Report of the Anti-Slavery Society of
  Canada_, p. 15.

It is not surprising that a considerable number of the fugitives
contented themselves with the present enjoyment of their newly
acquired liberty, and neglected to make provision for the future.
Such persons were quite ready to work, but were slow to understand
how they could acquire land in time, and secure the full profits
of their labor to themselves. The weight of enforced ignorance,
dependence and poverty was upon them. Not infrequently they entered
into profitless bargains, leasing wild lands on short terms, and
finding themselves dispossessed when their clearings were about
ready for advantageous cultivation.[659] Their knowledge of
agriculture was scanty, and their planting, in consequence, often
injudicious. They were, however, zealous to learn. The Rev. R. S.
W. Sorrick, who gave some instruction to the settlers at Oro in the
art of farming, declared them to be a most teachable people.[660]
The refugees at Colchester appear to have been equally open-minded
to the practical suggestions given them in a series of lectures on
"crops, wages and profit" delivered before them by Mr. Henson.

  [659] _Father Henson's Story of His Own Life_, pp. 165, 166;
  Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, pp. 196, 369.

  [660] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 120.

It is well known that among the slave-owners of the border states
the practice existed widely of entrusting some of their <DW64>s
with the responsibilities of farm management; and that in the same
portion of the South slaves were often permitted to hire their
own time for farm labor; thousands of runaways also had gathered
experience in the free states before their emigration to Canada;
hence one is prepared in a measure to understand the rapid strides
made by a large class of the <DW64> population in the country of
their adoption. Many of these people already had a gauge of their
ability, and were not afraid to go forward in the acquirement of
lands and homes of their own. To the advancement made by this
numerous class is due the favorable comment called forth from
observing persons, both Canadians and visiting Americans. Dr. Howe
has left us some interesting information concerning the condition of
refugee farmers in Canada. He found some cultivating small gardens
of their own near large towns, where they had a ready market for the
produce they raised; others, more widely scattered, tilled little
farms, which for the most part were clear of encumbrance; these
farms were "inferior to the first-class farms of their region in
point of cultivation, fences, stock and the like," but were "equal
to the average of second-class farms"; their owners lacked the
capital, intelligence and skill of the best farmers, but, far from
being lazy, stupid or thriftless, supported themselves in a fair
degree of comfort, and occupied houses not easily distinguishable
in appearance from the farmhouses of their white neighbors. The
miserable hut of the worthless <DW64> squatter was occasionally to
be seen, but usually the rude cabin and small clearing marked the
spot where a newly arrived fugitive had begun his home, which in
due course was to pass through successive stages until it should
become a well-cleared farm, with good buildings and a large stock of
animals and tools.[661]

  [661] _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 65, 66. See
  also Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 368.

A fact deplored by some friends of the refugees was the inclination
to congregate in towns and cities.[662] A committee of investigation
appointed by the Anti-Slavery Society of Canada reported in 1852
that, although many fugitives were scattered through the various
districts, the larger number was massing in certain localities,
those named being Elgin, Dawn and Colchester village settlements,
Sandwich, Queen's Bush, Wilberforce, Hamilton and St. Catherines,
together with the Niagara district and Toronto.[663] According to
Josiah Henson the towns about which these people were gathering were
Chatham, Riley, Sandwich, Anderton (probably Anderson), Malden,
Colchester, Gonfield (doubtless Gosfield), London, Hamilton and the
colonies at Dawn and Wilberforce.[664] Other centres undoubtedly
existed, though no exhaustive list of such places could be made from
the meagre accounts left us.

  [662] Mitchell, _The Underground Railroad_, p. 128.

  [663] _First Annual Report of the Society_, pp. 16, 17.

  [664] _The Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, as narrated
  by Himself_, p. 100.

The movement to the towns was natural, for friends and employment
were more easily to be found there than elsewhere. Certain parts or
quarters of the towns rapidly filled up with the <DW64>s, and the
bonds of race and sympathy came into full play, causing constant
accretions of new settlers. This was especially true of Fort Malden
or Amherstburg, for years the principal port of entry for fugitives
landing from the Michigan and Ohio borders. The result in this
and similar cases was unsatisfactory; the people seemed not to do
as well as in other places.[665] In Hamilton and Toronto, we are
told, the dwellings of the blacks were scattered among those of
the whites, instead of being crowded together in a single suburban
locality more or less distinct from the city of which it formed a
part.[666] However, local conditions existing in Toronto, such as
rent charges, tended to confine the <DW52> people to the northwest
section of the city.[667]

  [665] Dr. Howe quotes the following statement from Mr. Brush,
  town clerk of Malden: "A portion of them (the <DW52> people)
  are pretty well behaved, and another portion not.... A great
  many of these <DW52> people go and sail (are sailors) in the
  summer-time, and in the winter lie around, and don't do much....
  We have to help a great many of them, more than any other class
  of people we have here. I have been clerk of the council for
  three years, and have had the opportunity of knowing. I think
  the council have given more to the <DW52> people than to any
  others." See also _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 58.

  [666] _A North-Side View of Slavery_, p. 62.

  [667] _Ibid._, p. 94.

A wide range of occupations was open to the refugees in the towns;
besides the lighter kinds of service about hotels and other public
houses, and the work of plastering and whitewashing, often performed
by <DW64>s, various trades were followed, such as blacksmithing,
carpentering, building, painting, mill-work and other handicrafts.
There were good <DW64> mechanics in Hamilton, Chatham, Windsor,
Amherstburg and other places. A few were engaged in shopkeeping,
or were employed as clerks, while a still smaller number devoted
themselves to teaching and preaching.

As a class the fugitives in the towns, as in the country, were
accounted steady and industrious, and their dwellings were said
to be "generally superior to those of the Irish, or other foreign
emigrants of the laboring class," and "far superior to the
<DW64> huts upon slave plantations, which many of them formerly
inhabited."[668] Dr. J. Wilson Moore, of Philadelphia, visited
the refugee communities in various Canadian towns, for example
at Chatham, London and Wilberforce, and was favorably impressed
with what he saw; with the orderly deportment of the crowds of
<DW52> people at Chatham while returning from a celebration of
the anniversary of the West Indian emancipation, with the air of
neatness and comfort displayed by the homes of the fugitives at
London, with the advance from log cabins to brick and frame-houses
made by the settlers at Wilberforce.[669] The weight of evidence
supplied by Mr. Drew was unquestionably favorable to the view
that the refugees were making substantial progress. He found the
condition of the <DW52> people in Toronto such as to be a proper
cause of satisfaction for the philanthropist; many men in Hamilton
were well-to-do; concerning those living in London he learned that
some were highly intelligent and respectable, but that others
wasted their time and neglected their opportunities; he noted that
there was great activity among the <DW64>s at Chatham, where they
engaged in a large variety of manual pursuits; at Windsor, almost
all the members of this class had comfortable homes, and some owned
neat and handsome houses; at Sandwich a few were house-owners, the
rest were tenants; in Amherstburg the assurance was given that the
<DW52> people of Canada were doing better than the free <DW64>s in
the United States; the settlers at New Canaan were reported to be
making extraordinary progress, considering the length of time they
had lived there; and out of a <DW52> population of seventy-eight at
Gosfield all of the heads of families, with two or three exceptions,
were freeholders.[670] Dr. Howe, who visited the houses of the
<DW52> people in the outskirts of Chatham and other large places,
described them as being for the most part small and tidy two-story
houses with garden lots about them, neatly furnished, the tables
decently spread and plentifully supplied. He was convinced that the
fugitive slaves lived better than foreign immigrants in the same
region, and clothed their children better.[671]

  [668] Howe, _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, p. 63.

  [669] Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, p. xvii.

  [670] _A North-Side View of Slavery_, pp. 94, 119, 147, 234, 321,
  344, 348, 376, 378.

  [671] _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 63, 64. See
  also Mitchell's _Underground Railroad_, pp. 130, 131, 133, 135,
  137-139, 142-144, 146, 148 _et seq._

The relation of the slave to his wife and children was a precarious
one in the South, especially in the border region from which most
of the Canadian exiles came. Slave-breeding for the Southern market
was extensively carried on in Virginia, Kentucky and other border
states; slave-traders made frequent trips through this section; and
their coming brought consternation, distress and separation to many
a slave-family. These and other violations of the domestic ties
might be expected to react on the home life of the slave-family,
tending to discourage regard for the forms of family life, and to
take away incentive to constancy. In view of such degradation it is
surprising to note the care taken by many refugees for the formal
legitimation of the alliances made by them in slavery. Once secure
in their freedom and in their domestic relations, they began to
substitute for the marriage after "slave fashion" the legal form of
marriage, which they saw observed about them in Canada. Dr. Howe
noticed that the fugitives settled themselves in families, respected
the sanctity of marriage, and showed a general improvement in
morals.[672]

  [672] _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 95, 101,
  Appendix, pp. 109, 110. In her book, _A Woman's Life Work_, p.
  193, Mrs. Laura S. Haviland reports some interesting cases of
  this sort.

This recognition of a new standard of social virtue signifies a
great gain on the part of the refugees. As the withholding of any
real instruction from the slaves in the South helped to brutalize
them, so their moral elevation in Canada went hand in hand with
their enlightenment through schools and religious teaching. What
advantages were afforded them in the way of education in their new
abiding-place, and what measure of benefit did they derive from
these opportunities?

It appears that under the Canadian law <DW52> people were permitted
either to send their children to the common schools or to have
separate schools provided from their proportionate share of the
school funds. In some districts, however, local conditions stood in
the way of the education of <DW52> children. Many of the parents
did not appreciate the need of sending their children to school
regularly; it often happened that they were too destitute to take
advantage of these opportunities; again, they were unaccustomed to
the enjoyment of equal privileges with the whites and were timid
about assuming them. The children, unused to the climate of the new
country, perhaps also thinly clad, were sickly and often unable to
go to school.[673]

  [673] Mitchell, _The Underground Railroad_, pp. 140, 164, 165.

Prejudice was also not wanting in some quarters among the whites.
In the town of Sandwich, on the Detroit River, in 1851 or 1852, the
feelings of the two people were much agitated over the question
of mixed schools.[674] The towns of Chatham, London and Hamilton
appear also to have been more or less affected by prejudice against
the <DW64>.[675] Partly owing to this prejudice, and partly to their
own preference, the <DW52> people, acting under the provision of
the law that allowed them to have separate schools, set up their
own schools in Sandwich and in many other parts of Ontario.[676]
Drew incidentally noted the existence of separate schools at
Colchester, Amherstburg, Sandwich, Dawn and Buxton; the existence
of private schools at London, Windsor and perhaps one or two other
places; and the presence of an extremely small number of <DW52>
children in the common schools at Hamilton and London. Concerning
Toronto, he tells us that no distinction existed there in regard
to school privileges. Such figures as Drew supplies show the
separate, private and mission schools to have been more numerously
attended than the public or common schools. The former furnished
the conditions under which whatever appreciation of education there
was native in a community of <DW64>s, or whatever taste for it
could be awakened there, was free to assert itself unhindered by
real or imagined opposition. That the refugees were capable of a
genuine interest in the schools provided for them, even under the
most disheartening circumstances, appears from the fact that "many
of the  settlers were attracted to Dresden and Dawn by the
preferred advantages of education on the industrial plan in the Dawn
Institute."[677] Adults and children both attended; the schools of
the mission-workers were intended to reach as many as possible of a
constituency made up largely of grown persons. An evening school for
adults was established in Toronto, and had a good attendance.[678]
Sunday-schools were an important accessory, furnishing, as they did,
opportunities to many whose week days were full of other cares.
Mrs. Haviland's experience was probably that of mission-teachers
in other parts of Canada. On Sundays her schoolhouse was filled
to overflowing, many of her congregation coming five or six miles
to get to the meeting. The Bible was read with eagerness by those
whose ignorance required prompting at every word. The oppression of
past years was forgotten, for the hour, in the pleasure of learning
to read the Word of God. An aged couple, past eighty, were among
the most regular attendants.[679] The spread of the earnest desire
for knowledge shown in these meetings would suffice to explain
an observation made by Dr. Howe in 1863 to the effect that a
surprisingly large number could then read and write.[680]

  [674] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, pp. 341, 342.

  [675] _Ibid._, pp. 118, 147, 235.

  [676] _Ibid._, p. 341.

  [677] _Ibid._, p. 308.

  [678] _First Annual Report of the Anti-Slavery Society of
  Canada_, p. 15.

  [679] _A Woman's Life Work_, pp. 192, 193.

  [680] _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, p. 77.

An agency illustrative of the refugees' desire for self-improvement
was the association made up of local societies called "True Bands."
The first of these clubs was organized at Amherstburg or Malden in
September, 1854, and in less than two years there were fourteen such
societies in various parts of Canada West. The total membership of
the association is not known, but the True Band of Malden comprised
six hundred persons, and that of Chatham, on the first enrolment,
three hundred and seventy-five. Persons of both sexes were admitted
to membership, and a small monthly payment was required. The objects
of the association were comprehensive; they included the improvement
of the schools, the increase of the school attendance among the
<DW52> people, the abatement of race prejudice, the arbitration
of disputes between <DW52> persons, the employment of a fund for
aiding destitute persons just arriving from slavery, the suppression
of begging in behalf of refugees by self-appointed agents, and
so forth. The True Band at Malden did much good work; and in all
other places where the societies were formed it is reported that
excellent results were secured. These clubs demonstrated their
ability by concerted action to care for numerous strangers as they
arrived in Canada after their long pilgrimage.[681]

  [681] Drew, _A North-Side View of Slavery_, pp. 236, 237.

Another object of the True Band association was to prevent
divisions in the church, and as far as possible to heal those that
had already occurred. This provision was apparently intended to
serve as a check on the disposition of the refugees to multiply
churches. "Whenever there are a few families gathered together,"
wrote one observer, "they split up into various sects and each
sect must have a meeting-house of its own.... Their ministers have
canvassed the United States and England, contribution-box in hand;
and by appealing to sectarian zeal, got the means of building up
tabernacles of brick and wood, trusting to their own zeal for
gathering a congregation...."[682] This eagerness to build churches
has been criticised as consuming much of the time and substance of
the exiles, and causing division where union was desirable. But
if this side of the religious life and activities of the refugees
calls for condemnation, another side, which was fostered by the
new conditions, was the more marked manifestation of the religious
nature of the blacks in what has been well called in contrast with
their emotionalism the higher forms of conscience, morality and good
works.[683]

  [682] Howe, _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, p. 92.

  [683] _Ibid._

The minds of many of the Canadian exiles were ever going back to the
friends and loved ones they had left behind them on the plantations
of the South. Each new band of pilgrims as it came ashore at some
Canadian port was scanned by little groups of <DW64>s eagerly
looking for familiar faces. Strange and solemn reunions after years
of separation and of hardship took place along the friendly shores
of Canada. But the fugitive that was safe in the promised land was
anxious to assist fortune, and as soon as he had learned to write or
could find an acquaintance to write for him, was likely to send a
letter to some trusted agent of the Underground Railroad for advice
or assistance in an attempt to release some slave or family of
slaves from their thraldom. Many, we know, took a more dangerous
method than this, and went personally to seek their relatives in
the South, and piloted them safely back to English soil; but the
appeal to anti-slavery friends in the States, while probably less
effective, sometimes secured the desired results. William Still,
the chairman of the Acting Vigilance Committee of Philadelphia,--a
position that brought him in contact with hundreds of escaped slaves
as they were being sent beyond our northern frontier,--was the
recipient of numerous letters entreating his aid for the deliverance
of the kinsmen of refugees.[684]

  [684] Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, 2d ed., pp. 59, 65,
  105, 137, 193, 249, 263, 291, 293, 337, 385, 448, 490.

Fugitive slaves were admitted to citizenship in the provinces on the
same terms as other immigrants. Many of them became property owners
in the course of time, paid their allotted share of the taxes,
and thus gained the franchise; Dr. Howe examined the records of
several towns in 1862 and made comparisons of the amount of taxable
property owned by whites and blacks. According to his statement the
proportion of white rate or tax payers to the white population of
Malden was in the ratio of one to three and one-third; that of the
 ratepayers of the town to the <DW52> population, one to
eleven. The average amount paid by the whites was $9.52, while that
paid by the blacks was $5.12. In Chatham the white ratepayers were
"about one to every three and one-half of the white population,
and the  about one to every thirteen of the <DW52>
population." The average tax paid by white and black was $10.63
and $4.98 respectively. At Windsor it appears that the proportion
of ratepayers among the whites was as one to seven and one-fourth,
and among the blacks it was as one to five. Here the per capita
average was $18.76 for the former, and $4.18 for the latter.[685]
These towns, it is to be noted, were not colonies; and in them the
fugitives were offered no peculiar inducements to become the owners
of property. All things considered, the showing is highly creditable
for the <DW64>s.

  [685] _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 61, 62.

The fact that they had been slaves did not debar the refugees
from the exercise of whatever political rights they had acquired.
The <DW64> voters used their privilege freely in common with the
native citizens, allying themselves with the two regular parties of
Canada, the Conservative and the Reform.[686] In some communities
<DW64>s were elected to office. The Rev. William King, head of the
Buxton Settlement, has mentioned the offices of pathmasters, school
trustees, and councillors as those to which <DW52> men were chosen
within his knowledge. These, he said, were as high as the <DW64> had
then attained, and he thought that white men would refuse to vote
for a black running for Parliament.[687] Dr. J. Wilson Moore, a
friend of the refugees, said of them in 1858 that their standing was
fair, and that the laws of the land made no distinction. He observed
that they did jury duty with their white neighbors, and served as
school directors and road commissioners. On the whole, he thought,
they were as much respected as their intelligence and virtue
entitled them to be.[688]

  [686] Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, p. xxvii.

  [687] Howe, _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, Appendix,
  p. 108.

  [688] Still, _Underground Railroad Records_, p. xvii.

In view of the remarkable progress made by the refugees and of
their general serviceableness as settlers in the provinces, it
is easy to understand why the Canadian government maintained its
favorable attitude towards them to the end of the long period of
immigration. In 1859 the Governor-General testified to the favorable
opinion the central government entertained of the fugitives as
settlers and citizens by assuring the Rev. W. M. Mitchell that "We
can still afford them homes in our dominions"; and the Parliament
of Ontario manifested its interest in their continued welfare
by voting to incorporate the Association for the Education and
Elevation of the <DW52> People of Canada upon the showing that the
association would thereby be enabled to extend its philanthropic
labors among the blacks.[689] The Canadian authorities seem to
have become established in the view reached after a candid and
prolonged investigation by Dr. Howe, that the refugees "promote the
industrial and material interests of the country and are valuable
citizens."[690]

  [689] Mitchell, _The Underground Railroad_, pp. 155, 156.

  [690] _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, p. 102. William
  Still, who made a trip through Canada West in 1855, expressed a
  view similar to that above quoted, and added the words: "To say
  that there are not those amongst the <DW52> people in Canada,
  as every place, who are very poor, ... who will commit crime,
  who indulge in habits of indolence and intemperance, ... would
  be far from the truth. Nevertheless, may not the same be said of
  white people, even where they have had the best chances in every
  particular?" _Underground Railroad Records_, p. xxviii.

[Illustration: CHURCH OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVES IN BOSTON.

This church once stood near the house of Lewis Hayden, 66 Phillips
Street, Boston, Massachusetts.

(From an old engraving.)]




CHAPTER VIII

FUGITIVE SETTLERS IN THE NORTHERN STATES


There were many fugitives from bondage that did not avail themselves
of the protection afforded by the proximity of Canadian soil. For
various reasons these persons remained within the borders of the
free states; some were drawn by the affinities of race to seek
permanent homes in communities of <DW52> people; some, keeping
the stories of their past lives hidden, found employment as well
as oblivion among the crowds in cities and towns; some, choosing
localities more or less remote from large centres of population,
settled where the presence of Quakers, Wesleyan Methodists,
Covenanters or Free Presbyterians gave them the assurance of safety
and assistance; and some, after a severe experience of pioneer
life in the woods of Canada, preferred to run their chances on
the southern shores of the lakes, where it was easier to gain a
livelihood, and whence escape could be made across the line at the
first intimation of danger.

As one would suppose, it is impossible to determine with any
accuracy how many fugitive settlers there were in the North at any
particular time. Estimates both local and general in character
have come down to us, and, naturally enough, one is inclined to
attach greater value to the former than to the latter, on the
score of probable correctness, but here the investigator is met
by the extreme paucity of examples, which, as it happens, are
confined to two towns in eastern Massachusetts, namely, Boston and
New Bedford. In October, 1850, the Rev. Theodore Parker stated
publicly that there were in Boston from four hundred to six hundred
fugitives.[691] Concerning the refugee population of New Bedford
our information is much less definite, for it is reported that
in that place there were between six hundred and seven hundred
 citizens, many of whom were fugitives.[692] Nevertheless one
cannot doubt that the representatives of this class were numerous
and widely scattered throughout the whole territory of the free
zone, for reference is made by many surviving abolitionists not
only to individual refugees or single families of refugees that
dwelt in their neighborhood, but even to settlements a considerable
part of whose people were runaway slaves. Where conditions were
peculiarly favorable it was not an unknown thing for runaways to
conclude their journeys when scarcely more than within the borders
of free territory. The Rev. Thomas C. Oliver, of Windsor, Canada,
is authority for the statement that fugitive settlers swarmed among
their Quaker protectors at Greenwich, New Jersey, on the very edge
of a slave state.[693] In communities situated at greater distance
from the sectional line, like Columbus[694] and Akron,[695] Ohio,
Elmira[696] and Buffalo,[697] New York, and Detroit, Michigan, many
fugitives are known to have lived. The Rev. Calvin Fairbank relates
that, while visiting Detroit in 1849, he discovered several families
he had helped from slavery living near the city. He went to see
these families, and afterward wrote concerning them: "Living near
the Johnsons, and like them contented and comfortable, I found the
Stewart and Coleman families, for whom I had also lighted the path
of freedom."[698] In the vicinity of Sandy Lake, in the northwestern
part of Pennsylvania, there was a colony of <DW52> people, most of
whom were runaway slaves.[699]

  [691] _Chronotype_, Oct. 7, 1850.

  [692] Clipping from the _Commonwealth_, preserved in a scrap-book
  relating to Theodore Parker, Boston Public Library.

  [693] Conversation with Mr. Oliver, Windsor, Ont., Aug. 2, 1895.

  [694] Conversation with the Rev. James Poindexter, Columbus, O.,
  summer of 1895.

  [695] _History of Summit County, Ohio_, pp. 579, 580.

  [696] Letters of Mrs. Susan L. Crane, Elmira, N.Y.

  [697] See p. 250, this chapter.

  [698] _The Chicago Tribune_, Jan. 29, 1893.

  [699] Letter of John F. Hogue, Greenville, Pa., Nov. 25, 1895.

Such evidence, which is local in its nature, should be considered
in conjunction with the general estimates of those persons that
expressed opinions after wide observation in regard to the whole
number of fugitive settlers in the North. The most indefinite of
these contemporary opinions is that of the veteran underground
helper, Samuel J. May, who states that "hundreds ventured to
remain this side of the Lakes."[700] Other judges attempt to put
their estimates into figures; thus, Henry Wilson thinks that by
1850 twenty thousand had found homes in the free states;[701] Mr.
Franklin B. Sanborn, admitting the inherent difficulty of the
calculation, places the number at from twenty-five thousand to fifty
thousand;[702] and the Canadian refugee, Josiah Henson, wrote in
1852: "It is estimated that the number of fugitive slaves in the
various free states ... amounts to 50,000."[703]

  [700] _Some Recollections of our Anti-Slavery Conflict_, p. 297.

  [701] _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. II, p. 304; see
  also E. B. Andrews' _History of the United States_, Vol. II, p.
  36.

  [702] Conversation with Mr. Sanborn, Cambridge, Mass., March,
  1897.

  [703] _The Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, as narrated
  by Himself_, p. 97.

Fugitives that thus dwelt in the Northern states for a longer or
shorter period did so at their own risk, and in general against the
advice of their helpers. Their reliance for safety was altogether
upon their own wariness and the public sentiment of the communities
where they lived, and until slavery perished in the Civil War they
were subjected to the fear of surprise and seizure. The Southern
people apparently regarded their right to recover their escaped
slaves as unquestionable as their right to reclaim their strayed
cattle, and they were determined to have the former as freely and
fully recognized in the North as the latter;[704] and it might be
added that there were not a few people in the North quite willing to
admit the slaveholder's right freely to reclaim his human property,
and to aid him in doing so. What the sentiment was that prevailed in
the North during the twenties and thirties of the present century is
evidenced in certain laws enacted by the legislatures of some of the
states in line with the Federal Slave Law of 1793. Thus, in an act
passed by the assembly of Pennsylvania, March 25, 1826, provision
was made for the issuance by courts of record of the commonwealth
of certificates or warrants of removal for <DW64>s or mulattoes,
claimed to be fugitives from labor;[705] and in a law enacted by
the legislature of Ohio, February 26, 1839, it was provided that
any justice of the peace, judge of a court of record, or mayor
should authorize the arrest of a person claimed as a fugitive slave
on the affidavit of the claimant or his agent, and that the judge
of a court of record before whom the fugitive was brought should
grant a certificate of removal upon the presentation of satisfactory
proof.[706]

  [704] James H. Fairchild, _The Underground Railroad, Tract No.
  87_, in Vol. IV, Western Reserve Historical Society, p. 106.

  [705] G. M. Stroud, _A Sketch of the Laws Relating to Slavery_,
  2d ed., 1856, pp. 281, 282.

  [706] _Statutes of the State of Ohio_, 1841, collated by J. B.
  Swan, pp. 595-600.

Among those that paid homage to such laws as these, and thus
made the North an unsafe refuge for slaves, were to be found
representatives of all classes of society. Samuel J. May opens to
view the convictions of some of the most cultured people of his day
by the following incidents related concerning two well-known New
England clergymen. "The excellent Dr. E. S. Gannett, of Boston, was
heard to say, more than once, very emphatically, and to justify it,
'that he should feel it to be his duty to turn away from his door
a fugitive slave,--unfed, unaided in any way, rather than set at
naught the law of the land.'

"And Rev. Dr. Dewey, whom we accounted one of the ablest expounders
and most eloquent defenders of our Unitarian faith,--Dr. Dewey was
reported to have said at two different times, in public lectures
or speeches during the fall of 1850 and the winter of 1851, that
'he would send his _mother_ into slavery, rather than endanger
the Union, by resisting this law enacted by the constituted
government of the nation.' He has often denied that he spoke thus
of his 'maternal relative,' and therefore I allow that he was
misunderstood. But he has repeatedly acknowledged that he did
say, 'I would consent that my own brother, my own son, should go,
_ten times rather_ would I go myself into slavery, than that this
Union should be sacrificed.'"[707] After the occurrence of the
famous Jerry rescue at Syracuse, October 1, 1851, many newspapers
representing both political parties emphatically condemned the
successful resistance made to the law by the abolitionists as "a
disgraceful, demoralizing and alarming act."[708]

  [707] _Some Recollections of our Anti-Slavery Conflict_, p. 367.

  [708] _Some Recollections of Our Anti-Slavery Conflict_, p. 380.
  The newspapers named by Mr. May are, _The Advertiser_ and _The
  American_ of Rochester, _The Gazette_ and _Observer_ of Utica,
  _The Oneida Whig_, _The Register_, _The Argus_ and _The Express_
  of Albany, _The Courier_ and _Inquirer_ and _The Express_ of New
  York.

There were not wanting in almost every community members of the
shiftless class of society that were always ready to obstruct the
passage of fugitive slaves to the North, and whose most vigorous
exercise was taken in the course of some slave-hunting adventure.
The Rev. W. M. Mitchell, who had had this class to contend with in
the performance of his underground work during a number of years in
Ohio, characterized it in a description, penned in 1860, in which
he sets forth one of the conditions that made the Northern states
an unsafe refuge for self-liberated <DW64>s. "The progress of the
Slave," he wrote, "is very much impeded by a class of men in the
Northern States who are too lazy to work at respectable occupations
to obtain an honest living, but prefer to obtain it, if possible,
whether honestly or dishonestly, by tracking runaway slaves. On
seeing advertisements in the newspapers of escaped slaves, with
rewards offered, they, armed to the teeth, saunter in and through
Abolition Communities or towns, where they are likely to find the
object of their pursuit. They sometimes watch the houses of known
Abolitionists.... We are hereby warned, and for our own safety
and that of the Slave, we act with excessive caution. The first
discoverer of these bloody rebels communicates their presence to
others of our company, that the entire band in that locality is
put on their guard. If the slave has not reached us, we are on the
lookout, with greater anxiety than the hunters, for the fugitive,
to prevent his falling into the possession of those demons in human
shape. On the other hand should the Slave be so fortunate as to
be in our possession at the time, we are compelled to keep very
quiet, until the hunter loses all hopes of finding him, therefore
gives up the search as a bad job, or moves on to another Abolition
Community, which gives us an opportunity of removing the Fugitive
further from danger, or sending him towards the North Star...."[709]

  [709] _The Underground Railroad_, pp. 13, 14.

It is not to be supposed, of course, that the business of
slave-hunting was carried on mainly by the persons here described
in such uncomplimentary terms. Persons of this type contented
themselves generally, no doubt, with acting as spies and informers,
and rarely engaged in the excitement of a slave-hunt except as the
aids of Southern planters or their agents. If it is true that there
was a sentiment averse to slavery prevailing through many years in
the North, it is also true that the residents of the free states
for the most part conceded the right of Southerners to pursue and
recover their fugitives without hindrance from their Northern
neighbors. The free states thus became what the abolitionists called
the "hunting-ground" of the South, and as early as 1830 or 1835
the pursuit of slaves began to attract wide attention. During the
years following many localities, especially in the middle states,
were visited from time to time by parties on the trail of the
fleeing bondman, or seeking out the secluded home of some self-freed
slave; and after the enactment of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850
Southerners became more energetic than before in pushing the search
for their escaped chattels. It has been recorded that "more than two
hundred arrests of persons claimed as fugitives were made from the
time of the passage of the Bill to the middle of 1856. About a dozen
of these were free persons, who succeeded in establishing the claim
that they never had been slaves; other persons, equally free, were
carried off. Half a dozen rescues were made, and the rest of these
cases were delivered to their owners. These arrests took place more
frequently in Pennsylvania than in any other Northern state. Many
fugitives were caught and carried back, of whom we have no accounts,
save that they were seen on the deck of some river steamboat, in the
custody of their owners, without even passing through the formality
of appearing before a commissioner. About two-thirds of the persons
arrested as above had trials. When the arrests to the number of two
hundred, at least, can be traced, and their dates fixed, during six
years, we may suppose that the Bill was not, as some politicians
averred, practically of little consequence."[710]

  [710] Weiss, _Life and Correspondence of Theodore Parker_, Vol.
  II, p. 93.

Concerning the efficiency of the new law there is a difference of
opinion among the contemporary writers that commented upon it;
but there could be no disagreement as to the distress into which
it plunged some of the refugees long resident in the free states.
In not a few instances these persons had married, acquired homes,
and were rearing their families in peace and happiness. Under the
Fugitive Slave Act some of these settlers were seized upon the
affidavit of their former owners, and with the sanction of the
federal authority were carried back into slavery. Among the many
cases that might be cited the following will serve to illustrate the
misfortunes ever ready to be precipitated upon fugitive settlers
in the Northern states. In 1851 John Bolding, claimed as the
property of a citizen of Columbia, South Carolina, was arrested in
Poughkeepsie, New York, and taken back to the South. Bolding was a
young man of good character, recently married, and the possessor
of a small tailor shop in Poughkeepsie.[711] In August, 1853,
George Washington McQuerry, of Cincinnati, was remanded to slavery
in Kentucky. He had lived several years in Ohio, had married a
free woman, and they had three children.[712] In September, 1853,
a family of <DW52> persons at Uniontown, Pennsylvania, were
claimed as slaves by a Virginian. Their statement that they had
been permitted by their master to visit friends in Fayette County
did not prevent their immediate restoration to him.[713] In May,
1857, Addison White, a runaway from Kentucky, was found living
near Mechanicsburg, Ohio, where he had been at work about six
months earning means to send for his wife and children. Some of the
abolitionists of the neighborhood prevented his reclamation.[714]
In three of these cases at least the reënslavement of the refugees
was prevented by an abolition sentiment locally strong enough to
lead to the purchase of the slaves from their claimants; but it is
noteworthy that public opinion in the neighborhoods where these
runaways lived was unable to shield them from capture.

  [711] _The Fugitive Slave Law and Its Victims_, by Samuel May,
  Jr., 1861, p. 19.

  [712] _Ibid._, p. 31. See Appendix B, p. 374.

  [713] _Ibid._, p. 68 _et seq._

  [714] See Appendix B, p. 375.

The refugees that preferred to settle in the Northern states rather
than in Canada naturally made homes for themselves in anti-slavery
communities among tried friends. Here they could rest with some
assurance upon the benevolence of these localities and feel safe,
although their liberty was still in danger. A slave-hunter in
entering such neighborhoods was obliged to move with great caution;
he was in the midst of strangers, with few allies, and his scheme
was likely to fail if his presence became known. Sometimes, when
he was in the very act of leading the captive back to the South
in bonds, he would find his progress interrupted by a crowd, his
authority questioned, his return to the office of a magistrate
insisted upon, and ultimately, perhaps, his prisoner released by a
procedure more or less formal. The slave-hunter that incautiously
flourished weapons and made threats was likely to be arrested and
subjected to such additional delays and inconveniences as would
render his undertaking expensive as well as vexatious. There can
be no doubt that this was the experience of many slave-owners that
sought to recover their servants in the free states. Mr. Clay
touched on this point, April 22, 1850, in presenting petitions to
the United States Senate from four citizens of Kentucky. These
persons, he said, "state that each of them has lost a slave.... That
these slaves have taken refuge in the state of Ohio, and that it is
in vain for them to attempt to recapture them; that they cannot go
there and attempt to recover their property without imminent hazard
to their lives."[715] This statement, reiterating the idea contained
in the petitions themselves, namely, that the danger attending
pursuit was great, is too strong in reference to a large number of
the abolition communities in the Northern states, in many of which
non-resistance principles were advocated. At the same time it must
be remembered that the usual methods of slave-catchers were not
conciliatory to the people among whom they went, and that their
bravado sometimes secured for them rough treatment at the hands of
a mob, especially if the number of <DW52> people present was large
enough to warrant their venting their outraged feelings.

  [715] _Congressional Globe_, New Series, Vol. XXII, Part I, p.
  793.

The difficulty of recovering slave property in the North had been
considerable for some years, and it was steadily growing greater.
The uncertainty of reclamation in the large number of cases made
the whole business unprofitable and undesirable for slave-owners.
A writer in the _North American Review_ for July, 1850, says,
"Though thousands of slaves have escaped by crossing the Ohio
River, or Mason and Dixon's line, during the last five years, no
attempt has been made to reclaim them in more than one case out of
a thousand."[716] If one takes this statement as meant to convey
merely the idea that the number of pursuits was extremely small in
proportion to the number of escapes there will be no difficulty
in accepting it, for probably this was the fact down to 1850; and
the explanation of it, so far as can be gathered from the lips of
Southern men, is to be found in the strong probability of failure in
undertaking these costly enterprises. Thus Mr. Mason, of Virginia,
in his argument in favor of a new fugitive slave law, declared that,
under the existing conditions, "you may as well go down into the
sea and endeavor to recover from his native element a fish which
has escaped from you, as expect to recover a ... fugitive. Every
difficulty is thrown in your way by the population.... There are
armed mobs, rescues. This is the real state of things."[717]

  [716] F. Bowen on "Extradition of Fugitive Slaves," Vol. LXXI, p.
  252 _et seq._

  [717] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-first Congress, First
  Session, p. 1583; also M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 31.

The law of 1850 was intended to remove the occasion for such
complaints on the part of slaveholders, and secure them in the
recovery and possession of their property. The effect of its
provisions upon the South was to arouse slave-owners to greater
activity in the pursuit of their chattels, while in the North the
effect was to increase greatly the determination in the minds of
many to resist the enforcement of the law. Despite the severe
penalties it levelled against those that should be guilty of
shielding the refugee, the expression of sympathy for fugitive
settlers was open and hearty in many quarters; and public meetings
were held by abolitionists to proclaim defiance to the law and
protection to the fugitive. At Lowell, Massachusetts, an immense
Free Soil meeting adopted resolutions inviting former residents of
the city to return from Canada, where they had taken refuge;[718]
at Syracuse, New York, a gathering of all parties declared its
abhorrence of the Fugitive Slave Law, and formed an association or
vigilance committee "so that the Southern oppressors may know that
the people of Syracuse and its vicinity are prepared to sustain one
another in resisting the encroachments of despotism";[719] at Boston
an indignation meeting was held "for the denunciation of the law and
the expression of sympathy and coöperation with the fugitive." Among
the resolutions adopted at this meeting, one advised "the fugitive
slaves and  inhabitants of Boston and the neighborhood to
remain with us, for we have not the smallest fear that any one of
them will be taken from us and carried off to bondage; and we trust
that such as have fled in fear will return to their business and
homes"; another resolution proposed the appointment of a vigilance
committee "to secure the fugitives and  inhabitants of
Boston and vicinity from any invasion of their rights by persons
acting under the law."[720] In Ashtabula County, Ohio, a meeting at
Hartsgrove resolved, "that we hold the Fugitive Slave Law in utter
contempt ... and that we will not aid in catching the fugitive, but
will feed him, and protect him with all the means in our power, and
that we will pledge our sympathy and property for the relief of any
person in our midst who may suffer any penalties for an honorable
opposition ... to the requirements of this law."[721] In other
portions also of the free states meetings were held in which the
purpose was avowed to protect fugitive slaves.[722]

  [718] Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America_, Vol.
  II, p. 306.

  [719] Samuel J. May, _Some Recollections of Our Anti-Slavery
  Conflict_, p. 353.

  [720] John Weiss, _Life and Correspondence of Theodore Parker_,
  Vol. II, p. 94.

  [721] Article by the Rev. S. D. Peet, in _History of Ashtabula
  County, Ohio_, pp. 33, 34.

  [722] "No sooner was the deed done, the Fugitive Slave Act sent
  forth to be the law of the land, than outcries of contempt and
  defiance came from every free state, and pledges of protection
  were given to the <DW52> population. It is not within the scope
  of my plan to attempt an account of the indignation meetings that
  were held in places too numerous to be even mentioned here." S.
  J. May, _Some Recollections of the Anti-Slavery Conflict_, p.
  349.

The change of sentiment in the North from passive acquiescence in
the law to active resistance to it is best seen, perhaps, in the
history of the so-called personal liberty laws. The real object of
these statutes was to impair the operation of the national Fugitive
Slave Law, although their proposed object was in most cases to
prevent the removal of free  citizens to the South under
the claim that they were fugitive slaves. These statutes were
passed by the legislatures of various states during the period of
a little more than thirty years from 1824 to 1858, the greater
number being enacted after the repeal of the Missouri Compromise
in 1854. The first two in the series were those enacted by Indiana
and Connecticut in 1824 and 1838 respectively, and provided that on
appeal fugitives might have a trial by jury. In 1840 Vermont and New
York framed laws granting jury trial, and also providing attorneys
to defend fugitives. In 1842 the Prigg decision gave the occasion
for a new class of statutes; the release of state authorities
from the execution of the Slave Law by the opinion handed down by
Justice Story was taken advantage of in Massachusetts, Vermont,
Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, and the officers of the states were
forbidden from performing the duties imposed by the law of 1793.
The decade from 1850 to 1860 is marked by a fresh crop of these
personal liberty acts, due to the sentiment aroused by the law of
1850 and aggravated by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. As the
new national law avoided the employment of state officers, state
legislation was now directed in the main to limiting the powers of
the executors of the laws as far as possible, and depriving them
of the facilities of action. Thus, the new laws generally provided
counsel for any one arrested as a fugitive; secured to him a trial
surrounded by the usual safeguards; prohibited the use of state
jails; and forbade state officers to issue writs or give aid to the
claimant. The penalty for the violation of these provisions was a
heavy fine and imprisonment. "Such acts," it is said, "were passed
in Vermont, Connecticut and Rhode Island, in Massachusetts, Michigan
and Maine. Later, laws were also enacted in Wisconsin, Kansas, Ohio
and Pennsylvania. Of the other Northern States, two only, New Jersey
and California, gave any official sanction to the rendition of
fugitives. In New Hampshire, New York, Indiana, Illinois, Iowa and
Minnesota, however, no full personal liberty laws were passed."[723]

  [723] M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 65-70, and the
  references there given.

Notwithstanding the disposition shown in many parts of the free
states to protect fugitive settlers, the Slave Law of 1850 spread
consternation and distress among them, and caused numbers to leave
the little homes they had established for themselves, and renew
their search for liberty. Perhaps in no community of the North did
fugitive settlers feel themselves more secure than in Boston, the
city of Garrison, Phillips and Parker; here they were gathered
together by the Rev. Leonard B. Grimes, a <DW52> man, who soon
organized a church of fugitive slaves, and such was the feeling of
confidence among them that in 1849 a building was begun for this
unique congregation. Within a few months, however, the new Slave
Law was enacted, and wrung from this band of runaways a cry of
anguish that may be justly regarded as expressing the distress of
the people of this class in all quarters of the free states. At a
meeting of the Boston refugees, held October 5, 1850, an appeal to
the clergy of Massachusetts was issued, in the preamble of which
was embodied the slaves' view of their own situation, and their
pitiful entreaty for help. As "trembling, proscribed and hunted
fugitives ... now scattered through the various towns and villages
of Massachusetts, and momentarily liable to be seized by the strong
arm of government, and hurried back to stripes, tortures and bondage
..." they implored the clergy to "'lift up (their) voices like
a trumpet' against the Fugitive Slave Bill, recently adopted by
Congress...."[724] The church building of the fugitive settlers
"was arrested midway towards its completion, and the members were
scattered in wild dismay. More than forty fled to Canada. One of
their number, Shadrach, was seized, but more fortunate than the
hapless Sims, who had no fellowship with them, he succeeded in
making his escape."[725] An individual case that illustrates the
sudden disaster experienced by numerous households throughout the
North was recorded by the Rev. J. S. C. Abbott, in January, 1852.
The case occurred in Boston in 1851: "A <DW52> girl, eighteen years
of age, a few years ago escaped from slavery at the South. Through
scenes of adventure and peril she found her way to Boston, obtained
employment, secured friends, and became a consistent member of a
Methodist church. She became interested in a very worthy young man,
of her own complexion, who was a member of the same church. They
were soon married. Their home, though humble, was the abode of piety
and contentment.... Seven years passed away; they had two little
boys, one six and the other four years of age. These children, the
sons of a free father, but of a mother who had been a slave, by the
laws of our Southern states were doomed to their mother's fate.
These Boston boys, born beneath the shadow of Faneuil Hall, the
sons of a free citizen of Boston, and educated in the Boston free
schools, were, by the compromises of the Constitution, admitted to
be slaves, the property of a South Carolinian planter. The Boston
father had no right to his own sons. The law, however, had long been
considered a dead letter. The Christian mother, as she morning and
evening bowed with her children in prayer, felt that they were safe
from the slave-hunter, surrounded as they were by the churches, the
schools, and the free institutions of Massachusetts.

  [724] Scrap-book of clippings, circulars, etc., presented to the
  Boston Public Library by Mrs. L. L. Parker.

  [725] C. E. Stevens, _Anthony Burns, A History_, 1856, p. 208.

"The Fugitive Slave Law was enacted. It revived the hopes of the
slave-owners. A young, healthy, energetic mother, with two fine
boys, was a rich prize.... Good men began to say: 'We must enforce
this law; it is one of the compromises of the Constitution.'
Christian ministers began to preach: 'The voice of the law is the
voice of God. There is no higher rule of duty.'... The poor woman
was panic-stricken. Her friends gathered around her and trembled
for her. Her husband was absent from home, a seaman on board one
of our Liverpool packets. She was afraid to get out of doors lest
some one from the South should see her and recognize her. One day,
as she was going to the grocery for some provisions, her quick and
anxious eye caught a glimpse of a man prowling around, whom she
immediately recognized as from the vicinity of her old home of
slavery. Almost fainting with terror, she hastened home, and, taking
her two children by the hand, fled to the house of a friend. She and
her trembling children were hid in the garret. In less than one hour
after her escape, the officer with a writ came for her arrest.

"... At midnight, her friends took her in a hack, and conveyed her,
with her children, to the house of her pastor. A prayer-meeting
had been appointed there, at that hour, in behalf of the suffering
sister. A small group of stricken hearts were assembled....
Groanings and lamentations filled the room. No one could pray....
Other fugitives were there, trembling in view of a doom more
dreadful to them than death. After an hour of weeping ... they took
this Christian mother and her children in a hack, and conveyed them
to one of the Cunard steamers, which fortunately was to sail for
Halifax the next day.... Her brethren and sisters of the church
raised a little money from their scanty means to pay her passage,
and to save her for a few days from starving, after her first
arrival in the cold land of strangers. Her husband soon returned to
Boston, to find his home desolate, his wife and his children exiles
in a foreign land.

"I think that this narrative may be relied upon as accurate. I
received the facts from the lips of one, a member of the church, who
was present at that midnight 'weeping-meeting,' before the Lord.
Such is slavery in Boston, in the year 1852. Has the North nothing
to do with slavery?"[726]

  [726] Quoted by F. B. Sanborn, in his _Life of Dr. S. G. Howe,
  the Philanthropist_, pp. 237, 238, 239. Similar stories are
  related by Lydia Maria Child, in her _Life of Isaac T. Hopper_,
  pp. 455-458.

In localities nearer to slave territory than Boston, and in places
where anti-slavery sentiment was perhaps less pronounced, it may be
supposed that terror was not less prevalent among fugitive settlers.
The members of the  community near Sandy Lake in northwestern
Pennsylvania, many of whom had purchased small farms and had them
partly paid for, sold out or gave away their farms and went to
Canada in a body.[727] The sudden disappearance of refugees from
their habitations in various other places as soon as the character
of the new law became noised abroad was a phenomenon the cause of
which was unmistakable. Of the many that thus vanished from their
accustomed haunts,[728] Josiah Henson, writing in 1852, said:
"Some have found their way to England, but the mass are flying to
Canada, where they feel themselves secure. Already several thousands
have gone thither, and have added considerably to the number
already settled, or partially settled, in that part of the British
dominions...."[729] As Mr. Henson was a worker among the refugees in
Canada he was in a position to speak from his personal knowledge,
and his testimony is sustained by that of the Rev. Anthony Bingey,
an escaped slave, who helped receive fugitives at Amherstburg,
Ontario, one of the chief landing-places of the <DW64> emigrants from
the United States. Mr. Bingey states that after the Fugitive Slave
Law took effect the runaways came there "by fifties every day, like
frogs in Egypt." Before that time "many had settled in the States,
but after the Fugitive Slave Law they could be taken, so they came
in from all parts."[730] Sumner estimated that, altogether, "as many
as six thousand Christian men and women, meritorious persons,--_a
larger band than that of the escaping Puritans_,--precipitately
fled from homes which they had established" to British soil. _The
Liberator_ published a statement, made in February, 1851, that the
African Methodist and Baptist churches of Buffalo, New York, had
both lost a large number of members, the loss of the former being
given as one hundred. The Baptist church of the <DW52> people of
Rochester, in the same state, out of a membership of one hundred and
fourteen, lost one hundred and twelve, including the pastor. The
African Baptist church of Detroit lost eighty-four members at this
time.[731]

  [727] Letter of John F. Hogue, Greenville, Pa., Nov. 25, 1895;
  letter of the Rev. James Lawson, Franklin, Pa., Nov. 25, 1895.

  [728] _Life of William Lloyd Garrison_, Vol. III, p. 302. See
  also Rhodes's _History of the United States_, Vol. I, p. 198.

  [729] _The Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, as narrated
  by Himself_, pp. 97, 98, 99.

  [730] Conversation with Mr. Bingey, Windsor, Ont., July 31, 1896.

  [731] _Life of Garrison_, Vol. III, p. 302; also foot-note, pp.
  302, 303.

One must not imagine, however, that all the fugitives migrated
beyond the borders of the free states. No doubt a considerable
number, more daring than the rest,[732] or in some way favored
by circumstances, chose to remain and run the risk of discovery.
Colonel Thomas Wentworth Higginson asserts that "For many years
fugitive slaves came to Massachusetts and remained, this lasting
until the Fugitive Slave Law was passed in 1850, and longer. Even
after that period we tried to keep them in Worcester, where I
then lived, it being a strong anti-slavery place, and they often
stayed."[733] Some of the fugitives that were induced to move by
the Slave Law only passed from one state into another, instead of
continuing their journey to regions beyond the jurisdiction of a
United States commissioner. Of a company of blacks dwelling near
the home of Elijah F. Pennypacker in Chester County, Pennsylvania,
at the time of the enactment of the law of 1850, it is said that
while some went to Canada, some went to New York and some to
Massachusetts.[734] It was noted above that the new church of the
fugitives of Boston was stopped midway in the process of building
by the promulgation of the act, but it is significant that the
structure was completed soon after. Evidently not all of the
refugees departed from the city of their adoption. It is related
that "When the first fury of the storm had blown over, Mr. Grimes
set himself with redoubled energy to repair the wastes that had
been made. He collected money from the charitable, and purchased the
members of his church out of slavery, that they might return without
fear to the fold. He made friends among the rich, who advanced
funds for the completion of his church. At length it was finished,
and, as if for an omen of good, was dedicated on the first day when
Burns stood for trial before Commissioner Loring."[735] Runaways
entering the free states for the first time after the subsidence
of the paroxysm of fear among their fellows sometimes remained in
neighborhoods where the conditions were supposed to be favorable to
their safety. Some of these were never disturbed, and consequently
never went to Canada at all.

  [732] "Some of the boldest chose to remain, and armed themselves
  to defend their freedom, instinctively calculating that the
  sight of such an exigency would make the Northern heart beat
  too rapidly for prudence!" Weiss, _Life and Correspondence of
  Theodore Parker_, Vol. II, p. 92.

  [733] Letter of Mr. Higginson, Cambridge, Mass., Feb. 5, 1894.

  [734] R. C. Smedley, _History of the Underground Railroad_, p.
  210.

  [735] C. E. Stevens, _Anthony Burns, A History_, p. 208. In a
  foot-note it is said, "The church is a neat and commodious brick
  structure, two stories in height, and handsomely finished in the
  interior. It will seat five or six hundred people. The whole
  cost, including the land, was $13,000, of which, through the
  exertion of Mr. Grimes, $10,000 have already (1856) been paid...."

Among the fugitive settlers in the Northern states there were
some at least that became widely known among abolitionists and
others as active agents of the Underground Railroad. Frederick
Douglass was one of these, and during his residence in New Bedford,
Massachusetts, and later during his residence in Rochester, New
York, he was able to help many runaways. The Rev. J. W. Loguen, who
became a bishop of the African Methodist Church about 1869, settled
in Syracuse, New York, in 1841, and became immediately one of the
managers of secret operations there. In his hospitable home, Samuel
J. May relates, was fitted up an apartment for fugitive slaves,
and, for years before the Emancipation Act, scarcely a week passed
without some one, in his flight from slavedom to Canada, enjoyed
shelter and repose at Elder Loguen's."[736] Lewis Hayden, for
many years a prominent citizen of Boston, who owed his liberty to
the self-sacrificing efforts of the Rev. Calvin Fairbank and Miss
Delia Webster in September, 1844,[737] made a practice of harboring
slaves in his house, number 66 Phillips Street. "Some there are,"
a recent writer declares, "who well remember when William Craft was
in hiding here from the slave-catchers, and how Lewis Hayden had
placed two kegs of gunpowder on the premises, resolved to blow up
his house rather than surrender the fugitive. The heroic frenzy of
the resolute black face, as with match in hand Hayden stood waiting
the man-stealers, those who saw it declare that they can never
forget."[738]

  [736] _Some Recollections of our Anti-Slavery Conflict_, pp. 202,
  203.

  [737] _Rev. Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times_, pp. 46, 48, 49.

  [738] Article by A. H. Grimké, on "Anti-Slavery Boston," in _The
  New England Magazine_, December, 1890, p. 458.

William Wells Brown, who distinguished himself as an anti-slavery
lecturer in this country and England, rendered considerable service
to fellow-fugitives shortly after his escape from Missouri about
1840.[739] Securing employment on a Lake Erie steamboat, he was able
to provide the means of transportation for many runaways across the
lake. As the boat frequently touched at Cleveland on its trips to
and fro between Buffalo and Detroit, Mr. Brown made an arrangement
with some Cleveland friends to furnish transportation, which was
done without charge, for any <DW64>s they might wish to send to
Canada. The result was that delegations of anxious refugees were
often taken aboard at the Cleveland wharf. Brown engaged in this
service in the early forties, and his companies were therefore
small, but he sometimes gave passage to four or five at one time.
"In the year 1842," he says, "I conveyed, from the first of May
to the first of December, sixty-nine fugitives over Lake Erie to
Canada. In 1843 I visited Malden, in upper Canada, and counted
seventeen in that small village whom I had assisted in reaching
Canada."[740] John W. Jones, a respected citizen of Elmira, New
York, made his way in 1844 from Virginia to the city where he
still lives. During the following year he succeeded in aiding
two younger brothers to join him, and thereafter he continued,
in coöperation with Mr. Jervis Langdon and other abolitionists
of Elmira, to succor his brethren in their search for places of
refuge. After the construction of the Northern Central Railroad
through Elmira, Mr. Jones effected an arrangement with some of
the employees of that road by which his friends could be carried
through to the Canadian border in baggage-cars. At the same time he
was in regular correspondence with William Still, the agent of the
central underground station at Philadelphia, who frequently sent him
companies of passengers requiring immediate transportation.[741]
John H. Hooper, a fugitive from the Eastern Shore of Maryland and
an acquaintance there of Fred Douglass, kept a station at Troy,
New York, where he settled.[742] Louis Washington, who fled from
Richmond, Virginia, to Columbus, Ohio, became a conductor of the
Underground Road at that point. Mr. James Poindexter, a well-known
 clergyman of Columbus, knew Washington intimately, and
testifies that he had teams and wagons with which he conveyed
the midnight pilgrims on their way.[743] There are other cases
of fugitive settlers that became members of the large company of
underground operators. But a sufficient number have been mentioned
to indicate that they were not rare. The first and the last of the
seven named did not continue long in the status of escaped slaves.
Frederick Douglass secured his liberty in a legal way through the
payment by English friends of the sum of $750 to his master. Louis
Washington purchased his own freedom. The other five, so far as
known, were never relieved by the payment of money from the claims
of their masters. Most, if not all, of these men remained in the
Northern states after the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.

  [739] S. J. May, _Some Recollections of our Anti-Slavery
  Conflict_, p. 289.

  [740] _Narrative of William W. Brown, A Fugitive Slave_, pp. 106,
  107, 108.

  [741] Letters of Mrs. Susan Crane, Elmira, N.Y.; letters of John
  W. Jones, Elmira, N.Y.; see also Still, _Underground Railroad
  Records_, p. 530.

  [742] Letters of Mr. Martin I. Townsend, Troy. N.Y., Sept. 4,
  1896, and April 3, 1897.

  [743] Conversation with Mr. Poindexter, Columbus, O., in the
  summer of 1895.




CHAPTER IX

PROSECUTIONS OF UNDERGROUND RAILROAD MEN


The aversion to a law for the rendition of fugitive slaves that
early manifested itself in the North was perhaps foreshadowed in the
hesitating manner in which the question was dealt with by Congress.
The original demand for legislation was caused by the activity
of kidnappers in Pennsylvania; but the first bill, reported from
committee to the House in November, 1791, was dropped for some
reason not now discoverable. At the end of March in the following
year a committee of the Senate was appointed to consider the
matter, but it accomplished nothing. At the beginning of the next
session a second Senate committee was chosen, and from this body
a bill emanated. This bill proved to be unsatisfactory, however,
and after the committee had been remodelled by the addition of two
new members the bill was recommitted with instructions to amend.
With some slight change the measure proposed by the committee was
adopted by the Senate, January 18; and after an interval of nearly
three weeks the House passed it with little or no debate, by a vote
of forty-eight to seven. Thus for nearly a year and a quarter the
subject was under the consideration of Congress before it could be
embodied in a bill and sent to the executive for his signature. On
February 12, 1793, President Washington signed this bill and it
became a law.[744]

  [744] M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 17, 18.

The object of the law was, of course, to enforce the constitutional
guarantee in regard to the delivery of fugitives from service to
their masters. An analysis of the law will show that forcible
seizure of the alleged fugitive was authorized; that the decision of
the magistrate before whom he was to be taken was allowed to turn on
the testimony of the master, or the affidavit of some magistrate
in the state from which he came; and that trial by jury was denied.
Persons attempting to obstruct the law by harboring or concealing a
fugitive slave, resisting his arrest, or securing his rescue, were
liable to a fine of five hundred dollars for the benefit of the
claimant, and the right of action on account of these injuries was
reserved to the claimant.[745]

  [745] _Statutes at Large_, I, 302-305.

[Illustration: SALMON P. CHASE, of OHIO,

known as "attorney-general for fugitive slaves," on account of his
frequent appearance as counsel in fugitive slave cases.]

[Illustration: THOMAS GARRETT, of WILMINGTON, DELAWARE,

who aided 2700 runaways, and paid $8000 in fines for his violations
of the slave laws.]

The exclusive regard for the rights of the owner exhibited in these
provisions was fitted to stir the popular sense of justice in
the Northern states, most of which had already ranged themselves
by individual action on the side of liberty. Persons moved by
the appeals of the hunted <DW64> to transgress the statute would
naturally try to avoid its penalties by concealment of their acts,
and this we know was what they did. The whole movement denominated
the Underground Railroad was carried on in secret, because only
thus could the fugitives, in whose behalf it originated, and their
abettors, by whom it was maintained, be secure from the law. When
through mischance or open resistance, as sometimes happened, an
offender against the law was discovered and brought to trial, the
case was not allowed to progress far before the Fugitive Recovery
Act itself was assailed vigorously by the counsel for the defendant.
The grounds of attack included the absence of provision for jury
trial, the authority of the claimant or his agent to arrest without
a warrant, the antagonism between state and federal legislation, the
supposed repugnancy of the law of 1793 to the Ordinance of 1787,
the denial of the power of Congress to legislate on the subject of
fugitive slaves, and the question as to the responsibility for the
execution of the law. Nearly if not all of these disputed points
were involved in the great question as to the constitutionality
of the congressional act, a question that kept working up through
the successive decisions of the courts to irritate and disturb the
peace between the sections, that the fugitive clause in the federal
Constitution, the act of 1793 itself, and the judicial affirmations
following in their train were intended to promote.

The omission of a provision from the law of Congress securing trial
by jury to the alleged fugitive was at once remarked by the friends
of the bondman, and caused the law to be denounced in the court-room
as worthy only of the severest condemnation.[746] As early as
1819, in the case of Wright _vs._ Deacon, tried before the Supreme
Court of Pennsylvania, it was urged that the supposed fugitive was
entitled to a jury trial, but the arguments made in support of the
claim have not been preserved.[747] The question was presented in
several subsequent cases of importance arising under the law of
1793, namely, Jack _vs._ Martin, in 1835,[748] Peter, _alias_ Lewis
Martin, about 1837,[749] and State _vs._ Hoppess, in 1845.[750] From
the reports of these cases one is not able to gather much in the
way of direct statement showing what were the grounds taken for
the advocacy of trial by jury in such cases, but the indications
that appear are not to be mistaken. In all of these cases it seems
to have been insisted that the law of 1793 failed to conform to
the constitutional requirement on this point; and in State _vs._
Hoppess it is distinctly stated that the law provided for a trial of
the most important right without a jury, contrary to the amendment
of the Constitution declaring that "In suits at common law, where
the value shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury
shall be preserved...";[751] and that the act also authorized the
deprivation of a person of his or her liberty contrary to another
amendment, which declares that no person shall be "deprived of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law."[752] In Jack
_vs._ Martin, as probably in the other cases, the obvious objection
seems to have been made that the denial of the jury contributed to
make easy the enslavement of free citizens. The courts, however, did
not sustain these objections; thus, for example, in the last case
named, Judge Nelson, while admitting the defect of the law, decided
in conformity with it,[753] and the claims upon the constitutional
guarantees, asserted in behalf of the supposed fugitive, were also
overruled, a reason given in the case of Wright _vs._ Deacon being
that the evident scope and tenor of both the Constitution and the
act of Congress favored the delivery of the fugitive on a summary
proceeding without the delay of a formal trial in a court of common
law. Another reason offered by the court in this case, and repeated
by the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District
of New York in the matter of Peter, _alias_ Lewis Martin, was that
the examination under the federal slave law was only preliminary,
its purpose being merely to determine the claimant's right to
carry the fugitive back to the state whence he had fled, where the
question of slavery would properly be open to inquiry.

  [746] Professor Eugene Wambaugh, of the Law School of Harvard
  University, in a letter to the author, comments as follows on
  the source of the injustice wrought by the Fugitive Slave acts:
  "The difficulty lay in the initial assumption that a human being
  can be property. Grant this assumption, and there follow many
  absurdities, among them the impossibility of framing a Fugitive
  Slave Law that shall be both logical and humane. Human beings
  are entitled to a trial of the normal sort, especially in a case
  involving the liability of personal restraint. Chattels, however,
  are entitled to no trial at all; and if a chattel be lost or
  stolen, the owner may retake it wherever he finds it, provided he
  commits no breach of the peace. (3 Blackstone's _Commentaries_,
  4.) If slaves had been treated as ordinary chattels, there
  could have been no trial as to the ownership of them, unless,
  indeed, there were a dispute between competing claimants. There
  would have been, however, the fatal objection that thus a free
  man--black, mulatto, or white--might be enslaved without a
  hearing. Here, then, is a puzzle. If the man is a slave, he
  is entitled to no trial at all. If he is free, he is entitled
  to a trial of the most careful sort, surrounded with all the
  safeguards that have been thrown up by the law. When there is
  such a dilemma, is it strange that there should be a compromise?
  The Fugitive Slave Laws really were a compromise; for in so far
  as they provided for an abnormal and incomplete trial, a hearing
  before a United States Commissioner, simply to determine rights
  as between the supposed slave and the supposed master, they
  conceded the radical impossibility of following out logically
  the supposition that human beings can be chattels, and, in so
  far as they denied to the supposed slave the normal trial, they
  assumed in advance that he was a slave. I need not write of the
  dilemma further. A procedure intermediate between a formal trial
  and a total denial of justice was probably the only solution
  practicable in those days; but it was an illogical solution, and
  the only logical solution was emancipation."

  [747] 5 _Sergeant and Rawle's Reports_, 63. See Appendix B, p.
  368.

  [748] 14 _Wendell's Reports_, 514. See Appendix B, p. 368.

  [749] In the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern
  District of New York. 2 _Paine's Reports_, 352.

  [750] 2 _Western Law Journal_, 282.

  [751] Amendments, Article VII.

  [752] _Ibid._, Article V.

  [753] _12 Wendell's Reports_, 315-324.

The mode of arrest permitted by the law was a cause of irritation
to the minds of abolitionists throughout the free states, and
became one of the points concerning which they joined issue in
the courts. The law empowered the claimant to seize the fugitive
wheresoever found for the purpose of taking him before an officer
to prove property. The circumstances that quickened the sympathy
of a community into active resistance to this feature of the law
are fully illustrated in one of the earliest cases coming before
a high court, in which the question of seizure was brought up for
determination. The case is that of Commonwealth vs. Griffith, which
was tried in the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, at the
October term in 1823. From the record of the matter appearing in the
law-books, one gathers that a slave, Randolph, who had fled from his
master in Virginia, found a refuge in New Bedford about 1818, where
by his thrift he acquired a dwelling-house. After several years
he was discovered by Griffith, his owner's agent, and was seized
without a warrant or other legal process, although the agent had
taken the precaution to have a deputy sheriff present. The agent's
intention was to take the slave before a magistrate for examination,
pursuant to the act of 1793.[754] New Bedford was a Quaker town,
and the slave seems not to have lacked friends, for the agent was
at once indicted for assault and battery and false imprisonment.
The action thus begun was prosecuted in the name of the state,
under the direction of Mr. Norton, the attorney-general. As against
the act of Congress the prosecution urged that the Constitution
did not authorize a seizure without some legal process, and that
such a seizure would manifestly be contrary to the article of the
amendments of the Constitution that asserted the right of the people
to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against
unreasonable searches and seizures.[755] The protest that if the
law was constitutional any citizen's house might be invaded without
a warrant under pretence that a <DW64> was concealed there called
forth the interesting remark from Chief Justice Parker that a case
arising out of a constable's entering a citizen's house without
warrant in search of a slave had come before him in Middlesex, and
that he had held the act to be a trespass. Nevertheless, the court
sustained the law on the ground that slaves were not parties to the
Constitution, and that the amendment referred to had relation only
to the parties.[756]

  [754] _2 Pickering's Reports_, 12. See Appendix B, p. 368.

  [755] Amendments, Article IV; 2 _Pickering's Reports_, 15, 16.

  [756] 2 _Pickering's Reports_, 19.

The question of arrest without warrant emerged later in several
other cases; for example, Johnson vs. Tompkins (1833),[757] the
matter of Peter, _alias_ Lewis Martin (1837),[758] Prigg _vs._
Pennsylvania (1842),[759] and State _vs._ Hoppess (1845).[760] The
line of objection followed by those opposing the law in this series
will be sufficiently indicated by the arguments presented in the
Massachusetts case of 1823, treated above. The tribunals before
which the later suits were brought did not depart from the precedent
set in the early case, and the act of 1793 was invariably justified.
In Johnson _vs._ Tompkins the court pointed out that under the
law the claimant was not only free to arrest his fugitive without
a warrant, but that he was also free to do this unaccompanied by
any civil officer, although, as was suggested, it was the part of
prudence to have such an officer to keep the peace.[761] In the
famous case of Prigg _vs._ Pennsylvania, the Supreme Court of the
United States went back of the law of Congress to the Constitution
in seeking the source of the master's right of recaption, and laid
down the principle 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.
In this sense and to this extent this clause of the Constitution
may properly be said to execute itself, and to require no aid from
legislation, state or national."[762]

  [757] In the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern
  District of Pennsylvania. 1 _Baldwin's Circuit Court Reports_, p.
  571 et seq. See Appendix B, p. 368.

  [758] 2 _Paine's Reports_, 350. See Appendix B, p. 369.

  [759] 16 _Peters' Reports_, 613.

  [760] 2 _Western Law Journal_, 282. See Appendix B, p. 371.

  [761] 1 _Baldwin's Circuit Court Reports_, 571; Hurd, _Law of
  Freedom and Bondage_, Vol. II, p. 444.

  [762] 16 _Peters' Reports_, 613.

For many years before Prigg's case various states in the North
had considered it to be within the province of their legislative
powers to enact laws dealing with the subject of fugitive slaves.
It would be beside our purpose to enter here upon an examination
of these statutes, but it is proper to say that the variety of
particulars in which these differed from the law concerning the same
subject enacted by Congress prepared the way for a series of legal
contests in regard to the question, whether the power to legislate
in relation to fugitive slaves could be exercised properly by the
states as well as by the federal government. This issue presented
itself in at least three notable cases under the law of 1793: these
were Jack _vs._ Martin (1835), Peter, _alias_ Lewis Martin (1837),
and Prigg _vs._ Pennsylvania (1842). The decisions reached in the
first and last cases are of especial significance, because, in the
first, the question of concurrent jurisdiction constituted the
subject of main interest for the Supreme Court of New York, the
court to which the case had been taken from an inferior tribunal;
while in the last case, the importance attaches to the conclusive
character of an adjudication pronounced by the most exalted court of
the nation.

In Jack _vs._ Martin the action was begun under the New York
law of 1828 for the recovery of a fugitive from New Orleans.
Notwithstanding the fact that this law authorized the seizure and
return of fugitives to their owners, and that in the case before
us, as occurred also in the case of Peter, _alias_ Lewis Martin,
the <DW64> was adjudged to his claimant, the law of the state was
considered invalid, because the right of legislation on the subject
was held to belong exclusively to the national government.[763]

  [763] 12 _Wendell's Reports_, 311, 316-318.

In Prigg's case[764] a statute of Pennsylvania, passed in 1826,
and bearing the suggestive title, "An act to give effect to the
provisions of the Constitution of the United States relative to
fugitives from labor, for the protection of free people of color,
and to prevent kidnapping," was violated by Edward Prigg in seizing
and removing a fugitive slave-woman and her children from York
County, Pennsylvania, into Maryland, where their mistress lived.
In the argument made before the Supreme Court in support of the
state law, the authority of the state to legislate was urged on the
ground that such authority was not prohibited to the states nor
expressly granted "in terms" to Congress;[765] that the statute of
Pennsylvania had been enacted at the instance of Maryland, and with
a view to giving effect to the constitutional provision relative
to fugitives;[766] that the states could best determine how the
duty of delivery enjoined upon them should be performed so as to
be made acceptable to their citizens;[767] and that the act of
Congress was silent as to the rights of <DW64>s wrongfully seized
and of the states whose territory was entered and laws violated
by persons acting under pretext of right.[768] The Supreme Court
did not sustain these objections. A majority of the judges agreed
with Justice Story in the view that Congress alone had the power
to legislate on the subject of fugitive slaves. The reasons given
for this view were two: first, the constitutional source of the
authority, by virtue of which the force of an act of Congress
pervades the whole Union uncontrolled by state sovereignty or state
laws, and secures rights that otherwise would rest upon interstate
comity and favor; and, secondly, the necessity of having a uniform
system of regulations for all parts of the United States, by
which the differences arising from the varieties of policy, local
convenience and local feelings existing in the various states can
be avoided. The right to retake fugitive slaves and the correlative
duty to deliver them were to be "coextensive and uniform in remedy
and operation throughout the whole Union." While maintaining that
the right of legislation in this matter was exclusively vested in
Congress, the court insisted that it did not thereby interfere with
the police power of the several states, and that by virtue of this
power the states had the authority to arrest and imprison runaway
slaves, and to expel them from their borders, just as they might do
with vagrants, provided that in exercising this jurisdiction the
rights of owners to reclaim their slaves secured by the Constitution
and the legislation of Congress were not impeded or destroyed.[769]

  [764] See Appendix B, p. 370.

  [765] 16 _Peters' Reports_, 579.

  [766] _Ibid._, 588-590.

  [767] _Ibid._, 595.

  [768] _Ibid._, 602.

  [769] _Ibid._, 612-617.

As the friends of runaway slaves sometimes sought to oppose to the
summary procedure of the federal law the processes provided by
state laws in behalf of fugitives, so in their endeavor to overthrow
the act of 1793, they occasionally appealed to the Ordinance for
the government of the Northwest Territory. The Ordinance, it will
be remembered, contained a clause prohibiting slavery throughout
the region northwest of the Ohio River, and another authorizing
the surrender of slaves escaping into this territory.[770] The
abolitionists took advantage of these provisions under certain
circumstances, in the hope of securing the release of those that
had fallen into the eager grasp of the congressional act, and at
the same time of proving the incompatibility of this measure with
the Ordinance. The attempt to do these things was made in three
well-known cases, which came before the courts about 1845. The first
of these was State _vs._ Hoppess, tried before the Supreme Court of
Ohio on the circuit, to secure the liberation of a slave that had
fled from his keeper, but was afterwards recaptured;[771] the second
was Vaughan _vs._ Williams, adjudicated in the Circuit Court of the
United States for the District of Indiana, a case originating in an
action against the defendant for rescuing certain fugitives;[772]
and the third was Jones _vs._ Van Zandt, which was carried to the
Supreme Court of the United States and there decided. This last case
grew out of the aid given nine runaways by Mr. Van Zandt, through
which one of them succeeded in escaping.[773] The arguments, based
upon the Ordinance, that were advanced in these cases are adequately
set forth in the report of the first case, a report prepared by
Salmon P. Chase, subsequently Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
of the United States. These arguments, two in number, were as
follows: first, the Ordinance expressly prohibited slavery, and
thereby effected the immediate emancipation of all slaves in the
Territory; and, secondly, the clause in the Ordinance providing for
the surrender of fugitives applied only to persons held to service
in the _original_ states.[774]

  [770] See Chap. II, pp. 28, 32.

  [771] 2 _Western Law Journal_, 279-293.

  [772] 3 _Western Law Journal_, 65-71; also, 3 _McLean's Reports_,
  530-538.

  [773] 5 _Howard's Reports_, 215 _et seq._

  [774] 2 _Western Law Journal_, 281, 283; 3 _McLean_, 530.

The opinions given by the courts in the cases under consideration
failed to support the idea of the irreconcilability existing between
the law of 1793 and the Ordinance. The Supreme Court of Ohio
declared that under the federal Constitution the right of recaption
of fugitive slaves was secured to the new states to the same extent
that it belonged to the original states.[775] The Circuit Court of
the United States took virtually the same stand by pointing out
that a state carved from the Northwest Territory assumed the same
constitutional obligations by entering the Union that the original
thirteen states had earlier assumed, and that where a conflict
occurred the Constitution was paramount to the Ordinance.[776]
Finally, the Supreme Court at Washington declared that the clause
in the Ordinance prohibiting slavery applied only to people living
within the borders of the Northwest Territory, and that it did not
impair the rights of those living in states outside of this domain.
Wheresoever the Ordinance existed the states preserved their own
laws, as well as the Ordinance, by forbidding slavery; the provision
of the Constitution and the act of Congress looking toward the
delivery of fugitive slaves did not interfere with the laws of the
free states as to their own subjects. The court therefore held that
there was no repugnance between the act and the Ordinance.[777]

  [775] 2 _Western Law Journal_, 288.

  [776] 3 _McLean's Reports_, 532; 3 _Western Law Journal_, 65.

  [777] 5 _Howard's Reports_, 230, 231.

Among the various objections raised in the court-room against the
law of 1793, the denial of the power of Congress to legislate on the
subject of fugitive slaves was one that should not be overlooked.
It commanded the attention of the bench in at least two important
cases, both of which have been mentioned in other connections,
namely, Peter, _alias_ Lewis Martin (1837), and State _vs._ Hoppess
(1845). In both of these cases the denial of legislative authority
was based upon the doctrine that there had been no delegation of the
necessary power to Congress by the Constitution. The fugitive slave
clause in the Constitution, it was said in the report of the second
case, prepared by Mr. Chase, granted no power at all to Congress,
but was "a mere clause of compact imposing a duty on the states
to be fulfilled, if at all, by state legislation."[778] However
prevalent this view may have been in the Northern states,--and the
number of state laws dealing with the subject of fugitive slaves
indicates that it predominated,--neither the Circuit Court of the
United States for the Southern District of New York in the earlier
case, nor the Supreme Court of Ohio in the later, were willing
to subscribe to the doctrine. On the contrary, both asserted the
power of Congress to pass laws for the restoration of runaway
slaves, on the ground that the creation of a duty or a right by the
Constitution is the warrant under which Congress necessarily acts in
making the laws needful to enforce the duty or secure the right.[779]

  [778] 2 _Paine's Reports_, 354; 2 _Western Law Journal_, 282.

  [779] 2 _Paine's Reports_, 354, 355; also, 2 _Western Law
  Journal_, 289.

The outcome of the judicial examination in the high courts of
the various points thus far considered was wholly favorable to
the constitutionality of the law of 1793. The one case within
the category of great cases in which that law was decided to
be unconstitutional in any particular was that of Prigg _vs._
Pennsylvania. By the law of 1793 state and local authorities
were empowered to take cognizance of fugitive slave cases
together with judges holding their appointments from the federal
government.[780] In the hearing given the case before the Supreme
Court at Washington, in 1842, Mr. Johnson, the attorney-general of
Pennsylvania, cited former decisions of the Supreme Court to show
that in so far as the congressional law vested jurisdiction in
state officers it was unconstitutional and void.[781] The court's
answer was momentous and far-reaching. While the law was declared
to be constitutional in its essential features, it was asserted
that it did not point out any state functionaries, or any state
actions, to carry its provisions into effect. The states could not,
therefore, so the court decided, be compelled to enforce them;
and any insistence that the states were bound to provide means
for the performance of the duties of the national government,
nowhere delegated or entrusted to them by the Constitution,
would bear the appearance of an unconstitutional exercise of the
interpretative power.[782] As the decision in the Prigg case
carried the weight of great authority, and became a precedent for
all future judgments,[783] the relief it afforded state officers
from distasteful functions was soon accepted by many states, and
they enacted laws forbidding their magistrates to issue warrants
for the arrest or removal of fugitive slaves.[784] In consequence
of this manifest disinclination on the part of the Northern states
to restore to Southern masters their escaped slaves, the federal
government was induced to make more effective provision for the
execution of the Constitution in this particular. Such provision was
embodied in the second Fugitive Slave Law, passed as a part of the
Compromise of 1850.

  [780] See Section 3 of the act, _Statutes at Large_, I, 302-305.

  [781] 16 _Peters' Reports_, 598.

  [782] _16 Peters' Reports_, 608, 622. See also Marion G.
  McDougall's _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 108, 109.

  [783] M. G. McDougall's _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 28.

  [784] See Chap. IX, pp. 245, 246, and Chap. X, p. 337.

That the new law was not intended to extinguish the old is apparent
from the title assigned it, which read: "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, ..."[785] Its evident purpose was to increase the facilities
and improve the means for the recovery of fugitives from labor.
To this end it created commissioners, who were to have authority,
like the judges of the circuit and district courts of the United
States, to issue warrants for the apprehension of runaway slaves,
and to grant certificates for the removal of such persons back to
the state or territory whence they had escaped. All cases were to
be heard in a summary manner; the testimony of the alleged fugitive
could not be received in evidence; and the fee of the commissioner
or judge was to be ten dollars when the decision was in favor of
the claimant, but only five dollars when it was unfavorable. The
penalties created by the new law were more rigorous than those
imposed by the old. A fine not to exceed a thousand dollars and
imprisonment not to exceed six months constituted the punishment
for harboring a runaway or aiding in his rescue, and the party
injured could bring suit for civil damages against the offender in
the sum of one thousand dollars for each fugitive lost through his
interference. If the claimant apprehended a rescue, the officer
making the arrest could be required to retain the fugitive in his
custody for the purpose of removing him to the state whence he had
fled. The refusal of the officer to obey and execute the warrants
and precepts issued under the provisions of the law laid him liable
to a fine of a thousand dollars for the benefit of the claimant;
and the escape of a fugitive from his custody, whether with his
assent or without it, made him liable to a prosecution for the
full value of the labor of the <DW64> thus lost. Ample security
from such disaster was intended to be provided for the marshal and
his deputies by the clause authorizing them to summon to their aid
the bystanders, or posse comitatus, when necessary, and all good
citizens were commanded to respond promptly with their assistance.
In removing a fugitive back to the state from which he had escaped,
when an attempt at rescue was feared, the marshal in charge was
commanded to employ as many persons as he deemed necessary to
resist the interference. The omission of the new law to mention any
officers appointed by the states is doubtless traceable, as is the
clause establishing commissionerships, to the ruling in the decision
of Prigg's case that state officers could not be forced to execute
federal legislation.

  [785] _Statutes at Large_, IX, 462.

It will be remembered that the decision in the Prigg case also
contained a ruling that acknowledged the right of the claimant to
seize and remove the alleged fugitive, wheresoever found, without
judicial process. It has been suggested recently that this part of
the decision, denominated the most obnoxious part, was avoided in
the law of 1850.[786] But the language of the new law no more denied
this right than the language of the old bestowed it. In both cases
equally the claimant seems to have enjoyed the right of private
seizure and arrest without process, but for the purpose of taking
the supposed fugitive before the proper official.[787] So far as
the language of the statute was concerned the Prigg decision was
quite as possible under the later as under the earlier law. It was
the language of the Constitution upon which this part of the famous
decision was made to rest, and that, it needs scarcely be said,
continued unchanged during the period with which we are concerned.

  [786] Henry W. Rogers, Editor, _Constitutional History of the
  United States as seen in the Development of American Law_,
  Lecture III, by George W. Biddle, p. 152.

  [787] Section 3 of the law of 1793 provided that "the person to
  whom such labour or service may be due, his agent or attorney,
  is hereby empowered to seize and arrest such fugitive from
  labour, and to take him or her before any judge of the circuit
  or district courts of the United States, ... within the state,
  or before any magistrate of a county (etc.) ... wherein such
  seizure ... shall be made, and upon proof to the satisfaction of
  such judge or magistrate ... it shall be the duty of such judge
  or magistrate to give a certificate thereof ... which shall be
  a sufficient warrant for removing the said fugitive ... to the
  state or territory from which he or she fled."

  Section 6 of the act of 1850 provides that "the person or persons
  to whom such service or labour may be due, or his, her, or their
  agent or attorney ... may pursue and reclaim such fugitive
  person, either by procuring a warrant ... or by seizing and
  arresting such fugitive, where the same can be done without
  process, and by taking, or causing such person to be taken,
  forthwith before such court, judge or commissioner, whose duty
  it shall be to hear and determine the case ... in a summary
  manner; and upon satisfactory proof ... to make out and deliver
  to such claimant, his or her agent or attorney, a certificate
  ... with authority ... to use such reasonable force ... as may
  be necessary ... to take and remove such fugitive person back
  to the State or Territory whence he or she may have escaped as
  aforesaid."

It is not to be supposed, of course, that the law of 1850 was found
to be intrinsically less objectionable to abolitionists than the
measure it was intended to supplement. On the contrary, it soon
proved to be decidedly more objectionable. The features of the
first Slave Act that were obnoxious to the Northern people, and had
been subjected to examination in the courts, were retained in the
second act, where they were associated with a number of new features
of such a character that they soon brought the new law into the
greatest contempt. While, therefore, the records of the trials of
the chief cases arising under the later law are found to contain
arguments borrowed from the contentions made in the cases already
discussed, it is interesting to note that they afford proof that
new arguments were also brought to bear against the act of 1850.
As with the first Fugitive Slave Law, so also with its successor,
fault was found on account of the absence of any provision for jury
trial;[788] the authority of a claimant or his agent to arrest
without legal process;[789] the opposition alleged to exist between
the law and the Ordinance of 1787;[790] and the power said to be
improperly exercised by Congress in legislating upon the subject
of fugitive slaves.[791] It is unnecessary to introduce here a
study of these points as they presented themselves in the various
cases arising, for a discussion of them would lead to no principles
of importance other than those discovered in the cases already
examined.[792]

  [788] Sims' case, tried before the Supreme Judicial Court of
  Massachusetts, March term, 1851. See 7 _Cushing's Reports_, 310.

  Miller _vs._ McQuerry, tried before the Circuit Court of the
  United States, in Ohio, 1853. See 5 _McLean's Reports_, 481-484.

  _Ex parte_ Simeon Bushnell, etc., tried before the Supreme Court
  of Ohio, May, 1859. See 9 _Ohio State Reports_, 170.

  [789] Norris _vs._ Newton et al., tried before the Circuit Court
  of the United States, in Indiana, May term, 1850. See 5 _McLean's
  Reports_, 98.

  _Ex parte_ Simeon Bushnell, etc. See 9 _Ohio State Reports_, 174.

  United States _vs._ Buck, tried before the District Court of the
  United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 1860. See
  8 _American Law Register_, 543.

  [790] Booth's case, tried before the Supreme Court of Wisconsin,
  June term, 1854. See 3 _Wisconsin Reports_, 3.

  _Ex parte_ Simeon Bushnell, and _ex parte_ Charles Langston,
  tried before the Supreme Court of Ohio, May, 1859. See 9 _Ohio
  State Reports_, 111, 114-117, 124, 186.

  [791] Sims' case. See 7 _Cushing's Reports_, 290. Booth's case.
  See 3 _Wisconsin Reports_.

  [792] For the text of the Slave Laws, see Appendix A, pp. 359-366.

In some of the cases that were tried under the act of 1850, however,
new questions appeared; and in some, where the questions were
perhaps without novelty, the circumstances were such that the cases
cannot well be passed over in silence.

If, as was freely declared by the abolitionists, it was possible
for free <DW64>s to be abducted from the Northern states under the
form of procedure laid down by the act of 1793, there can be little
reason to doubt that the same thing was equally possible under the
procedure established by the act of 1850. Certain it is that the
anti-slavery people were not dubious on this point, but they had
scarcely had time to formulate their criticisms of the new law when
the first case under it of which there is any record demonstrated
the ease with which this legislation could be taken advantage of
in the commission of a foul injustice. The case occurred September
26, only eight days after the passage of the act. A free <DW64>,
James Hamlet, then living in New York, was arrested as the slave of
Mary Brown, of Baltimore. The hearing took place before a United
States commissioner and the <DW64>'s removal followed at once. The
community in which Hamlet was living was greatly incensed when the
facts concerning his disappearance became known, and the sum of
money necessary for his redemption was quickly contributed. Before a
fortnight had elapsed he was brought back from slavery.[793]

  [793] Marion G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 43 and 44, with
  the references there given; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave
  Power_, Vol. II, pp. 304, 305. See Appendix B, p. 372.

The summary manner in which this case was disposed of had prevented
a defence being made in behalf of the supposed fugitive. In the
next case, however, that of Thomas Sims, which was tried before
the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts in 1851, the <DW64> was
represented by competent counsel, who brought forward objections
against the second Fugitive Slave Law. Almost the first of these
was directed against the power of the special officers, the
commissioners, created by the new law. It was insisted that the
authority with which these officers were invested was distinctly
judicial in character, despite the constitutional provision limiting
the exercise of the judicial power of the United States to organized
courts of justice, composed of judges, holding their offices during
good behavior, and receiving fixed salaries for their services.[794]
The same argument seems to have been adduced in Scott's case, tried
before the District Court of the United States in Massachusetts
in 1851; in the case of Miller _vs._ McQuerry, tried before the
Circuit Court of the United States in Ohio in 1853;[795] in Booth's
case, argued in the Supreme Court of Wisconsin in 1854;[796] in the
case known as _ex parte_ Robinson, adjudicated by the Circuit Court
of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio at its April
term, 1855;[797] and in the case _ex parte_ Simeon Bushnell, argued
and determined in the Supreme Court of Ohio in 1859.[798] The court
met this argument by a direct answer in four of the cases mentioned,
namely, those of Sims, Scott, Booth and _ex parte_ Robinson. In the
first, Sims' case, Chief Justice Shaw pointed out that under the
Slave Law of 1793 the jurisdiction over fugitive slave cases had
been conferred on justices of the peace and magistrates of cities
and towns corporate, as well as on judges of the United States
circuit and district courts, and that evidently, therefore, the
power bestowed had not been deemed judicial in the sense in which
it was urged that the functions of the commissioners were judicial.
At the same time the judge admitted that the "argument from the
limitation of judicial power would be entitled to very grave
consideration" if it were without the support of early construction,
judicial precedent and the acquiescence of the general and state
governments. In the trial of James Scott, on the charge of aiding
in the rescue of Shadrach (May or June, 1851), Judge Sprague, of
the United States District Court, held that the legal force of the
certificate issued by a commissioner lay merely in the authority it
conveyed to remove the person designated from one state to another,
and that the disposition made of the person removed depended solely
upon the laws of the state to which he was taken. The facts set
down in the certificate were not, therefore, to be considered as
matters judicially established, but as facts only in the opinion of
the commissioner. In Booth's case, the opinion of the Supreme Court
of Wisconsin contained a reference to the legality of the power of
the commissioners and sustained the objection to their authority
on the ground of unconstitutionality.[799] In _ex parte_ Robinson,
Judge McLean admitted that the inquiry made by the commissioner
was "somewhat in the nature of judicial power," but that the same
remark applied to all the officers of the accounting departments of
the government, as, for example, the examiners in the Patent Office.
He also remarked that the Supreme Court had always treated the acts
of the commissioners, in the cases that had come before it, as
possessed of authority under the law.[800]

  [794] _7 Cushing's Reports_, 287. The constitutional requirement
  will be found in Article III, Section 1, of the Constitution of
  the United States.

  [795] 5 _McLean's Reports_, 481.

  [796] 3 _Wisconsin Reports_, 39.

  [797] 6 _McLean's Reports_, 359.

  [798] 9 _Ohio State Reports_, 176.

  [799] 3 _Wisconsin Reports_, 64.

  [800] 6 _McLean's Reports_, 359, 360.

The uncertainty as to the precise character of the commissioners'
power displayed in the different views of the courts before which
the question was brought marks the observations of the commissioners
themselves in regard to their authority. Examples will be found
in Sims' and Burns' cases. In the former, Mr. George T. Curtis
declared that claims for fugitive slaves came within the judicial
power of the federal government, and that, consequently, the mode
and means of the application of this power to the cases arising were
properly to be determined by Congress. In the latter, Mr. Edward G.
Loring asserted that his action was not judicial at all, but only
ministerial.

An additional ground of objection to the commissioners was found in
the provision made in the law of 1850 for their remuneration. When
one of these officers issued a certificate authorizing the removal
of a runaway to the state whence he had escaped, he was legally
entitled to a fee of ten dollars; when, however, he withheld the
warrant he could receive but five dollars. Abolitionists took much
offence at this arrangement, and sometimes scornfully denominated
the special appointees under the law the "ten-dollar commissioners,"
and insisted that the difference between the fees was in the nature
of a bribe held out to the officers to induce them to decide in
favor of the claimant. Considering the prevalence of this feeling
outside of the courts, it is not surprising that objections to the
section of the act regulating the fees of commissioners should
have been taken within the court-room.[801] Such objection was
raised in McQuerry's case, and was answered by Judge McLean. This
answer is probably the only one judicially declared, and is worth
quoting: "In regard to the five dollars, in addition, paid to the
commissioner, where the fugitive is remanded to the claimant," the
judge explained, "in all fairness it cannot be considered as a
bribe, or as so intended by Congress; but as a compensation to the
commissioner for making a statement of the case, which includes the
facts proved, and to which the certificate is annexed. In cases
where the witnesses are numerous and the investigation takes up
several days, five dollars would scarcely be a compensation for the
statement required. Where the fugitive is discharged, no statement
is necessary."[802]

  [801] Hurd, _Law of Freedom and Bondage_, Vol. II, p. 747.

  [802] 5 _McLean's Reports_, 481.

The fees paid to commissioners were, as indicated in the remarks
just quoted, by way of remuneration for services rendered in
inquiries relative to the rights of ownership of <DW64>s alleged to
have escaped from the South. These inquiries, together with similar
inquiries that arose under the act of 1793, constitute a group by
themselves. Another group is made up of the cases growing out of the
prosecution under the two acts of persons charged with harboring
fugitive slaves, or aiding in their rescue. The secrecy observed by
abolitionists in giving assistance to escaping bondmen shows that
the evils threatening, if a discovery occurred, were constantly kept
in mind. After the passage of the second act, public denunciation
of the measure was indulged in freely, and open resistance to its
provisions, whether these should be considered constitutional or
not, was recommended in some quarters. Such remonstrances seem to
have early disturbed the judicial repose of the courts, for, six
months after the new Fugitive Slave Bill had become a law, Justice
Nelson found occasion in the course of a charge to the grand jury of
the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of
New York to deliver a speech on sectional issues in which he gave
an exposition of the new law, "so that those, if any there be, who
have made up their minds to disobey it, may be fully apprised of the
consequences."[803] The severer penalties of the law of 1850 had
no deterrent effect upon those who were determined to resist its
enforcement. The fervor displayed in harboring runaways increased
rather than diminished throughout the free states, and the spirit
of resistance thus fostered broke out in daring and sometimes
successful attempts at rescue. Through the activity of slave-owners
in seeking the recovery of their lost property, and the support
afforded them by the government in the strict enforcement of the new
law, a number of offenders were brought to trial and subjected to
punishments inflicted under its provisions.

  [803] 1 _Blatchford's Circuit Court Reports_, 636.

Among the prosecutions arising under the two congressional acts the
following cases are offered as typical. The number has been limited
by choosing in general from among such as came before supreme courts
of the states, or before circuit and district courts of the United
States.

One of the earliest cases of which we have record was brought
before the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania on writ of error, in 1822. The action
was for the penalty under the law of 1793 for obstructing the
plaintiff, a citizen of Maryland, in seizing his escaped slave in
Philadelphia for the purpose of taking him before a magistrate there
to prove property. The trial in the United States District Court
had terminated in a verdict of $500 for the slave-owner. Judge
Washington, of the Circuit Court, decided, however, that there was
an error in the judgment of the lower court, that the judgment must
be reversed with costs, and the cause remitted to the District Court
in order that a new trial might be had. This case is known in the
law books as the case of Hill _vs._ Low.[804]

  [804] _Washington's Circuit Court Reports_, 327-331.

Occasionally an attempt at rescue ended in the arrest and
imprisonment of the slave-catchers, as well as the release of the
captured <DW64>. When a party of rescuers went to such a length as
here indicated it laid itself liable to an action for damages on
the ground of false imprisonment, as well as to prosecution for
the penalty under the Fugitive Slave Law. This is illustrated in
the case of Johnson _vs._ Tomkins, a case belonging to the year
1833.[805] It was the outgrowth of the attempt of a master to
reclaim his slave from the premises of a Quaker, John Kenderdine,
of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. Before the slave-owner could
return to New Jersey, the state of his domicile, he and his party
were overtaken, and after violent handling in which the master
was injured, they were taken into custody, and were forthwith
prosecuted. The trial ended in the acquittal of the company from
New Jersey, whose seizure of the <DW64> was found to be justifiable.
Then followed the prosecution of some of the Pennsylvania party for
trespass and false imprisonment, before the Circuit Court of the
United States. The fact that the defendants were all Quakers was
noted by the judge, who found it "hard to imagine" the motives by
which these persons, "members of a society distinguished for their
obedience and submission to the laws" were actuated. The question of
damages was left exclusively to the jury. The verdict rendered was
for $4,000, and the court gave judgment on the verdict.[806]

  [805] _Baldwins Circuit Court Reports_, 571-605.

  [806] _Washington's Circuit Court Reports_, 327-331.

The law of 1793 provided a double penalty for those guilty of
transgressing its provisions: first, the forfeiture of a sum of
$500 to be recovered for the benefit of the claimant by action of
debt; secondly, the payment of such damages as might be awarded
by the court in an action brought by the slave-owner on account
of the injuries sustained through the loss, or even the temporary
absence, of his property. In the famous case of Jones _vs._ Van
Zandt, which was pending before the United States courts, in Ohio
and at Washington, for five years, from 1842 to 1847, the defendant
was compelled to pay both penalties. In April, 1842, Mr. Van Zandt,
an anti-slavery Kentuckian, who had settled at Springdale, a few
miles north of Cincinnati, Ohio, was caught in the act of conveying
a company of nine fugitives in his market-wagon at daybreak one
morning, and, notwithstanding the efforts of the slave-catchers, one
of the <DW64>s escaped. The trial was held before the United States
Circuit Court at its July term, 1843. The jury gave a verdict for
the claimant of $1,200 in damages on two counts.[807] Besides the
suit for damages, an action was brought against Van Zandt for the
penalty of $500. In this action, as in the other, the verdict was
for Jones, the plaintiff. The matter did not end here, however, and
was carried on a certificate of division in opinion between the
judges to the Supreme Court of the United States. The decision of
this court was also adverse to Van Zandt, and final judgment was
entered against him for both amounts. This settlement was reached at
the January term in 1847.[808]

  [807] _McLean's Reports_, 612.

  [808] _Howard's Reports_, 215-232; see also Schuckers, _Life and
  Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 53-66; Warden, _Private Life and
  Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 296-298.

The successful rescue of a large company of slaves was likely to
make the adventure a very expensive one for the responsible persons
that took part in it. Such was the experience of the defendants in
the case of Giltner _vs._ Gorham and others, determined in 1847. Six
slaves, the chattels of Mr. Giltner, a citizen of Carroll County,
Kentucky, were discovered and arrested in Marshall, Michigan, by
the agents of the claimant, but through the intervention of the
defendants were set at liberty. Action was brought to recover the
value of the <DW64>s, who were estimated to be worth $2,752. In the
first trial the jury failed to agree. At the succeeding term of
court, however, a verdict for the value of the slaves was found for
the plaintiff.[809]

  [809] _McLean's Reports_, 402-426.

The value of four <DW64>s was involved in the case of Norris _vs._
Newton and others. These <DW64>s were found in September, 1849,
after two years' absence from Kentucky, living in Cass County,
Michigan. Here they had taken refuge among abolitionists and people
of their own color. They were at once seized by their pursuers and
conveyed across the line into Indiana, but had not been taken far
when their progress was stopped by an excited crowd with a sheriff
at its head. The officer had a writ of habeas corpus, and the temper
of the crowd would admit of no delay in securing a hearing for the
fugitives. The court-house at South Bend, whither the captives were
now taken, was at once crowded with spectators, and the streets
around it filled with the overflow. The <DW64>s were released
by the decision of the judge, but were rearrested and placed in
jail for safe-keeping. On the following day warrants were sworn
out against several members of the Kentucky party, charging them
with riot and other breaches of the peace, and civil process was
begun against Mr. Norris, the owner of the slaves, claiming large
damages in their behalf. Meanwhile companies of <DW52> people,
some of whom had firearms and others clubs, came tramping into the
village from Cass County and the intermediate country. Fortunately
a demonstration by these incensed bands was somehow avoided. Two
days later the fugitives were released from custody on a second writ
of habeas corpus, and, attended by a great bodyguard of <DW52>
persons, were triumphantly carried away in a wagon. The slave-owner,
the charges against whom were dropped, had declined to attend the
last hearing accorded his slaves, declaring that his rights had
been violated, and that he would claim compensation under the law.
Suit was accordingly brought in the Circuit Court of the United
States in 1850, and the sum of $2,850 was awarded as damages to the
plaintiff.[810]

  [810] 5 _McLean's Reports_, 92-106.

Another case in which large damages were at stake was that of Oliver
_vs._ Weakley and others, tried in the United States Circuit Court
for the Western District of Pennsylvania, in October term, 1853. It
was alleged and proved that Mr. Weakley, one of the defendants, had
given shelter in his barn to several slaves of the plaintiff, who
was a citizen of Maryland. The jury failed to agree on the first
trial. A second trial was therefore held, and this time a verdict
was reached; one of the defendants was found guilty, and damages to
the amount of $2,800 were assessed upon him; the other defendants
were declared "not guilty."[811]

  [811] 2 _Wallace Jr.'s Reports_, 324-326.

The dismissal without proper authority of seven fugitives from the
custody of their captors at Sandusky, Ohio, by Mr. Rush R. Sloane,
a lawyer of that city, led to the institution of two suits against
him by Mr. L. F. Weimer, the claimant of three of the slaves. The
suits were tried before the District Court of the United States
at Columbus, Ohio, in 1854, and a verdict for $3,000 and costs was
returned in favor of the slaveholder. The costs amounted to $330.30,
and the defendant had also to pay $1,000 in attorneys' fees. Some
friends of Mr. Sloane in Sandusky formed a committee and collected
$393, an amount sufficient to pay the court and marshal's costs,
but the judgment and the other expenses were borne by the defendant
individually.[812]

  [812] 6 _McLean's Reports_, 259-273. Mr. Sloane's account of the
  case will be found in _The Firelands Pioneer_ for July, 1888,
  pp. 46-49. A copy of the certificate of the clerk of court there
  given is here reproduced:--

  "Louis F. Weimer _vs._ Rush R. Sloane. United States District of
  Ohio, in debt.

  OCTOBER TERM, 1854.

  Judgment for Plaintiff for $3000 and costs.

  Received July 8th, 1856, of Rush R. Sloane, the above Defendant,
  a receipt of Louis F. Weimer, the above Plaintiff, bearing date
  Dec. 14th, 1854, for $3000, acknowledging full satisfaction of
  the above judgment, except the costs; also a receipt of L. F.
  Weimer, Sr., per Joseph Doniphan, attorney, for $85, the amount
  of Plaintiff's witness fees in said case; also certificates of
  Defendant's witnesses in above case for $162; also $20 in money,
  the attorney's docket fees attached, which, with the clerk and
  marshal's fees heretofore paid, is in full of the costs in said
  case.

  (Signed)   WILLIAM MINER, _Clerk_."

The burden of the penalty, of which, as we have just seen, a small
fraction was assumed by sympathizers with the offender in the case
of Mr. Sloane, was altogether removed by friendly contributors in
the case of another citizen of Sandusky. Two <DW64>s from Kentucky,
who were being cared for at the house of Mr. F. D. Parish, were
protected from arrest by their benefactor in February, 1845. As
Parish was a fearless agent of the Underground Road, the fugitives
were not seen afterwards in northern Ohio. The result was that
Parish was required to undergo three trials, and in the last, in
1849, the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of
Ohio fined him $500, the estimated value of the slaves at the time.
This sum, together with the costs and expenses, amounting to as much
more, was paid by friends of Mr. Parish, who made up the necessary
amount by subscriptions of one dollar each.[813]

  [813] For the first trial (1845), see 3 _McLean's Reports_, 631;
  _s. c. 5 Western Law Journal_, 25; 7 _Federal Cases_, 1100; for
  the second trial (1847), see 10 _Law Reporter_, 395; _s. c._ 5
  _Western Law Journal_, 206; 7 _Federal Cases_, 1093; for the
  third trial (1849), see 5 _McLean's Reports_, 64; _s. c._ 7
  _Western Law Journal_, 222; 7 _Federal Cases_, 1095. See also
  _The Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888, pp. 41, 42.

It will have been noticed that the Van Zandt and Parish cases were
in litigation for about five years each. A famous Illinois case,
that of Dr. Richard Eells, occupied the attention of the courts and
of the public more or less during an entire decade. The incidents
that gave rise to this case occurred in Adams County, Illinois, in
1842. In that year Mr. Eells was indicted for secreting a slave
owing service to Chauncey Durkee, of Missouri, and was convicted and
sentenced to pay a fine of $400 and the costs of the prosecution.
The case was taken on writ of error first to the Supreme Court of
the state, and after the death of Mr. Eells to the Supreme Court of
the United States. In both instances the judgment of the original
tribunal was confirmed. The decision of the federal court was
reached at its December term for 1852.[814]

  [814] 5 _Illinois Reports_, 498-518; 14 _Howard's Reports_, 13,
  14.

It was sometimes made clear in the courts that the defendants in
cases arising under the Fugitive Slave laws were persons in the
habit of evading the requirements of these laws. This is true of
the case of Ray _vs._ Donnell and Hamilton, which was tried before
the United States Circuit Court in Indiana, at the May term, 1849.
A slave woman, Caroline, and her four children fled from Kemble
County, Kentucky, and found shelter in a barn near Clarksburg,
Indiana. Here they were discovered by Woodson Clark, a farmer
living in the neighborhood, who took measures immediately to inform
their master, while the slaves were removed to a fodder-house for
safe-keeping. In some way Messrs. Donnell and Hamilton learned
of the capture of the <DW64>s by Mr. Clark, and secured a writ
of habeas corpus in their behalf; but, if the testimony of Mr.
Clark's son, supported by certain circumstantial evidence, is to
be credited, the blacks were released from custody by the personal
efforts of the defendants, and not by legal process. Considerable
evidence conflicting with that just mentioned appears to have had
little weight with the jury, for it gave a verdict for the claimant
and assessed his damages at $1,500.[815]

  [815] 4 _McLean's Reports_, 504-515.

In the trial of Mitchell, an abolitionist of the town of Indiana,
Pennsylvania, in 1853, for harboring two fugitives, some of
the evidence was intended to show that he was connected with a
"regularly organized association," the business of which was "to
entice <DW64>s from their owners, and to aid them in escaping to
the North." The slaves he was charged with harboring had been given
employment on his farm in the country, where, as it was thought,
they would be secure. After remaining about four months they were
apprised of danger and escaped. Justice Grier charged the jury to
"let no morbid sympathy, no false respect for pretended 'rights
of conscience,' prevent it from judging the defendant justly." A
verdict of $500 was found for the plaintiff.[816]

  [816] 2 _Wallace Jr.'s Reports_, 313, 317-323.

Penalties for hindering the arrest of a fugitive slave were imposed
in two other noted cases, which deserve mention here, although
they are considered at length in another connection. One of these
was Booth's case, with which the Supreme Court of Wisconsin, and
the District and Supreme Courts of the United States dealt between
the years 1855 and 1858. The sentence pronounced against Mr. Booth
included imprisonment for one month and a fine of $1,000 and
costs--$1,451 in all.[817] The other case was what is commonly known
as the Oberlin-Wellington case, tried in the United States District
Court at Cleveland, Ohio, in 1858 and 1859. Only two out of the
thirty-seven men indicted were convicted, and the sentences imposed
were comparatively light. Mr. Bushnell was sentenced to pay a fine
of $600 and costs and to be imprisoned in the county jail for sixty
days, while the sentence of the <DW52> man, Langston, was a fine of
$100 and costs and imprisonment for twenty days.

  [817] 21 _Howard's Reports_, 510; _The Fugitive Slave Law in
  Wisconsin, with Reference to Nullification Sentiment_, by Vroman
  Mason, p. 134.

In all of the cases thus far considered the charges upon which the
transgressors of the Fugitive Slave laws were prosecuted were,
in general terms, harboring and concealing runaways, obstructing
their arrest, or aiding in their rescue. There was, however, one
case in which the crime alleged in the indictment was much more
serious, being nothing less than treason against the United States.
This was the famous Christiana case, marked not only by the nature
of the indictment, but by the organized resistance to arrest made
by the slaves and their friends, and by the violent death of one
of the attacking party. The frequent abduction of <DW64>s from
the neighborhood of Christiana, in southeastern Pennsylvania,
seems to have given occasion for the formation, about 1851, of a
league for self-protection among the many <DW52> persons living
in that region.[818] The leading spirit in this association was
William Parker, a fugitive slave whose house was a refuge for
other runaways. On September 10, Parker and his neighbors received
word from the Vigilance Committee of Philadelphia that Gorsuch, a
slaveholder of Maryland, had procured warrants for the arrest of
two of his slaves, known to be staying at Parker's house. When,
therefore, Gorsuch with his son and some friends appeared upon the
scene about daybreak on the morning of the 11th, and, having broken
into the house, demanded the fugitives, the <DW64>s lost little time
in sounding a horn from one of the upper-story windows to summon
their friends. From fifty to one hundred men, armed with guns, clubs
and corn-cutters, soon came up. Castner Hanway and Elijah Lewis,
two Quakers, who had been drawn to the place by the disturbance,
declined to join the marshal's posse and help arrest the slaves;
but they advised the <DW64>s against resisting the law, and warned
Gorsuch and his party to depart if they would prevent bloodshed.
Neither side would yield, and a fight was soon in progress. In the
course of the conflict the slave-owner was killed, his son severely
wounded, and the fugitives managed to escape.

  [818] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 107, 108; 2 _Wallace
  Jr.'s Reports_, 159.

The excitement caused by this affair extended throughout the
country. The President of the United States placed a company of
forty-five marines at the disposal of the United States marshal,
and these proceeded under orders to the place of the riot. A large
number of police and special constables made search far and wide for
those concerned in the rescue. Their efforts were rewarded with the
arrest of thirty-five <DW64>s and three Quakers, among the latter
Hanway and Lewis, who gave themselves up. The prisoners were taken
to Philadelphia and indicted by the grand jury for treason. Hanway
was tried before the Circuit Court of the United States for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania in November and December, 1851.
In the trial it was shown by the defence that Mr. Hanway was a
native of a Southern state, had lived long in the South, and, during
his three years' residence in Pennsylvania, had kept aloof from
anti-slavery organizations and meetings; his presence at the riot
was proved to be accidental. Under these circumstances the charge
of Justice Grier to the jury was a demonstration of the unsoundness
of the indictment: the judge asked the jury to observe that a
conspiracy to be classed as an act of treason must have been for
the purpose of effecting something of a public nature; and that the
efforts of a band of fugitive slaves in opposition to the capture of
any of their number, even though they were directed by friends and
went the full length of committing murder upon their pursuers, was
altogether for a private object, and could not be called "levying
war" against the nation. It did not take the jury long to decide the
case. After an absence of twenty minutes the verdict "not guilty"
was returned. One of the <DW64>s was also tried, but not convicted.
Afterward a bill was brought against Hanway and Lewis for riot and
murder, but the grand jury ignored it, and further prosecution was
dropped.[819]

  [819] Still's _Underground Railroad Records_, pp. 348-368;
  Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, pp. 107-130; 2 _Wallace Jr.'s
  Reports_, pp. 134-206; M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp.
  50, 51; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. II, pp.
  328, 329.

One cannot examine the records of the various cases that have been
passed in review in the preceding pages of this chapter without
being struck in many instances by the character of the men that
served as counsel for fugitive slaves and their friends. It not
infrequently happens that one comes upon the name of a man whose
principles, ability and eloquence won for him in later years
positions of distinction and influence at the bar and in public
life. In the Christiana case, for example, Thaddeus Stevens was a
prominent figure; in the Van Zandt case Salmon P. Chase and William
H. Seward presented the arguments against the Fugitive Slave Law
before the United States Supreme Court;[820] Mr. Chase also appeared
in Eells' case, and in the case known as _ex parte_ Robinson,
besides others of less judicial importance. Rutherford B. Hayes took
part in a number of fugitive slave cases in Cincinnati, Ohio. A
letter written by the ex-President in 1892 says: "As a young lawyer,
from the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law until the war, I was
engaged in slave cases for the fugitives, having an understanding
with Levi Coffin and other directors and officers of the U. R. R.
that my services would be freely given."[821] John Jolliffe, another
lawyer of Cincinnati, less known than the anti-slavery advocates
already mentioned, was sometimes associated with Chase and Hayes
in pleading the cause of fugitives.[822] The Western Reserve was
not without its members of the bar that were ready to display
their legal talent in a movement well grounded in the popular
mind of eastern Ohio. An illustration is afforded by the trial of
the Oberlin-Wellington rescuers, when four eminent attorneys of
Cleveland offered their services for the defence, declining at
the same time to accept a fee. The event shows that the political
aspirations of these men were not injured by their procedure, for
Mr. Albert G. Riddle, who spoke first for the defence, was elected
to Congress from the Cleveland district the following year, and Mr.
Rufus P. Spalding, one of his associates, was similarly honored
by the same district in 1862.[823] In November, 1852, the legal
firm of William H. West and James Walker, of Bellefontaine, Ohio,
attempted to release from custody several <DW64>s belonging to
the Piatt family of Kentucky, before their claimants could arrive to
prove property. The attempt was successful, and, by prearrangement,
the fugitives were taken into a carriage and driven rapidly to a
neighboring station of the Underground Railroad. The funds to pay
the sheriff, the court expenses and the livery hire were borne in
part by Messrs. West and Walker.[824]

  [820] Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. I, p. 477.

  [821] Letter of Mr. Hayes, Fremont, O., Aug. 4, 1892.

  [822] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, pp. 548, 549.

  [823] Rhodes, _History of the United States_, Vol. II, p. 364.
  The others representing the rescuers were Franklin T. Backus
  and Seneca O. Griswold. See J. R. Shipherd's _History of the
  Oberlin-Wellington Rescue_, p. 14.

  [824] Conversation with Judge William H. West, Bellefontaine, O.,
  Aug. 11, 1894.

[Illustration: RUSH R. SLOANE,

OF SANDUSKY, OHIO,

fined $3000 and costs for assisting runaways to Canada.]

[Illustration: THADDEUS STEVENS, M.C.,

who befriended fugitives in southeastern Pennsylvania, and appeared
for them in court.]

[Illustration: J. R. WARE,

OF MECHANICSBURG, OHIO,

a station-keeper, in a centre receiving fugitives from several
converging routes.]

[Illustration: EX-PRESIDENT R. B. HAYES,

who, as a young lawyer in Cincinnati, Ohio, served as counsel in
fugitive slave cases.]

Among the names of the legal opponents of fugitive slave legislation
in Massachusetts, that of Josiah Quincy, who gained distinction in
public life and as President of Harvard College, is first to be
noted. Mr. Quincy was counsel for the alleged runaway in one of the
earliest cases arising under the act of 1793.[825] In some of the
well-known cases that were tried under the later act Richard H.
Dana, Robert Rantoul, Jr., Ellis Gray Loring, Samuel E. Sewell and
Charles G. Davis appeared for the defence. Sims' case was conducted
by Robert Rantoul, Jr., and Mr. Sewell; Shadrach's by Messrs. Davis,
Sewell and Loring; and Burns' case by Mr. Dana and others.[826]

  [825] M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 35.

  [826] _Ibid._, pp. 44, 46, 47.

Instances gathered from other Northern states seem to indicate
that information of arrests under the Fugitive Slave acts almost
invariably called out some volunteer to use his legal knowledge
and skill in behalf of the accused, and that in many centres there
were not lacking men of professional standing ready to give their
best efforts under circumstances that promised, in general, little
but defeat. Owen Lovejoy, of Princeton, Illinois, was arrested
on one occasion for aiding fugitive slaves, and was defended by
James H. Collins, a well-known attorney of Chicago. Returning
from the trial of Lovejoy, Mr. Collins learned of the arrest of
Deacon Cushing, of Will County, on a similar charge, and together
with John M. Wilson he immediately volunteered to conduct the new
case.[827] At the hearing of Jim Gray, a runaway from Missouri, held
before Judge Caton of the State Supreme Court at Ottawa, Illinois,
Judge E. S. Leland, B. C. Cook, O. C. Gray and J. O. Glover
appeared voluntarily as counsel for the <DW64>.[828] As a result
of the hearing it was decided by the court that the arrest was
illegal, since it had been made under the state law; the <DW64> was,
therefore, discharged from the arrest, but could not be released by
the judge from the custody of the United States marshal. However,
the bondman was rescued, and thus escaped. Eight men were indicted
on account of this affair, prominent among whom were John Hossack
and Dr. Joseph Stout, of Ottawa. Mr. Hossack, who was tried first,
had an array of six of the leading lawyers of Chicago to present his
side of the case; they were the Hons. Isaac N. Arnold, Joseph Knox,
B. C. Cook, J. V. Eustace, E. Leland and E. C. Larnard. Mr. Stout
had three of these men to represent him, namely, Messrs. Eustace,
Larnard and Arnold.[829] Early in March, 1860, two citizens of
Tabor, Iowa, Edward Sheldon and Newton Woodford, were captured while
conducting four runaways from the Indian Territory to a station of
the Underground Railroad. At the trial they were ably defended by
James Vincent, Lewis Mason and his brother, and were acquitted. It
may be added that the trial closed at nine o'clock in the evening,
and before daybreak the <DW64>s had been rescued and sent forward on
their way to Canada.[830]

  [827] G. H. Woodruff, _History of Will County, Illinois_, p. 264.

  [828] The _Ottawa Republican_, Nov. 9, 1891. The hearing occurred
  Oct. 20, 1859.

  [829] The _Pontiac_ (Ill.) _Sentinel_, 1891-1892.

  [830] The _Tabor_ (Ia.) _Beacon_, 1890-1891, Chap. XXI of
  a series of articles by the Rev. John Todd, on "The Early
  Settlement and Growth of Western Iowa."

In Philadelphia there were several lawyers that could always
be depended on to resist the claims of the slave-owner to his
recaptured property in the courts. William Still mentions two
of these, namely, David Paul Brown and William S. Pierce, as
"well-known veterans" ready to defend the slave "wherever and
whenever called upon to do so."[831] Robert Purvis relates
an incident of David Paul Brown that will be recognized as
characteristic of the spirit in which the class of advocates to
which he belonged rendered their services for the slave. A case
growing out of the capture of a <DW64> by his pursuers occupied
the attention of Mr. Purvis for a season in 1836, and he desired
to engage Mr. Brown for the defence; he accordingly presented
the matter to the distinguished attorney, offering him a fee of
fifty dollars in advance. Mr. Brown promptly undertook the case,
but refused the money, saying: "I shall not now, nor have I
ever, accepted fee or reward, other than the approval of my own
conscience, and I respectfully decline receiving your money."[832]

  [831] _Underground Railroad Records_, p. 367.

  [832] Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, p. 359.

In what was, so far as known, the last case under the Slave Law
of 1850, Mr. John Dean, a prominent lawyer of Washington, D.C.,
displayed noteworthy zeal in the interest of his client, a supposed
fugitive. The affair occurred in June, 1862, and came within the
cognizance of the United States courts. Mr. Dean, who had just
obtained the discharge of the <DW52> man from arrest, interfered
to prevent his seizure a second time as the slave of a Virginian.
The claimant, aided by other persons, sought to detain the black
until a civil officer should arrive to take him into custody, but
the attorney's surprising play at fisticuffs defeated the efforts of
the assailing party and the black got away. He soon enlisted in one
of the  regiments then forming in Washington, and it is to
be surmised that all question concerning his status was put to rest
by this step. Mr. Dean was indicted for aiding in the escape of a
fugitive slave, and although the affair is said to have caused great
excitement in the Capital, especially in the two Houses of Congress,
it never reached a legal decision, but lapsed through the progress
of events that led rapidly to the Emancipation Proclamation and the
repeal of the Fugitive Slave laws.[833]

  [833] This case is given by Mr. Noah Brooks, in his _Washington
  in Lincoln's Time_, 1895, pp. 197, 198.

In the crisis that was reached with the beginning of the new decade,
the question of the rendition of fugitives from service was by
no means lost sight of. As in 1850, so in 1860 a measure for the
more effective protection of slave property appears to have been
a necessary condition in any plan of compromise that was to gain
Southern support. President Buchanan sought to meet the situation
by proposing, in his message of December 4, 1860, the adoption
of "explanatory" amendments to the Constitution recognizing the
master's right of recovery and the validity of the Fugitive Slave
Law; he also recommended a declaration against the so-called
personal liberty laws of the states as unconstitutional, and
therefore void. This produced, within three months, in the House, a
crop of more than twenty resolutions relative to fugitive slaves;
the deliberations of that body issued at length, March 1, 1861,
in the passage of a bill to make more effective the law of 1850.
The new measure provided for an appeal to the Circuit Court of the
United States, where cases were to be tried by jury. But in the
Senate this bill never got beyond the first reading.

That the people of the Northern states would have acquiesced in
a new law for the surrender of runaway <DW64>s was certainly not
to be expected. Both the law of 1793 and that of 1850 had been
systematically evaded as well as frequently denounced, and now
memorials were being sent to Congress praying for the repeal of the
despised legislation.[834] A bill for this purpose was introduced
into the House by Mr. Blake, of Ohio, in 1860, but was smothered
by the attempt to amend the existing law. A similar measure was
introduced into the Senate in December, 1861, by Mr. Howe, of
Wisconsin, who prefaced its presentation by declaring that the
Fugitive Slave Law "has had its day. As a party act it has done its
work. It probably has done as much mischief as any other one act
that was ever passed by the national legislature. It has embittered
against each other two great sections of the country."[835] The bill
was referred to a committee, where it was kept for some time, and at
length was reported adversely in February, 1863.

  [834] Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. III, p.
  395.

  [835] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-seventh Congress, First
  Session, 1356.

In the meantime slavery was subjected to a series of destructive
attacks in Congress, despite the views of some, who held that the
institution was under constitutional protection. The passions and
exigencies of the War, together with the humane motives from which
the anti-slavery movement had sprung, did not leave these assaults
without justification. In August, 1861, a law was enacted providing
for the emancipation of <DW64>s employed in military service
against the government; in April, 1862, slavery was abolished in
the District of Columbia; in May, army officers were forbidden to
restore fugitives to their owners; in June slavery was prohibited
in the territories; and in July an act was passed granting freedom
to fugitives from disloyal masters that could find refuge with the
Union forces.

In the train of these measures, and in September of the same year
in which most of them were enacted, President Lincoln issued his
proclamation of warning to the South declaring that all persons
held as slaves in the states continuing in rebellion on the 1st of
January, 1863, should be "thenceforth and forever free." When the
warning was carried into effect on the first day of the new year by
the famous Proclamation of Emancipation, ownership of slave property
in the border states was not abolished. The loyalty of these
states was their protection against interference. As the Fugitive
Slave Law was not yet repealed opportunity was still afforded to
civil officers to enforce its provisions both north and south of
Mason and Dixon's line. North of the line there was, however, no
disposition to enforce the law. South of it wandering <DW64>s were
sometimes arrested by the civil authorities for the purpose of being
returned to their masters. The following advertisement, printed two
months and a half after the final proclamation went into effect,
illustrates the method pursued in dealing with supposed fugitives:--

     "There was committed to the jail in Warren County, Kentucky, as
     runaway slave, on the 29th September, 1862, a <DW64> 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 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. POTTER, J. W. C.

  March 16, 1863. 1 m."[836]

  [836] _Liberator_, May 1, 1863. Extract from the _Frankfort
  Commonwealth_, quoted by M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p.
  80.

Although the proposition to repeal the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850
had been made in Congress in 1860, and repeated in 1861 and 1862,
no definite and conclusive action was taken until 1864. During the
session of 1863-1864 five bills were introduced into the House
looking toward the repeal of the law. In the discussion of the
subject the probable effect of revocation upon the border states was
frequently dwelt upon, and it was urged by many members that the
loyal slave states would consider repeal as "insult and outrage."
Mr. Mallory, of Kentucky, was one of those that took this view.
He therefore demanded that the law "be permitted to remain on the
statute-book," urging, "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 gratuitous." In reply to this
and other arguments the need of enlisting <DW64> soldiers was pressed
on the attention of the House, and it was said by Mr. Hubbard, of
Connecticut, "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."[837] The conclusion
that slavery was already doomed to utter destruction could not
be avoided. The House therefore decided to throw away the empty
guarantee of the institution, and June 13 the vote on the bill for
repeal was taken. It resulted in the measure being carried by a vote
of 82 to 57. When the bill from the House came before the Senate the
question of repeal was already under consideration, and, indeed, had
been for three months and a half. Nevertheless, the House measure
was at once referred to committee and was reported back June 15.
It was then discussed by the Senate for several days and voted on
on June 23, the result being a vote of 27 in favor of repeal to 12
against it. Two days later President Lincoln affixed his signature
to the bill, and the Fugitive Slave laws were thereby annulled June
25, 1864. The constitutional provision for the recovery of runaways,
which had been judicially declared in the decision of Prigg's case
to be self-executing was not cancelled until December 18, 1865, when
the Secretary of State proclaimed the adoption of the Thirteenth
Amendment to the Constitution by the requisite number of states.

  [837] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-eighth Congress, First
  Session, 2913. See also M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p.
  85.




CHAPTER X

THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD IN POLITICS


To set forth the political aspect of the Underground Railroad is
not easy. Yet this side must be understood if the Underground
Railroad is to appear in its true character as something more than
a mere manifestation of the moral sentiment existing in the North
and in some localities of the South. The romantic episodes in the
fugitive slave controversy have been frequently described; but it
has altogether escaped the eye of the general historian that the
underground movement was one that grew from small beginnings into
a great system; that it must be reckoned with as a distinct causal
factor in tracing the growth of anti-slavery opinion; that it
furnished object lessons in the horrors of slavery without cessation
during two generations to communities in many parts of the free
states; that it was largely serviceable in developing, if not in
originating, the convictions of such powerful agents in the cause
as Harriet Beecher Stowe and John Brown; that it alone serves to
explain the enactment of that most remarkable piece of legislation,
the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850; and, finally, that it furnished the
ground for the charge brought again and again by the South against
the North of injury wrought by the failure to execute the law, a
charge that must be placed among the chief grievances of the slave
states at the beginning of the Civil War.

Even in colonial times there was difficulty in recovering fugitive
slaves, because of the aid rendered them by friends, as is apparent
from an examination of some of the regulations that the colonies
began to pass soon after the introduction of slavery in 1619.
The Director and Council of New Netherlands enacted an ordinance
as early as 1640, one of the provisions of which forbade
all inhabitants of New Netherlands to harbor or feed fugitive
servants under a penalty of fifty guilders, "for the benefit of
the Informer; 1/3 for the new Church and 1/3 for the Fiscal."[838]
Other regulations for the same colony contained clauses prohibiting
the entertainment of runaways; such are the laws of 1642,[839]
1648,[840] 1658,[841] and, after the Dutch had been supplanted
by English control, those of 1702[842] and 1730.[843] An act
of Virginia that went into force in 1642 was attributed to the
complaints made at every quarter court "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 undoing of divers poor men, thereby
also encouraging servants to run from their masters and obscure
themselves in some remote plantation." By way of penalty, to break
up the practice of helping runaways, this law provided that persons
guilty of the offence were to be fined twenty pounds of tobacco
for each night's hospitality.[844] That the law was ineffectual is
indicated by the increase of the penalty in 1655 by the addition to
the twenty pounds of tobacco for each night's entertainment of forty
pounds for each day's entertainment.[845] Similar acts were passed
by Virginia in 1657,[846] 1666,[847] and 1726.[848] The last act
required masters of vessels to swear that they would make diligent
search of their craft to prevent the stowing away of servants or
slaves eager to escape from their owners. An act of Maryland passed
in 1666 established a fine of five hundred pounds of casked tobacco
for the first night's hospitality, one thousand pounds for the
second, and fifteen hundred pounds for each succeeding night.[849]
A law of New Jersey in 1668 laid a penalty of five pounds in
money and such damages as the court should adjudge upon any one
transporting or contriving the transportation of an apprentice
or servant;[850] while another law, enacted seven years later,
declared that every inhabitant guilty of harboring an apprentice,
servant or slave, should forfeit to his master or dame ten shillings
for every day's concealment, and, if unable to pay this amount,
should be liable to the judgment of the court.[851] Provisions are
also to be found in the regulations of Massachusetts Bay,[852]
Rhode Island,[853] Connecticut,[854] Pennsylvania[855] and North
Carolina,[856] clearly intended to discourage the entertainment or
the transportation of fugitives. It is interesting to note that in
these early times Canada was a refuge for fugitives. In 1705 New
York passed a law, which was reënacted ten years later, to prevent
the escape of <DW64> slaves from the city and county of Albany to the
French in Canada. The reason given for the law was the necessity of
keeping from the French in time of war knowledge that might prove
serviceable for military purposes.[857]

  [838] _Laws and Ordinances of New Netherlands_, 32.

  [839] _Ibid._

  [840] _Ibid._, 104.

  [841] _Laws of New Netherlands_, 344.

  [842] _Acts of Province of New York from 1691 to 1718_, p. 58.

  [843] _Ibid._, 193.

  [844] _Statutes at Large_, Hening, _Laws of Virginia_, I, 253.

  [845] _Ibid._, I, 401.

  [846] _Ibid._, I, 439.

  [847] _Ibid._, II, 239.

  [848] _Ibid._, IV, 168.

  [849] _Maryland Archives, Assembly Proceedings_, 147.

  [850] _New Jersey Laws_, 82.

  [851] _Ibid._, 109.

  [852] _Charters and General Laws of the Colony and Province of
  Massachusetts Bay_, 386, 750 (1707 and 1718 respectively).

  [853] _Proceedings of General Assembly, Colony of Rhode Island
  and Providence Plantations, Providence_, 177; _Records of Colony
  of Rhode Island_, 177.

  [854] _Acts and Laws of His Majestie's Colony of Connecticut_,
  229 (1730 probably).

  [855] _Province Laws of Pennsylvania_, Philadelphia, 1725;
  _Province Laws of Pennsylvania_, 325.

  [856] _Laws of North Carolina_, 89 (1741); _Ibid._, 371 (1779).

  [857] _Acts of Province of New York_, 77 (1705); _Laws of
  Province of New York_, 218 (1715); Marion G. McDougall, _Fugitive
  Slaves_, 8.

[Illustration: GERRIT SMITH, M.C.,

the multi-millionnaire, whose mansion in Peterboro, New York, was a
station.]

[Illustration: JOSHUA R. GIDDINGS, M.C.,

who kept a room in his house in Jefferson, Ohio, for fugitives.]

[Illustration: CHARLES SUMNER,

THE CHAMPION OF THE FUGITIVE SLAVE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED
STATES.]

[Illustration: RICHARD H. DANA, Jr.,

COUNSEL FOR  REFUGEES IN BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS.]

The group of enactments just considered together with many other
early measures relating to the subject of fugitives makes it
clear that the question of extradition of runaway slaves had
also arisen in colonial times. A stipulation for the return of
fugitives had been inserted in the formal agreement entered into
by Plymouth, Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Haven at the time
of the formation of the New England Confederation in 1643,[858]
and may be supposed to have remained in force for a period of
forty years. In the first national constitution, the Articles of
Confederation adopted in 1781, no such provision was made. This
omission soon became serious through the action of the states of
Vermont, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Connecticut and Rhode Island
between 1777 and 1784 in taking steps toward immediate or gradual
emancipation; for the first time the question of the status of
fugitives in free regions was now raised.

  [858] _Plymouth Colony Records_, IX, 5; Marion G. McDougall,
  _Fugitive Slaves_, 7.

When, in 1787, the question arose of providing a government for the
territory northwest of the Ohio River, the difficulty was felt;
and the Northwest Ordinance included a clause for the reclamation
of fugitives from labor. A proposition made by Mr. King in 1785 to
prohibit slavery in this region without any provision for reclaiming
fugitives had gone to committee, but was never afterwards called up
in Congress. In the discussion of 1787 an amendment was offered by
Nathan Dane, of Massachusetts, the first clause of which excluded
slavery from the territory, and the second clause provided for
the rendition of fugitives. The previous delay and the prompt and
unanimous approval of the compromise measure of Mr. Dane give force
to the contention of a special student of the Ordinance, that the
stipulation forbidding slavery could not have been adopted without
the provision for the recovery of runaways.[859]

  [859] Peter Force, on the Ordinance of 1787, in the _National
  Intelligencer_, 1847. See also E. B. Chase's volume, entitled
  _Teachings of Patriots and Statesmen, or the "Founders of the
  Republic" on Slavery_, 1860, pp. 155, 160, 161, 169.

About six weeks after the incorporation, by the Continental
Congress, of the fugitive slave clause in the Northwest Ordinance, a
similar provision was made a part of the Constitution of the United
States by the vote of the Federal Convention at Philadelphia.[860]
In the case of the Constitution, as of the Ordinance, the
clause was probably necessary for the acceptance and adoption
of the instrument, and the action of the legislative body was
unanimous.[861]

  [860] E. B. Chase, _Teachings of Patriots and Statesmen ... on
  Slavery_, p. 9.

  [861] Alexander Johnston's careful survey of the subject in
  the _New Princeton Review_, Vol. IV, p. 183; J. H. Merriam,
  _Legislative History of the Ordinance of 1787_, Worcester, 1888;
  M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 64.

The settlement reached in regard to fugitives appears to have
excited little comment in the various state conventions called
to ratify the work of the Philadelphia Convention. It would be
interesting to know what was the nature of the discussion on the
point in the North. In the South the tone of sentiment concerning
the matter is illustrated by the remarks of Madison in the Virginia
convention, and of Iredell and Pinckney in the conventions of North
and South Carolina respectively.[862] Madison asserted of the
fugitive clause that it "secures to us that property which we now
possess." Iredell explained that "In some of the Northern states
they have emancipated all their _slaves_. If any of our slaves go
there and remain there a certain time, they would, by the present
laws, be entitled to their freedom, so that their masters could
not get them again. This would be extremely prejudicial to the
inhabitants of the Southern states; and to prevent it this clause
is inserted in the Constitution. Though the word _slave_ is not
mentioned, this is the meaning of it." Pinckney declared: "We have
obtained a right to recover our slaves, in whatever part of America
they may take refuge, which is a right we had not before. In short,
considering the 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 the whole, I do not
think them bad."[863]

  [862] These views are quoted by E. B. Chase, in his _Teachings of
  Patriots and Statesmen ... on Slavery_.

  [863] _Ibid._ See also Elliot's _Debates_, Vol. III, 182, 277.

The constitutional provision was, of course, general in its
terms, and, although mandatory in form, did not designate any
particular officer or branch of government to put it into execution.
Accordingly the law of 1793 was enacted. This law, however, was
of such a character as to defeat itself from the beginning.
Before the close of the year in which the measure was passed a
case of resistance occurred, which showed that adverse sentiment
existed in Massachusetts,[864] and three years later another
case--especially interesting because it concerned an escaped slave
of Washington--demonstrated to the first President that there was
strong opposition in New Hampshire to the law.[865] The method of
proof prescribed by the measure was intended to facilitate the
recovery of fugitives, but it was so slack that it encouraged the
abduction of free <DW64>s from the Northern states,[866] and thus,
by the injustice it wrought, stirred many to give protection and
assistance to <DW64>s.[867] The number of cases of kidnapping that
occurred along the southern border of the free states between 1793
and 1850 helps doubtless to explain the development of numerous
initial stations of the Underground Railroad during this period.

  [864] Appendix B, p. 367, 6. First recorded case of rescue
  (Quincy's case, Boston).

  [865] Appendix B, p. 367. Washington's fugitive, October, 1796.

  [866] Chapter II, p. 22; Chapter V, p. 120.

  [867] _Ibid._

The inefficiency of the first Fugitive Slave Act was early
recognized, and the period during which it was in existence
witnessed many attempts at amendment. It is possible that the
failure of Washington to recover his slave in 1796 furnished the
occasion for the first of these.[868] A motion was made, December
29, 1796, looking toward the alteration of the law.[869] Apparently
nothing was done at this time, and the matter lapsed until 1801,
when it came up in January and again in December of that year.[870]
In the month last named a committee was appointed in the House,
which reported a bill that gave rise to considerable debate. This
bill provided that employing a fugitive as well as harboring one
should be punishable; and that those furnishing employment to
<DW64>s must require them to show official certificates and must
publish descriptions of them. It is reported that Southern members
"considered it a great injury to the owners of that species of
property, 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 discontent
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 otherwise
would. It was, they said, even on the score of humanity, good policy
in those opposed to slavery to agree to this law."[871] Northern
members did not accept this view of the fugitive slave question, and
when the proposed bill was put to vote January 18, 1802, it failed
of passage.[872] The division on the measure took place on sectional
grounds, all the Northern members but five voting against it, all
the Southern members but two for it.[873]

  [868] William Goodell, _Slavery and Anti-Slavery_, pp. 231, 232.

  [869] _House Journal_, Fourth Congress, Second Session, p. 65;
  _Annals of Congress_, pp. 1741, 1767.

  [870] _House Journal_, Sixth Congress, Second Session, p. 220;
  _Annals of Congress_, p. 1053; _House Journal_, Seventh Congress,
  First Session, p. 34; _Annals of Congress_, p. 317.

  [871] _House Journal_, Seventh Congress, First Session, p. 125;
  _Annals of Congress_, pp. 422, 423.

  [872] The vote stood 46 to 43.

  [873] _House Journal_, Seventh Congress, First Session, pp. 125,
  128; _Annals of Congress_, pp. 423, 425.

For the next fifteen years Congress appears to have given no
consideration to the propriety of amending the law of 1793. Its
attention was mainly occupied by the abolition of the slave-trade,
the agitation preliminary to the War of 1812, and the events of that
War.[874] At length, in 1817, a Senate committee reported a bill
to revise the law, but it was never brought up for consideration.
In the same year a bill was drafted and presented to the House, on
account of the need of a remedy for the increased insecurity of
slave property in the border slave states. Pindall, of Virginia,
seems to have been its originator; at any rate he was the chairman
of the committee that reported the proposition. The interest in the
discussion that resulted was increased, doubtless, by two petitions,
one from the Pennsylvania Abolition Society, asking for a milder
law than that in existence, the other from the Baltimore Quakers,
seeking some security for free <DW64>s against kidnapping.

  [874] W. E. B. Du Bois, _The Suppression of the American Slave
  Trade_, pp. 105-109.

The House bill as presented in 1817 secured to the claimant of a
runaway the right to prove his title before the courts of his own
state, and thus to reclaim his human property through requisition
upon the governor of the state in which it had taken refuge;
it was further provided that the writ of habeas corpus was to
have no force as against the provisions of the proposed act. The
objections made to the measure are worth noting. Mr. Holmes, of
Massachusetts, disapproved of the effort to dispense with the writ
of habeas corpus, stating that such action would remove a safeguard
from the liberty of free <DW52> people. Mr. Mason, of the same
state, declared against trial by jury, which somebody had proposed,
insisting that "juries in Massachusetts would in ninety-nine cases
out of one hundred decide in favor of fugitives, and he did not
wish his town (Boston) infected with the runaways of the South."
Mr. Sergeant, of Pennsylvania, sought to amend the bill by making
the judges of the state in which the arrest occurred the tribunal
to decide the fact of slavery. And, last of all, Mr. Whitman, of
Massachusetts, opposed the provision making it a penal offence for
a state officer to decline to execute the act; a point, it should
be remarked, that came into prominence in the famous case of Prigg
_vs._ Pennsylvania in 1842. Notwithstanding these efforts to modify
the bill, it was carried without change, January 30, 1818, by a
vote of 84 to 69. In the Senate the bill was not passed without
alteration. After a vote to limit the act to four years, the upper
House made amendments requiring some proofs of the debt of service
claimed other than the affidavit of the claimant, and then passed
the act on March 12. The lower House did not find the modified bill
to its liking, and therefore declined to consider it further.[875]

  [875] _House Journal_, Fifteenth Congress, First Session, pp.
  50, 86, 182, 186, 189, pp. 193, 198; _Annals of Congress_, pp.
  446, 447, 513, 829-831, 838, 840, 1339, 1393. _Senate Journal_,
  Fifteenth Congress, First Session, pp. 128, 135, 174, 202, 227,
  228, 233; _House Journal_, p. 328; _Annals of Congress_, pp.
  165, 210, 259, 262, 1339, 1716; T. H. Benton, _Abridgment of
  the Debates of Congress_, Vol. VI, pp. 35, 36, 37, 110; M. G.
  McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 21-23; Lalor's _Cyclopædia_,
  Vol. II, pp. 315, 316; Schouler, _History of the United States_,
  Vol. III, p. 144.

This failure to secure a new general fugitive slave act by no means
prevented those interested from renewing their endeavors in that
direction. Before the close of the year the House was prompted to
bestir itself again by a resolution of the Maryland legislature
asking protection against citizens of Pennsylvania who were charged
with harboring and protecting fugitive slaves.[876] That the
allegation was well founded cannot be doubted. Evidence has already
been adduced to show that numerous branches of the Underground
Railroad had begun to develop in southeastern Pennsylvania as early
at least as the year 1800.[877] A month after the presentation of
the Maryland resolution a committee of the House was appointed.
This committee reported a bill without delay, but again nothing was
accomplished. The framing of the Missouri Compromise at the next
session of Congress, in 1820, gave opportunity for the incorporation
of a fugitive recovery clause, to enable Southern settlers in
Missouri and other slave states to recapture their absconding slaves
from the free territory north of the new state.[878] The fugitive
clause in the Ordinance of 1787 had insured the same right for
slave-owners taking land along the western frontier of Illinois.

  [876] McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 23.

  [877] Chapter II, pp. 21, 22.

  [878] _Annals of Congress_, Sixteenth Congress, First Session,
  pp. 1469, 1587. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 23. It will be
  remembered that according to the compromise Missouri was to be
  admitted into the Union as a slave state, while slavery was to be
  prohibited in all other territory gained from France north of 36
  degrees 30 minutes. See Appendix A, p. 361.

But of what utility were such provisions unless they could be
carried into effect? Immediately after the Missouri Compromise
became a law, propositions for new fugitive slave acts were again
offered in both the House and the Senate.[879] A later attempt
was made in the winter of 1821-1822, when another resolution of
the Maryland legislature similar to the one mentioned above was
presented. These efforts, like the earlier ones, failed to secure
the desired legislation.[880]

  [879] _House Journal_, Sixteenth Congress, First Session, p. 427.

  [880] _Senate Journal_, Sixteenth Congress, First Session,
  pp. 319, 326; _Annals of Congress_, p. 618; _House Journal_,
  Seventeenth Congress, First Session, p. 143; _Annals of
  Congress_, pp. 553, 558, 710. _Annals of Congress_, Seventeenth
  Congress, First Session, pp. 1379, 1415, 1444; Benton,
  _Abridgment of the Debates of Congress_, Vol. VI, p. 296;
  McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 23, 24.

The last petition of Maryland to Congress for the redress of
her grievance due to the underground operations of anti-slavery
Pennsylvanians was made December 17, 1821. The month of January
of the same year had witnessed the presentation in Congress of a
resolution from the general assembly of Kentucky, protesting against
Canada's admission of fugitives to her domain, and requesting
negotiation with Great Britain on the subject. In 1826, during
the administration of John Quincy Adams, negotiations were at
length opened. Henry Clay, then Secretary of State, instructed
Mr. Gallatin, the American Minister at the Court of St. James, to
propose an agreement between the two countries providing for "mutual
surrender of all persons held to service or labor, under the laws
of either party, who escape into the territory of the other." His
purpose in urging such a stipulation was, he declared, "to provide
for a growing evil which has produced some, and if it be not shortly
checked, is likely to produce much more irritation." He also stated
that Virginia and Kentucky were particularly anxious that an
understanding should be reached.

In February, 1827, Mr. Clay again communicated with Mr. Gallatin
on the subject, being led to do so by another appeal made to the
general government by the legislature of Kentucky. At this time he
mentioned the fact that a provision for the restoration of fugitive
slaves had been inserted in the treaty recently concluded with the
United Mexican States, a treaty, it should be added, that failed
of confirmation by the Mexican Senate. About five months later the
American Minister sent word to the Secretary of State that the
English authorities had decided that "It was utterly impossible
for them to agree to a stipulation for the surrender of fugitive
slaves," and this decision was reaffirmed in September, 1827.

The positive terms in which this conclusion was announced by
the representative of the British government might have been
accepted as final at this time had not further consideration of
the question been demanded by the House of Representatives. On
May 10, 1828, that body adopted a resolution "requesting the
President to open a negotiation with the British government in the
view to obtain an arrangement whereby fugitive slaves, who have
taken refuge in the Canadian provinces of that government, may be
surrendered by the functionaries thereof to their masters, upon
their making satisfactory proof of their ownership of said slaves."
This resolution was promptly transmitted to Mr. Barbour, the new
Minister, with the explanation before made to Gallatin, that the
evil at which it was directed was a growing one, well calculated to
disturb "the good neighborhood" that the United States desired to
maintain with the adjacent British provinces. But as in the case
of the former attempts to secure the extradition of the refugee
settlers in Canada, so also in this, the advances of the American
government were met by the persistent refusal of Great Britain to
make a satisfactory answer.[881]

  [881] Niles' _Weekly Register_, Vol. XXXV, pp. 289-291; S. G.
  Howe, _The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West_, pp. 12-14;
  William Goodell, _Slavery and Anti-Slavery_, p. 264; M. G.
  McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 25.

The agitation in Congress for a more effective fugitive slave law,
and the diplomatic negotiations for the recovery of runaways from
Canadian soil, which have been recounted in the preceding pages,
must be regarded as furnishing evidence of the existence in many
localities in the free states of a strong practical anti-slavery
sentiment. This evidence is reënforced by the facts presented in
the earlier chapters of this volume. The escape of slaves from
their masters into the free states and their simple but impressive
appeals for liberty were phenomena witnessed again and again by many
Northern people during the opening as well as the later decades
of the nineteenth century; and deepened the conviction in their
minds that slavery was wrong. Thus for years the runaway slave was
a missionary in the cause of freedom, especially in the rapidly
settling Western states. His heroic pilgrimage, undertaken under
the greatest difficulties, was calculated to excite active interest
in his behalf. Persons living along the border of the slave states,
whose sympathies were stirred to action by their personal knowledge
of the hardships of slavery, became the promoters of lines of
Underground Railroad, sending or taking fugitives northward to
friends they could trust. It was not an infrequent occurrence that
intimate neighbors were called in to hear the thrilling tales of
escape related in the picturesque and fervid language of <DW64>s
that valued liberty more than life. The writer, who has heard some
of these stories from the lips of surviving refugees in Canada,
can well understand the effect they must have produced upon the
minds of the spectators. Many children got their lasting impression
of slavery from the things they saw and heard in homes that were
stations on the Underground Road. John Brown was reared in such a
home. His father, Owen Brown, was among the earliest settlers of the
Western Reserve in Ohio that are known to have harbored fugitives,
and the son followed the father's example in keeping open house
for runaway slaves.[882] As early as 1815 many blacks began to
find their way across the Reserve,[883] and it is stated that even
before this year more than a thousand fugitives had been assisted
on their way to Canada by a few anti-slavery people of Brown County
in southwestern Ohio.[884] It is probable that numerous escapes
were also being made thus early through other settled regions. The
cause for this early exodus is not far to seek. The increase of the
domestic slave-trade from the northern belt of slaveholding states
to the extreme South, due to the profitableness of cotton-raising,
and stimulated by the prohibition of the foreign slave-trade in
1807, aroused slaves to flight in order to avoid being sold to
unknown masters in remote regions. The slight knowledge they
needed to guide them in a northerly course was easily obtainable
through the rumors about Canada everywhere current during the War
of 1812.[885] The noticeable political effects of the straggling
migration that began under these circumstances is seen in the
renewed agitation by Southern members of Congress during the years
1817 to 1822 for a more stringent Fugitive Slave Law, and the
negotiations with England several years later looking toward the
restoration to the South of runaways who had found freedom and
security on Canadian soil.

  [882] Chapter II, p. 37.

  [883] _Ibid._, pp. 37, 38.

  [884] William Birney, _James G. Birney and His Times_, p. 435.

  [885] Chapter II, p. 27.

The influence of the Underground Road in spreading abroad an abiding
anti-slavery sentiment was, of course, greatly restricted by the
caution its operators had to observe to keep themselves and their
protégés out of trouble. The deviating secret routes of the great
system were developed in response to the need of passengers that
were in constant danger of pursuit. It is this fact of the pursuit
of runaways into various communities where they were supposed to
be in hiding, together with the harsh scenes enacted by hireling
slave-catchers in raiding some station of the Underground Road, that
gave to the operations of the Road that publicity necessary to make
converts to the anti-slavery cause. During the earlier years of the
Road's development the pursuit of runaways was not so common as it
came to be after 1840, and later, after the passage of the second
Fugitive Slave Law in 1850; but cases are recorded, as already
noted, in 1793 in Boston, 1804 in eastern Pennsylvania, 1818 in New
Bedford, Massachusetts, and elsewhere. These are but illustrations
of a class of early cases that brought the question of slavery home
to many Northern communities with such force as could not have been
done in any other way. These cases, like the numerous cases of
kidnapping that occurred during the same period, contributed not
a little to keep alive a sentiment that was steadily opposed to
slavery, and that expressed and strengthened itself in the practice
of harboring and protecting fugitives. The great effect upon public
opinion of these cases, and such as these, appears from the sad
affair of Margaret Garner, a slave-woman who escaped from Boone
County, Kentucky, late in January, 1856, and found shelter with
her four children in the house of a <DW52> man near Cincinnati,
Ohio. Rather than see her offspring doomed to the fate from which
she had hoped to save them, she nerved herself to accomplish their
death. While her master, successful in his pursuit, was preparing to
take them back across the river, she began the work of butchery by
killing her favorite child. Before she could finish her awful task
she was interrupted and put in prison. The efforts to prevent her
return to Southern bondage proved unavailing, and she was at length
delivered to her master, together with the children she had meant to
kill. President R. B. Hayes, who was practising law in Cincinnati at
the time, and lived on a pro-slavery street, told Professor James
Monroe, of Oberlin College, that the tragedy converted "the whole
street," and that the day after the murder "a leader among his
pro-slavery neighbors" called at his house, and declared with great
fervor, "Mr. Hayes, hereafter I am with you. From this time forward,
I will not only be a black Republican, but I will be a _damned
abolitionist_!"[886]

  [886] James Monroe, _Oberlin Thursday Lectures, Addresses, and
  Essays_, 1897, p. 116. See Appendix B, pp. 367-377, for cases
  under the Slave laws.

That the doctrine of immediate abolition should find expression
during the years in which the underground movement was in its
initial stage of development, is a fact the importance of
which should be given due recognition in tracing the growth of
anti-slavery sentiment to 1830, and in showing thus what was
the preparation of the North for the advent of Garrison and his
followers, and for the party movements in opposition to slavery. It
is surely worthy of remark in this connection that, of the three men
that promulgated the idea of immediate abolition before 1830, one
published a book, containing, besides other things, an argument in
support of the assistance rendered to fugitive slaves, while another
was known both in Ohio and in the Southern states as an intrepid
underground operator.

Of the trio the first in point of time as also in pungency of
statement was the Rev. George Bourne, who went to live in Virginia
about 1809 after several years residence in Maryland. Mr. Bourne's
acquaintance with slavery impressed him deeply with the evils of
the system, and he accordingly felt constrained to preach and also
to publish some vehement protests against it. For this he was
persecuted and driven from Virginia, and, like a hunted slave, he
found his way in the night into Pennsylvania, where he settled with
his family. Among his writings is a small volume entitled _The
Book and Slavery Irreconcilable_, published in 1816 and addressed
to all that professed to be members of Christian churches. In
it the author vigorously and repeatedly urged the "immediate and
total abolition" of slavery, and warned his contemporaries of the
consequences of continuing the system until by its growth it should
endanger the Union. He could discover no palliative suitable to the
evil. "The system is so entirely corrupt," he said, "that it admits
of no cure but by a total and immediate abolition. For a gradual
emancipation is a virtual recognition of the right, and establishes
the rectitude of the practice. If it be just for one moment, it is
hallowed forever; and if it be inequitable, not a day should it be
tolerated."[887]

  [887] These quotations are taken from the summary of Bourne's
  _The Book and Slavery Irreconcilable_, given in the _Boston
  Commonwealth_, July 25, 1885, since the original was inaccessible
  to the present writer. The summary is known to be trustworthy.
  See _The Life of Garrison_, by his children, Vol. I, postscript
  to the Preface, and the references to the original there given.

Eight years after the appearance of the book containing these
uncompromising views, a treatise was published at the town of
Vevay on the Ohio River in southeastern Indiana by the Rev. James
Duncan. This small work was entitled _A Treatise on Slavery, in
which is shown forth the Evil of Slaveholding, both from the Light
of Nature and Divine Revelation_. The purpose of the work as set
forth by the author was to persuade all slaveholders that they
were "guilty of a crime, not only of the highest aggravation,
but one that, if persisted in," would "inevitably lead them to
perdition."[888] He therefore assailed the principle of slavery,
denying the argument admitted by some of the apologists for slavery
among his contemporaries, namely, "that the emancipation of slaves
need not be sudden, but gradual, lest the possessors of them should
be too much impoverished, and lest the free inhabitants might be
exposed to danger, if the blacks were all liberated at once." This
doctrine of the inexpediency of immediate abolition Mr. Duncan
denied, taking the position that such excuses would "go to justify
the practice of slaveholding, because the only motive that men can
have to practise slavery is that it may be a means of preventing
poverty and other penal evils. If the fear of poverty or any penal
sufferings will exculpate the possessors of slaves from blame for
a few months or years, it will do it for life; and if some may be
lawfully held to labor without wages, all may be held the same
way; and if the principle of slavery is morally wrong, it ought
not to be practised to avoid any penal evil, but if just, even the
cruel treatment of slaves would not condemn the practice."[889] He
maintained that, although the different sections of the country
were not equally guilty of the sins of slaveholding, yet the nation
as a whole was responsible for the evil,--on account of the number
in the free states that were friendly to slavery, on account also
of the advocacy by Northern representatives of the policy of
slavery extension, and, finally, on account of the slack zeal of
some of those inimical to the institution.[890] He proposed that
Christians should have no church fellowship with slaveholders; he
urged political action against slavery; and he supplemented the
assertion that it was the duty of slaves to escape if they could,
by the statement that it was impossible for any one to hinder
or prevent their escape without flying in the face of the moral
law.[891] As regards gradualism, which was practised in some states,
he said: "If it is lawful to hold a man in bondage until he is
twenty-eight years of age, it must be equally lawful to hold him to
the day of his death; and if it is sinful to hold him to the day
of his death, it must partake of the same species of crime to hold
him until he is twenty-eight."[892] The arguments in support of
his position he based largely upon the Decalogue, the Golden Rule
and other scriptural injunctions, as well as upon the Declaration
of Independence and the Constitution of the United States.[893]
Underground operators always justified themselves on these grounds;
and their motives in joining the Liberty and Free Soil parties
later--as many of them did--appear not to have been other than the
motives of Bourne and Duncan in advocating political action against
slavery.

  [888] Preface, p. viii.

  [889] Preface, pp. vii, viii.

  [890] _A Treatise on Slavery_, reprinted by the American
  Anti-Slavery Society, 1840, p. 59.

  [891] _Ibid._, p. 107. In advocating political action Mr. Duncan
  said, "The practice of slaveholding in a slave state need not
  deter emancipators or others from the privilege of voting for
  candidates to the legislative bodies, or from using their best
  endeavors to have men placed in office that would be favorable
  to the cause of freedom, and who may be best qualified to govern
  the state or commonwealth, but it ought to prevent any from
  officiating as a magistrate, when his commission authorizes him
  to issue a warrant to apprehend the slave when he is guilty of no
  other crime than that of running away from unmerited bondage."
  This was not the first time political action was proposed,
  for Mr. Bourne declared in his work (_The Book and Slavery
  Irreconcilable_): "Every voter for a public officer who will not
  destroy the system, is as culpable as if he participated in the
  evil, and is responsible for the protraction of the crime." See
  the _Boston Commonwealth_, July 25, 1885.

  [892] _A Treatise on Slavery_, p. 123.

  [893] _Ibid._, pp. 21, 32-40, 82, 84, 87-94, 96, 107. Mr.
  Duncan held that slavery was "directly contrary to the Federal
  Constitution." See pp. 110, 111.

The last member of the trio who complained of delay in granting
freedom to the enslaved was the Rev. John Rankin, the pastor of
a Presbyterian church in the town of Ripley on the Ohio River in
southwestern Ohio. Long residence in Tennessee and Kentucky had
filled him with hatred of slavery, and for this hatred he gave
his reasons in a series of thirteen vigorous letters addressed to
his brother Thomas, a merchant at Middlebrook, Augusta County,
Virginia, who had recently become a slave-owner. The letters were
written in 1824, and were collected in a little volume in 1826. In
the preface, Mr. Rankin said that the safety of the government and
the happiness of its subjects depended upon the extermination of
slavery,[894] and in the letters themselves he attacked the system
of American slavery in unmistakable language. In principle he
stood clearly with Bourne and Duncan, as he afterwards came to the
support of Garrison, although he did not use the words "immediate
abolition." He held that "Avarice tends to enslave, but justice
requires emancipation."[895] He heard with impatience the excuse
for continued slaveholding that freedom would ruin the blacks
because they were not capable of doing for themselves, and must,
therefore, either all starve or steal. With sarcasm he exclaimed,
"Immaculate tenderness! Astonishing sympathy! But what is to be
dreaded more than such tenderness and sympathy? Who would wish to
have them exercised upon himself?... And have not many of those
[slaves] who have been emancipated in America become wealthy and
good citizens?... We are commanded to 'do justly and love mercy,'
and this we ought to do without delay, and leave the consequences
attending it to the control of Him who gave the command."[896] It
has been noted in another place that Mr. Rankin was for years an
active agent of the Underground Railroad, in association with a
number of abolitionists of his neighborhood, among whom he was a
recognized leader.[897]

  [894] _Letters on American Slavery_, Preface, p. iii.

  [895] _Ibid._, p. 20.

  [896] _Letters on American Slavery_, pp. 104, 107.

  [897] Chapter IV, p. 109.

[Illustration: REV. JOHN RANKIN.

(From a bust by Ellen Rankin Copp, of Chicago, Illinois.)]

The idea has somehow gained credence in the general accounts of
the anti-slavery movement that the Garrisonian movement was one
that could scarcely be said to have had precursors in the earlier
agitation; and the pre-Garrison abolitionists have been thought
of, apparently, as marked by mild philanthropy, adherence to law
and tolerance. It has been supposed that an interval of inactivity
followed upon the earlier movements, and that the later movement
was thus a thing apart, radically different in its character from
anything that had gone before. In view of the evidence brought
together in this volume it is perhaps not too much to say that a
real continuity of development is traceable through the period with
which we have had to do, and that many little communities throughout
the country, under the influences always at work, had germinated the
idea of immediate abolition, in support of which texts were easily
found in the Bible; and that thus the way had been prepared for the
anti-slavery ideas and activities of 1830 and the subsequent years.
Mr. Garrison himself "confessed his indebtedness for his views" of
slavery to Bourne's _The Book and Slavery Irreconcilable_, next
after the Bible itself,[898] and in Number 17 of the first volume of
the _Liberator_ appears an extract quoted from Bourne's work.[899]
It is certain that Garrison was familiar with the work as early as
September 13, 1830,[900] and he may have been so earlier. He arrived
at the doctrine during the summer of 1829, before his association
with Lundy at Baltimore.[901] It cannot be determined when Garrison
first became acquainted with the _Letters on Slavery_ of the Rev.
John Rankin, but they seem to have had a wide circulation, for about
the year 1825 they had fallen into the hands of the Rev. Samuel J.
May, living at the time in Brooklyn, Connecticut, and he had read
them with interest.[902] In the second volume of the _Liberator_
Garrison republished these letters, and in after years, on more
than one occasion, he acknowledged himself the "disciple" of their
author.[903]

  [898] _The Life of Garrison_, by his children, Vol. 1, p. 306.

  [899] _Ibid._, postscript to Preface.

  [900] _Ibid._, p. 207.

  [901] _The Life of Garrison_, Vol. I, p. 140.

  [902] _Memoir of S. J. May_, by George B. Emerson and others, pp.
  76, 78, 87, 139, 140. See also _Life of Garrison_, Vol. I, p.
  213, foot-note.

  [903] _Life of Garrison_, Vol. I, pp. 305, 306; Vol. III, pp.
  379, 380.

The outspoken courage characteristic of the new phase into which the
anti-slavery cause passed in 1830 helped to increase the resistance
made in the North to the law for the rendition of fugitive slaves.
The sympathy with the slave now became vocal in various centres,
and made itself heard among the blacks of the South through the
passionate and unguarded utterances of their masters. The evidence
gathered from surviving abolitionists in the states adjacent to the
lakes shows an increased activity of the Underground Road during the
decade 1830-1840. The removal of the Indians from the Gulf states
and the consequent opening of vast cotton-fields during the period
named led many slaves to flee from the danger of transportation to
the far South.[904] Under these circumstances pursuits of runaways
became more frequent, and were often marked by a display of anger
on the part of the pursuing party easily accounted for by the
anti-slavery agitation in the free states. Open interference and
rescues in which both <DW64>s and whites took part became more
common.[905] Many persons of respectability, more courageous than
the great majority of their class at that time, not only enrolled
themselves in the new anti-slavery societies, but made it a part
of their duty to engage in the defence of fugitive slaves. Salmon
P. Chase often served as counsel for the captured runaway during
this period, and soon gained for himself the unenvied title of
"attorney-general for fugitive slaves."[906] Other men of talents,
position and education were not behind the rising Ohioan in their
protection of the refugee. A formal organization of Underground
Railroad workers, with Robert Purvis as president, was effected at
Philadelphia in 1838. It is evident that the Underground Railroad
was now developing with rapidity. The conditions prevailing in
the North and South during the decade 1840-1850 were not less
favorable to the escape of slaves, and, in one particular, were more
favorable; the decision in the Prigg case in 1842 took away much of
the effectiveness of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793, and thus made
pursuit little less than useless.

  [904] G. M. Weston, _Progress of Slavery in the United States_,
  p. 22.

  [905] McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 38, 39.

  [906] J. W. Schuckers, _The Life and Public Service of Samuel
  Portland Chase_, p. 52. For portrait see plate facing p. 254.

About four years before this historic decision was declared, that
is to say, in December, 1838, John Calhoun, of Kentucky, sought to
introduce a resolution in the House looking towards an enactment
making it unlawful for any person to aid fugitive slaves in escaping
from their owners, and another making it unlawful for any person
in the non-slaveholding states to entice slaves from their owners,
the prosecution of offenders against these proposed laws to take
place in the courts of the United States. Objections were made to
the introduction of these resolutions, and Mr. Calhoun was prevented
from getting a reference of the matter to the Committee on the
Judiciary by a vote of 107 to 89.[907] When the Prigg decision
came, its political significance was quickly shown in the passage
of laws by various Northern states forbidding their officers from
performing the duties imposed by the act of 1793. From 1842 to 1850,
Massachusetts, Vermont, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island passed such
laws, and Connecticut, while repealing an earlier law on her statute
books as being at the time unconstitutional, retained the portion of
it that restrained state officers from assisting in the execution of
the act.

  [907] _Congressional Globe_, Twenty-fifth Congress, Third
  Session, p. 34.

In the meantime the Southern leaders did not fail to note the
progress of anti-slavery sentiment north of Mason and Dixon's
line. This was not less manifest in the formation of the Liberty
party in the early years of the decade 1840-1850, than in the
legislative and other opposition to the Fugitive Slave Law. Indeed,
so marked an impression had been made upon the minds and sympathies
of anti-slavery men by the brave and successful flight of slaves,
that a Liberty convention at Peterboro, New York, in January, 1842,
issued an address to slaves, declaring that slavery was to be
"tortured even unto death," advising them to seek liberty by flight,
and assuring them that the abolitionist knew no more grateful
employment than that of helping escaping slaves to Canada. In August
of the following year the national convention of the new party,
comprising nearly a thousand delegates from all the free states
except New Hampshire, made the disavowal of the fugitive recovery
clause of the Constitution a part of the party platform, voting by
a decisive majority "to regard and treat the third clause of the
Constitution, whenever applied to the case of a fugitive slave,
as utterly null and void; and consequently as forming no part of
the Constitution of the United States whenever we are called upon
or sworn to support it."[908] About the time of the announcement
of this principle, Mr. Garrison issued in behalf of the American
Anti-Slavery Society an address to the bondmen of the South, in
which they were promised deliverance from their chains, and were
encouraged to run away from their masters. "If you come to us,
and are hungry," ran the address, "we will feed you; if thirsty,
we will give you drink; if naked, we will clothe you; if sick, we
will minister to your necessities; if in prison, we will visit you;
if you need a hiding-place from the face of the pursuer, we will
provide one that even bloodhounds will not scent out."[909]

  [908] Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. I, pp.
  552, 553.

  [909] _Ibid._, p. 563.

Such open attacks upon the property rights of planters and
slave-traders must have been extremely aggravating to Southerners,
and, of course, contributed to bring the question of a more
effective Fugitive Slave Law again under the consideration of
Congress, notwithstanding the fact that a large share of that
body's attention was occupied during the period from 1844 to 1848
with matters connected with the annexation of Texas, the Mexican
War and the settlement of the Oregon boundary dispute. In 1847 the
legislature of Kentucky presented a petition to Congress urging
the importance of new laws so framed as to enable the citizens of
slaveholding states to reclaim their <DW64>s when they had absconded
into the free states. This resulted in a bill reported in the
Senate, but the bill never got beyond its second reading. Two years
later an attempt was made in the House to secure legislation for the
same object, but the committee to whom the matter was referred seems
never to have reported.

At intervals more or less frequent, during a period of more than
fifty years, the South had been demanding of Congress adequate
protection for its human property against the depredations of
those Northerners who rejoiced in the work of secret emancipation.
The efforts of the slaveholding section for a stricter fugitive
recovery law had uniformly failed down to 1850, and it seems
altogether likely that the success won in the year named would not
have been realized,[910] if a bill intended to meet the needs of
slave-owners had not been made an essential part of the great scheme
of compromise for the adjustment of the differences threatening
the perpetuity of the Union at the time.[911] The measure that was
finally adopted, as a part of the programme of compromise, was one
introduced into the Senate by Mr. Mason, of Virginia, in the early
part of the first session of the Thirty-first Congress. It was
aimed, said its author, at evils "more deeply seated and widely
extended than those" his colleague recognized. "The state from
whence I came," continued Mr. Mason, "and the states of Kentucky and
Maryland, being those states of the Union that border on the free
states, have had ample experience, not only of the difficulties,
but of the actual impossibility of reclaiming a fugitive when he
once gets within the boundaries of a non-slaveholding state."[912]
Henry Clay, the author of the Compromise, whose disposition had
been to lean to the Northern rather than to the Southern side of
the general controversy, expressed the irritation of his own state,
Kentucky, when he said concerning the question of fugitive slaves:
"Upon this subject I do think that we have just and serious cause
of complaint against the free States. I think they have failed in
fulfilling a great obligation, and the failure is precisely upon
one of those subjects which in its nature is most irritating and
inflammatory to those who live in slave States.... It is our duty
to make the law more effective; and I shall go with the senator
from the South who goes furthest in making penal laws and imposing
the heaviest sanctions for the recovery of fugitive slaves and the
restoration of them to their owners."[913] Delaware and Missouri had
grievances similar to those of Kentucky and other border states. The
region constituted by these states suffered heavy losses through the
operations of the Underground Railroad.[914]

  [910] "The wonder is how such an Act came to pass, even by so
  lean a vote as it received; for it was voted for by less than
  half of the Senate, and by six less than the number of senators
  from the slave states alone. It is a wonder how it passed at
  all; and the wonder increases on knowing that, of the small
  number that voted for it, many were against it, and merely went
  along with those who had constituted themselves the particular
  guardians of the rights of the slave states, and claimed a lead
  in all that concerned them. These self-instituted guardians
  were permitted to have their own way, some voting with them
  unwillingly, others not voting at all. It was a part of the plan
  of 'compromise and pacification' which was then deemed essential
  to save the Union; under the fear of danger to the Union on one
  hand, and the charms of pacification and compromise on the other,
  a few heated spirits got the control and had things their own
  way." Benton's _Thirty Years' View_, Vol. II, p. 780.

  [911] See Rhodes' _History of the United States_, Vol. I, pp.
  130-136, for a discussion of the question whether the Union was
  in danger in 1850.

  [912] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-first Congress, First
  Session, Appendix, p. 1583.

  [913] _Life and Speeches of Henry Clay_, Vol. II, pp. 641, 643.
  The speech from which the above quotations are made was delivered
  Feb. 5 and 6, 1850.

  [914] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-first Congress, Second
  Session, Appendix, p. 1051; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 31.

That the cotton states also lost considerable property every year
by the escape of slaves to the North appears from a statement of
Senator Jefferson Davis, of Mississippi: "<DW64>s do escape from
Mississippi frequently," he said, "and the boats constantly passing
by our long line of river frontier furnish great facility to get
into Ohio; and when they do escape it is with great difficulty that
they are recovered; indeed, it seldom occurs that they are restored.
We, though less than the border states, are seriously concerned in
this question.... Those who, like myself, live on that great highway
of the West--the Mississippi River--and are most exposed, have a
present and increasing interest in the matter. We desire laws that
shall be effective, and at the same time within the constitutional
power of Congress; such as shall be adequate, and be secured by
penalties the most stringent which can be imposed."[915] Calhoun
admitted that discontent was universal in the South, and declared
that conciliation could only come when the North consented to meet
certain conditions, one of which was the restoration of fugitive
slaves.

  [915] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-first Congress, First
  Session, Appendix, p. 1615.

Many of the speeches contained suggestions and prophecies of
disunion. One of these, made by Pratt, of Maryland, called the
attention of the Senate to a recent address delivered by Mr. Seward,
of New York, before an assembly of Ohioans, in which he urged them
to "extend a cordial welcome to the fugitive who lays his weary
limbs at your door, and _defend him as you would your household
gods_."[916] Another made by Yulee, of Florida, informed the Senate
of a convention then sitting at Cazenovia, New York, attended
by more than thirty runaway slaves, and held for the purpose of
devising ways and means of escape for blacks. The language of the
address to slaves issued by the convention was not calculated to
reassure slave-owners. In part it ran: "Including our children,
we number here in Canada 20,000 souls. The population in the free
States are, with few exceptions, the fugitive slave's friends.

  [916] _Ibid._, p. 1592.

"We are poor. We can do little more for your deliverance than pray
to God for it. We will furnish you with pocket compasses, and in the
dark nights you can run away. We cannot furnish you with weapons;
some of us are not inclined to carry arms; but if you can get them,
take them, and, before you go back into bondage, use them, if you
are obliged to take life. The slaveholders would not hesitate to
kill you, rather than not take you back into bondage.

"Numerous as the escapes from slavery are, they would still be
more so, were it not for the master's protection of the rights of
property. You even hesitate to take the slowest of his horses; but
we say take the fastest. Pack up provisions and clothes; and either
get a key, or force the lock, and get his money and start."[917]
In view of such proceedings, openly conducted without hindrance,
the Senator appealed to his auditors and to the country to consider
whether "this Union can long continue?"[918]

  [917] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-first Congress, First
  Session, Appendix, pp. 1622, 1623.

  [918] _Ibid._

In his famous 7th-of-March speech, Webster freely admitted that
the complaints of the South in regard to the non-rendition of
fugitive slaves were just, and that the North had fallen short of
her duty. He therefore decided to support Mason's Fugitive Slave
Bill, although he wanted it amended in certain particulars, and
sought especially to have in it a clause securing trial by jury
to the refugee in case he denied owing service to the claimant.
He criticised the abolition societies of the North, and said he
thought their operations for the last twenty years had produced
"nothing good or valuable." The press of the South he found to be
as violent as that of the other section. There was, he decided, "no
solid grievance presented by the South within the redress of the
government, ... but the want of a proper regard to the injunction of
the Constitution for the delivery of fugitive slaves."[919]

  [919] _Webster's Works_, Vol. V, pp. 354, 355, 357, 358, 361.

Under the combined championship of Webster, Clay and Calhoun, and
to bring about better feeling between the two parts of the country,
which in the eyes of many contemporaries seemed on the verge of
splitting asunder, the new Fugitive Slave Law was passed by the
Senate, August 26, 1850, and by the House a few days later. By the
signature of President Fillmore the measure became a law, September
18.

The vote by which the new law had been passed through the two Houses
of Congress did not betoken a disposition at the North to meet
the obligations it imposed upon that section. Only three of the
senators representing free states voted for the measure. These were
Dodge and Jones, of Indiana, and Sturgeon, of Pennsylvania. Among
the one hundred and thirty-six members from the Northern states
in the House, only thirty-one voted with the slaveholders. Three
of the thirty-one were Whigs, the rest Democrats.[920] Jefferson
Davis showed that he comprehended the true situation when he said,
during the following session of Congress, that the history of the
law proved that it would not furnish the needed security, because
the Northern majority did not pass the bill, but merely allowed
the Southern minority to pass it, and because the measure had to
be executed in the North.[921] This view of the case seems not to
have been taken by those representing the border slave states.
The comprehensive character of Clay's scheme was favorable to the
incorporation in it of a measure stringent enough to suit the most
aggrieved without exciting the opposition such a measure would have
called out if presented by itself.

  [920] Von Holst, _Constitutional and Political History of the
  United States_, Vol. IV, pp. 18, 19. The hundred and thirty-six
  Northern members comprised seventy-six Whigs and fifty Democrats.

  [921] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-first Congress, Second
  Session, Appendix, p. 324. See also Von Holst's work, Vol. IV, p.
  27.

Whatever the expectations of the various slaveholding states with
regard to the recovery of their runaways under the new law, Joshua
R. Giddings, himself an enthusiastic agent of the Underground
Railroad and a better judge of the real convictions of the North
than Webster, took the earliest occasion to give utterance to the
sentiments of the people upon whom depended the success or failure
of the law of 1850. Giddings did not delay, nor did he mince
matters. In the earliest days of the session following that in which
the compromise had been passed he denounced the Fugitive Slave Law
and predicted its failure. Concerning the citizens of his own state,
he said: "The freemen of Ohio will never turn out to chase the
panting fugitive. They will never be metamorphosed into bloodhounds,
to track him to his hiding-place, and seize and drag him out, and
deliver him to his tormentors. Rely upon it they will die first....
Let no man tell me there is no higher law than this fugitive bill.
We feel there is a law of right, of justice, of freedom, implanted
in the breast of every intelligent human being, that bids him look
with scorn upon this libel on all that is called law."[922]

  [922] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-first Congress, Second
  Session, pp. 15, 16. Von Holst, _Constitutional and Political
  History of the United States_, Vol. IV, p. 15.

That slave-owners counted on deriving benefits from the law appears
from the great number of attempts at once made to reclaim runaways,
and the frequent prosecutions of those guilty of facilitating their
escape. The period sometimes designated the "era of slave-hunting"
began in the North. Slave-owners and their agents entered vigorously
upon the chase, and a larger number of communities in the free
states than ever before were invaded by men engaged in the
disgusting business of capturing blacks, intelligent and ambitious
enough to seek their own liberty. Villages, towns and cities from
Iowa to Maine, but especially in the middle states, witnessed
scenes calculated to awaken the popular detestation of slavery as
it had never been awakened before. Pitiable distress fell upon the
fugitive settlers in the North and did much to quicken consciences
everywhere. The capture of a fugitive in the place where he had
been living invariably caused an outburst of indignation; and if
the victim were not rescued before his removal by his captors a
sum of money was raised if possible, and his freedom was purchased
if that could be done. All of these circumstances contributed to
increase the traffic along the numerous and tortuous lines of the
Underground Railroad, which, according to the testimony of surviving
abolitionists, did its most thriving business in all parts of the
North during the decade from 1850 to 1860. The marked increase in
the number of <DW64>s seeking aid on their way to Canada at the
outset of this period was due to the flight of many of the fugitive
settlers from their accustomed haunts in the free states; but the
supply later on must be attributed to the ease of communication
through various channels by which slaves were every day learning
of the body of abolitionists eager to help them to freedom. The
readiness of the Northern people to act in opposition to the law
arose from their abhorrence of a measure that they considered
unrighteous and cruel, and from their resentment at the requirement
that they must join in the hunt, so that the fugitive might be
promptly enslaved.[923] The wide-spread opposition to the law led
to prosecutions of underground workers in various places, and these
prosecutions greatly helped to keep the slavery question before the
attention of the country, despite the wishes and endeavors of the
politicians who strove to silence the issue.[924]

  [923] McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 53.

  [924] "These prosecutions attracted more attention to the slavery
  question in a few months than the abolitionists had been able to
  arouse in twenty years." Professor Edward Channing, _The United
  States of America, 1765-1865_, p. 241.

The record of the year 1851 illustrates the character of the general
contest, which had already set in before the enactment of the new
law, but which assumed thenceforth an importance it had never had
before. Early in the year Shadrach was seized in Boston, carried
before the commissioner, and remanded to custody, but was rescued
by a crowd of <DW64>s and hurried off to Canada. Later Sims was
caught and confined in the court-house until he was marched to Long
Wharf under guard of three hundred policemen. William and Ellen
Craft, fugitives from Georgia, were tracked to Boston, but, aided by
Theodore Parker and other faithful friends, succeeded in escaping
to England. Other notable instances of pursuit occurred at Chicago,
Illinois, Poughkeepsie, New York, and Westchester and Wilkesbarre,
Pennsylvania. At Philadelphia a free <DW64> was arrested, proved a
slave by perjured testimony and taken to Maryland; fortunately he
gained his liberty again by the refusal of the planter to whom he
was delivered to identify him as his lost property. At Buffalo an
alleged fugitive was released on writ of habeas corpus by Judge
Conkling. At the hearing that followed the lack of evidence caused
the judge to discharge the prisoner, and he was soon in Canada. In
the attempt of the Maryland slave-owner, Gorsuch, and his party,
to recover certain runaway slaves from Christiana, Pennsylvania,
Gorsuch was killed and his son seriously wounded, while the
fugitives managed to escape. This affair caused intense excitement,
not only in Pennsylvania, but throughout the country. Another case
resulting in the death of one of the parties concerned grew out of
the kidnapping of a free <DW64> girl from the house of a Mr. Miller,
in Nottingham, Pennsylvania; Miller succeeded in rescuing the girl,
but he was mysteriously murdered before he reached home. Near the
close of the year 1851 Jerry McHenry was arrested in Syracuse, New
York, while an agricultural fair and a convention of the Liberty
party were in progress in that city. The attempted escape and the
recapture of the <DW64> wrought up the crowd to a state of intense
feeling, which was not relieved until the fugitive was rescued
and sent to Canada.[925] There were many other instances in which
communities were given the opportunity to show their spirit in the
defence of helpless bondmen.

  [925] F. W. Seward, _Seward at Washington as Senator and
  Secretary of State_, 1891, Vol. I, pp. 169, 170. McDougall,
  _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 44, 47-51, 58, 59.

The political leaders and the administration, who were responsible
for the enactment of the Fugitive Slave Law, were not willing to see
its provisions thus trampled under foot. Upon the reassembling of
Congress in December, 1850, President Fillmore expressed himself in
his message as pleased with the compromise measures, although, he
admitted, they had not yet realized their purpose fully. "It would
be strange," he said, "if they had been received with immediate
approbation by people and states prejudiced and heated by the
exciting controversies of their representatives." He nevertheless
had faith that the various enactments would be generally sustained.
The tinge of doubt in the communication of the President pretty
certainly referred to the fierce denunciations of the Fugitive
Slave Law recently uttered by mass-meetings in various parts of
the Northern states, and to several cases of resistance where the
execution of the law had been attempted. His reassuring expressions
voiced his own hope and that of the political magnates; and he meant
also, perhaps, to carry assurance to the South. Some balm seemed
necessary, for the Georgia convention in accepting the compromise
as a "permanent adjustment of the sectional controversy," voted,
"That it is the deliberate opinion of this convention that upon
the faithful execution of the Fugitive Slave Bill by the proper
authorities depends the preservation of our much-loved Union."[926]

  [926] _Boston Atlas_, Dec. 17, 1850.

The open resistance to the law upon several occasions in 1851
brought opportunities to the administration to exert itself in favor
of the faithful execution of the law. After the rescue of Shadrach
from the United States marshal on February 15, much excitement
existed, especially at the centre of government. The President
immediately issued a proclamation commanding all civil and military
officers, and calling on all good citizens, to "aid in quelling
this and similar combinations" and to assist in capturing the
persons that had set the law at defiance. The Senate, after debate,
adopted a resolution requesting the President to lay before it
information relating to the rescue, and inquiring whether further
legislation was desirable. This request was promptly complied
with by the executive. Then Clay, the author of the resolution,
urged that the President be invested with extraordinary power to
enforce the law, but failed to gain substantial support for his
proposition. In the meantime five of the rescuers of Shadrach were
indicted and tried, but owing to the disagreement of the jury none
of them were convicted. The energetic action of the administration
and its supporters had apparently accomplished no result, except
to demonstrate the difficulties with which the enforcement of the
Fugitive Slave Act was encompassed.

The same lesson was taught in two important instances toward the
end of this year, when the government undertook to carry the law
into effect. The Gorsuch tragedy at Christiana, Pennsylvania, led
the President to order the United States marshal, district attorney
and commissioner from Philadelphia, with forty-five United States
marines from the navy-yard, to assist in arresting those supposed
to have been engaged in the fight. The fugitives had escaped and
could not be recovered, but a number of other persons, most of whom
were , were arrested, taken to Philadelphia, and indicted
for treason. But the efforts of the authorities to convict were
unavailing, and the prisoners went scot free.[927]

  [927] For references see Appendix B, 53, Christiana case, p. 373.

Within a few days after the passage of the Fugitive Slave Law
in September of the previous year, the spirit of resistance in
Syracuse, New York, had manifested itself in public meetings
at which the law was denounced and a Vigilance Committee
organized.[928] In the early part of June following, Daniel Webster,
who was travelling extensively through the Northern states and
exerting his personal and official influence to secure obedience
to the law, visited Syracuse and made a speech. In the course of
his remarks he insisted in no conciliatory terms that the law
must be enforced. He said, "Those persons in this city who mean
to oppose the execution of the Fugitive Slave Law are traitors!
traitors!! traitors!!! This law ought to be obeyed, and it will be
enforced--yes, it shall be enforced, and that, too, in the midst
of the next anti-slavery convention, if then there shall be any
occasion to enforce it."

  [928] S. J. May, _Some Recollections of our Anti-Slavery
  Conflict_, p. 349.

As if in fulfillment of this prediction of the Secretary of
State, on October 1, 1851, a day when a convention of the Liberty
party was in progress, an attempt was made to capture one Jerry
McHenry, an undoubted fugitive; but the Vigilance Committee, under
efficient leadership, succeeded in rescuing him out of the hands of
his captors. At this outcome there was much exultation among the
anti-slavery people, as also when later the prosecution instituted
against eighteen of the rescuers ended in a failure to convict. It
is worthy of note that Seward was the first to sign the bond of
those indicted; and that Gerrit Smith, then a member of Congress,
made a defiant speech in the fall of 1852 in Canandaigua, where the
trial of one of the rescuers was going on.[929]

  [929] _Ibid._, pp. 373-384; Frothingham, _Life of Gerrit Smith_,
  p. 117; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, pp. 48, 49; Wilson, _Rise
  and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. II, pp. 327, 328.

[Illustration: HARRIET BEECHER STOWE.]

Such incidents, together with the aggravation caused by the removal
of fugitives successfully seized, made it plain that the compromise
was not the "finality" that the politicians declared it to be;
and that the Whig and Democratic parties chose to decree it in
their national platforms in the summer of 1852. The principles of
political opposition determined by the conditions of the time
were uttered by the convention of the Free Soil party, with which
many of the underground operators were now allied, in the words:
"No more slave states, no more slave territories, no nationalized
slavery, and no national legislation for the extradition of
slaves." The issue of the presidential campaign in the election of
Pierce, a compromise Democrat, marks only a temporary disturbance
in the progress of sentiment, due to the desire of the country to
have rest, the disinclination of many Whigs to support their own
candidate, General Winfield Scott, and the policy of acquiescence
he represented; and the solidarity of action among the Democrats,
who were generally satisfied both with their principles and their
candidate.

As it was the Fugitive Slave Law that brought the North face to
face with slavery nationalized, so it was the Fugitive Slave Law
that occasioned, in the spring of 1852, the production of _Uncle
Tom's Cabin_, a novel the great political significance of which
has been generally acknowledged. The observations and experience
that made possible for Mrs. Harriet Beecher Stowe the writing of
this remarkable book were gained by her while living at Cincinnati,
where she was enabled to study the effects of slavery. While thus a
resident on the borders of Kentucky, she numbered among her friends
slaveholders on the one side of the Ohio River and abolitionists on
the other. At the time of her first trip across the Ohio in 1833,
she visited an estate, which is described as that of Colonel Shelby
in _Uncle Tom's Cabin_.[930] Her associations and sympathies brought
home to her the personal aspects of slavery, and her house on Walnut
Hills early become a station on the Underground Railroad, remaining
so doubtless till 1850, when she removed with her husband, Professor
Calvin Stowe, to Brunswick, Maine.

  [930] C. E. Stowe, _Life of Harriet Beecher Stowe_, pp. 71, 72.

During the intervening years she was unconsciously gleaning
incidents and scenes and discovering characters for her future
book. The woful experiences of her midnight visitors, whose hunger
for freedom rose superior to every other need, awoke her deepest
compassion, and the neighborhood in which she lived, nay, even
her own household, supplied the circumstances and adventures
depicted in the lives of some of her most admirable characters.
Mrs. Stowe herself declared _Uncle Tom's Cabin_ to be "a collection
and arrangement of real incidents,--of actions really performed,
of words and expressions really uttered,--grouped together with
reference to a general result, in the same manner that the mosaic
artist groups his fragments of various stones into one general
picture."[931] For example she points out that the service of
Senator Bird in the incident of the novel in which Eliza escapes
from her pursuers Tom Locker and Marks had its counterpart in the
service rendered a <DW64> girl in her own employ by Professor Stowe
and his brother-in-law, Henry Ward Beecher, in 1839. This girl was
secretly conveyed northward by her escorts a distance of twelve
miles to the house of John Van Zandt, another station-keeper of
the Underground Road; and Van Zandt it was who "performed the good
deed which the author in her story ascribes to Van Tromp."[932]
Concerning the leading Quaker character in her book Mrs. Stowe
says: "The character of Rachel Halliday was a real one, but she
has passed away to her reward. Simeon Halliday, calmly risking
fine and imprisonment for his love to God and man, has had in this
country many counterparts among the sect. The writer had in mind,
at the time of writing, the scenes in the trial of Thomas Garet,
of Wilmington, Delaware, for the crime of hiring a hack to convey
a mother and four children from Newcastle jail to Wilmington, a
distance of _five_ miles."[933] The thrilling adventures of Eliza in
escaping across the Ohio River with her child in her arms as the ice
was breaking up was an actual occurrence that took place fifty miles
above Cincinnati, at Ripley, an initial station of an important
underground route.[934]

  [931] _A Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin_, p. 5; Charles Dudley Warner
  in _The Atlantic Monthly_, September, 1896, p. 312.

  [932] _A Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin_, p. 23; C. E. Stowe, _Life
  of Harriet Beecher Stowe_, p. 93; _Uncle Tom's Cabin_; Howe,
  _Historical Collections of Ohio_, Vol. II, pp. 102, 103; J. W.
  Shuckers, _Life of Chase_, p. 53.

  [933] _A Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin_, p. 54.

  [934] _Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, pp. 147-151; Howe,
  _Historical Collections of Ohio_, Vol. II, p. 104; see also
  article on "Early Cincinnati," by Judge Joseph Cox in the
  _Cincinnati Times-Star_, Feb. 6, 1891; a report of "The Story
  of Eliza," as told by the Rev. S. G. W. Rankin, printed in the
  _Boston Transcript_, Nov. 30, 1895, an article on Harriet Beecher
  Stowe, in the _Cincinnati Enquirer_, Nov. 3, 1895, p. 17.

By the combination of such elements under the crystallizing
influence of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, Mrs. Stowe made her
story. Intent on having the people of the North understand what
the "system" was, about which so many seemed apathetic, she set to
work in response to appeals to her to take up her pen. The result,
wholly unexpected, was the production of a book that did for the
whole population of the free states what the Underground Railroad
had been doing for a part only: the author made real the sin of
slavery to the consciences of freemen, by an object-lesson in the
possible evils of slavery and the desire of the slave to be free. In
Harriet Beecher Stowe the thousands of fugitive slaves that had been
unwittingly acting as missionaries in the cause of freedom through
the earlier years found at last a champion whose words carried their
touching story to the multitudes. The disheartening circumstances
under which her novel had been composed and the exhausted condition
in which the author found herself at its conclusion did not permit
her to look for anything but the failure of her undertaking. As
she finished the last proof-sheets "it seemed to her that there
was no hope; that nobody would hear, nobody would read, nobody
would pity; that this frightful system, which had already pursued
its victims into the free States, might at last even threaten them
in Canada."[935] But the success of the book was immediate. Three
thousand copies were sold on the first day of publication, and more
than three hundred thousand in this country within the year.[936]

  [935] Quoted by Charles Dudley Warner in _The Atlantic Monthly_,
  September, 1896, p. 315.

  [936] _Ibid._

The political effect of the novel has been disparaged by a few
writers, because it did not cause anti-slavery gains in the national
election occurring in the fall of 1852. Thus George Ticknor wrote
in December of that year, "It deepens the horror of servitude,
but it does not affect a single vote."[937] This was certainly
true, for the mass of Northerners were resting in the belief that
a substantial political settlement had been reached in the great
compromise. It was not to be expected that this belief, which was
the outcome of weeks of strenuous discussion, was to be easily
tossed aside under the emotional stimulus of a novel. The immediate
effect of _Uncle Tom's Cabin_ as a political agency lay in the
renewal on a vast scale of the consideration of the question of
slavery, which the compromise had been thought by so many to have
settled. Its remote effect, which did not show itself until the
latter part of the decade 1850-1860 has been best explained by
the historian, James Ford Rhodes. This writer says, "The mother's
opinion was a potent factor in politics between 1852 and 1860,
and boys in their teens in the one year were voters in the other.
It is often remarked that previous to the war the Republican
party attracted the great majority of school-boys, and that the
first voters were an important factor in its final success; ...
the youth of America whose first ideas on slavery were formed by
reading _Uncle Tom's Cabin_ were ready to vote with the party whose
existence was based on opposition to an extension of the great
evil."[938] They were also ready to fight for the cause of union and
of freedom in 1861.

  [937] _Life of George Ticknor_, Vol. I, p. 286.

  [938] _History of the United States_, Vol. I, pp. 284, 285.

Soon after the publication of Mrs. Stowe's book, Sumner began
his movement in the Senate to secure the repeal of the Fugitive
Slave Law. In May, 1852, he presented a memorial from the Society
of Friends in New England, asking for its repeal;[939] in July
he offered a resolution instructing the Committee on Judiciary
to report a bill for this purpose;[940] and in August he sought
to secure his end by proposing an amendment to the civil and
diplomatic appropriations bill.[941] In the speech made at the
time he presented this amendment, a speech said to rank with that
of Webster on the Compromise in 1850 in the popular interest it
aroused, Sumner pointed to the example of Washington, who let one of
his slaves remain unmolested in New Hampshire rather than "excite a
mob or riot, or even uneasy sensations in the minds of well-disposed
citizens." The execution of the Fugitive Slave Law, he asked
Congress to note, involved mobs, cruelty and violence everywhere its
enforcement was tried. The wonderful reception given _Uncle Tom's
Cabin_ was, he thought, an expression of the true public sentiment.
"A woman, inspired by Christian genius, enters the lists, like
another Joan of Arc, and with marvellous powers sweeps the chords
of the popular heart. Now melting to tears, and now inspiring to
rage, her work everywhere touches the conscience, and makes the
slave-hunter more hateful."[942] He saw the import of the appeal of
fugitive slaves to Northern communities for protection and liberty.
"For them every sentiment of humanity is aroused. Rude and ignorant
they may be, but in their very efforts for freedom they claim
kindred with all that is noble in the past. Romance has no stories
of more thrilling interest; classical antiquity has preserved no
examples of adventure and trial more worthy of renown. They are
among the heroes of our age. Among them are those whose names will
be treasured in the annals of their race. By eloquent voice they
have done much to make their wrongs known, and to secure the respect
of the world. History will soon lend her avenging pen. Proscribed
by you during life, they will proscribe you through all time. Sir,
already judgment is beginning; a righteous public sentiment palsies
your enactment."[943]

  [939] Peirce, _Life of Sumner_, Vol. III, p. 283.

  [940] _Ibid._, p. 289.

  [941] _Ibid._, p. 292.

  [942] Peirce, _Life of Sumner_, Vol. III, pp. 296, 297;
  _Congressional Globe_, Vol. XXV, p. 1112.

  [943] _Congressional Globe_, Vol. XXV, p. 1112; Peirce, _Life of
  Sumner_, Vol. III, p. 297.

  In a public speech made in 1850 Mr. Garrison had this to say,
  "Who are among our ablest speakers? Who are the best qualified to
  address the public mind on the subject of slavery? Your fugitive
  slaves,--your Douglasses, Browns and Bibbs,--who are astonishing
  all with the cogency of their words and the power of their
  reasoning." _Life of Garrison_, Vol. III, p. 311.

Through his denunciation of the law, his justification of those
who aided the fugitive, and his recognition of the power of
the fugitive's appeal, Sumner may be said to have become the
representative and spokesman in the Senate of fugitive slaves and
their Northern friends. How closely he identified himself with their
cause is indicated by his determined efforts to secure the repeal
of the obnoxious law, efforts repeated in July, 1854, and February,
1855, and carried by him to a successful issue in 1864.[944]

  [944] Peirce, _Life of Sumner_, Vol. III, p. 309, foot-note; Vol.
  IV, pp. 71, 175-177.

The action of public sentiment in the Northern states, which, he
said, palsied the Fugitive Slave Law, was accompanied, during the
decade from 1850 to 1860, by tokens of open violation of the law,
defiant resolutions adopted by mass-meetings, and obstructional
legislation passed by various free states; the spirit of
nullification was thus aroused in many localities north of Mason and
Dixon's line. The demands of character and humanity had long been
obeyed by many men and women for whom any compromise involving the
continuance in slavery of their fellow-men was a dreadful crime.
These persons had refused to yield obedience to that statute which
in their belief was subversive of the "higher law." Under the
action of causes that have been discussed in earlier chapters, the
sentiment that had developed the secret and illicit traffic along
numerous lines of the Underground Railroad became more obtrusive and
less regardful of congressional legislation. Besides participating
in the public and legitimate activities of anti-slavery societies,
and sharing in the organization of the Liberty and Free Soil
parties, the abolitionists formed vigilance committees in various
communities, the avowed purpose of which was to thwart the Fugitive
Slave Act; and while these bodies held their meetings in secret
and guarded the names of their members, it was often a matter of
common report in those localities that certain well-known men of the
neighborhood were active members. It was the Vigilance Committee of
Syracuse that rescued Jerry McHenry from custody of the officers,
in the presence of a great crowd; and the leaders in the affair,
Gerrit Smith, Charles A. Wheaton and Samuel J. May, far from seeking
oblivion, published an acknowledgment in the newspapers that they
had aided all they could in the rescue of Jerry, were ready for
trial, and would rest their defence on the "unconstitutionality and
extreme wickedness" of the Fugitive Slave Law. None of these men
were tried. The citizens of Onondaga County held a mass-convention
in approval of the liberation of the <DW64>, and unanimously adopted
resolutions justifying and applauding the act.[945]

  [945] S. J. May, _Some Recollections of our Anti-Slavery
  Conflict_, pp. 380, 381. Mr. May says another convention was held
  ten days later to condemn the action of the rescuers, and did so,
  but not without dissent.

From this time on till the outbreak of the Civil War bold and open
opposition to the authority of the federal law is a purpose not to
be mistaken or overlooked. The state reports of the Pennsylvania
and Massachusetts Anti-Slavery societies boasted of the steadily
increasing numbers of fugitives aided by abolitionists at many
centres, and heaped reproaches on the judges and commissioners that
gave decisions adverse to runaways.[946] Fugitive slave cases were
stubbornly contested in the courts on the ground that the law of
1850 was unconstitutional. The series of cases in which the law was
subjected to the penetrating criticism of some of the ablest lawyers
in the country is a long and interesting one; nothing in the history
of the times more clearly shows the effect of the Underground
Railroad in rousing ever-widening indignation at the hunt for
fugitives.[947]

  [946] See the reports after 1850.

  [947] For selected cases see Appendix B, p. 372.

In the spring of 1854 two cases, one in Wisconsin and the other
in Massachusetts, served to show the pitch to which the spirit of
resistance among the most responsible citizens could rise in both
the West and the East. On March 10, 1854, Joshua Glover, who was
living near Racine, Wisconsin, was arrested as a fugitive slave by
United States deputy marshals and the claimant, B. W. Garland, of
St. Louis. After a severe struggle Glover was knocked down, placed
in a wagon, driven to Milwaukee, and there lodged in jail. The
news of the capture reached Racine in a few hours, and a popular
meeting, larger than ever before held in the town, assembled on the
court-house square to take action. At this meeting it was resolved
to secure Glover a fair trial in Wisconsin; and it was voted,
"That inasmuch as the Senate of the United States has repealed all
compromises adopted by the Congress of the United States,[948]
we, as citizens of Wisconsin, are justified in declaring, _and
do declare, the slave-catching law of 1850 disgraceful and also
repealed_." This was but one of many nullifying resolutions adopted
about this time in various parts of the North, although most of the
resolutions were somewhat less extreme in statement.[949]

  [948] The Kansas-Nebraska legislation, repealing the Missouri
  Compromise of 1820, which was at this time before Congress, is
  here referred to.

  [949] Vroman Mason on "The Fugitive Slave Law in Wisconsin, with
  Reference to Nullification Sentiment," in the _Proceedings of the
  State Historical Society of Wisconsin_, 1895, pp. 122, 123.

At an afternoon meeting the deliberations ended in the decision
of about a hundred citizens of Racine to take boat at once for
Milwaukee. Upon arrival this delegation found the latter city in an
uproar. A meeting of five thousand persons had already appointed a
Committee of Vigilance to see that Glover had a fair trial, and this
demonstration had led the authorities to call for the local militia
to preserve order; but the militia did not appear. Such was now the
temper of the crowd that it could be satisfied with nothing less
than the immediate release of the prisoner. Glover was therefore
demanded, but, as he was not forthcoming, the jail door was battered
in, the <DW64> brought out, placed in a wagon and forwarded to Canada
by the Underground Railroad. The act of the rescuers was indorsed by
the public sentiment of the state; with but few exceptions justified
by the newspapers. Among the resolutions passed by mass-meetings
held to take action against the Kansas-Nebraska bill, then pending
in Congress, there was usually one thanking the rescuers for their
conduct.

Remembering with satisfaction the deliverance of Jerry, a special
convention assembled at Syracuse, New York, on March 22, 1854, and
sent a congratulatory message to Milwaukee and Racine, offering
to join them and all the sister cities of the North in a "holy
confederacy, which ... shall swear that no broken-hearted fugitive
shall ever again be consigned to slavery from the North, under the
accursed act of 1850." A state convention met at Milwaukee, April
13 and 14, which was attended by delegates from all the populated
districts. This assembly adopted a number of resolutions, several of
which were quotations from the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions,
including the famous one declaring "that, as in other cases of
compact among parties having no common judge, each party has an
equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions, as of the
mode and measure of redress." The Fugitive Slave Law was pronounced
unconstitutional, and aid was promised the rescuers of Glover.

It is interesting to note that at this convention a state league was
also formed, which has been called a forerunner of the Republican
party in Wisconsin.

The Supreme Court of the state was soon given an opportunity to
place itself on record with regard to the validity of the federal
law. The case of one of the rescuers, Sherman M. Booth, came before
it for decision. In passing judgment the court showed itself to
be in line with the sentiment of the state, for it declared the
act of 1850 unconstitutional; the principal grounds assigned were
the absence of congressional power to legislate on the subject of
the surrender of fugitives from labor, the improper conferring
of judicial authority upon commissioners, and the viciousness of
depriving a person of his liberty 'without due process of law.'
Booth was, of course, discharged. But the matter was not dropped
here. The United States District Court now obtained jurisdiction
of the case; the jury found the prisoner guilty, and the judge
sentenced him to imprisonment for one month, and to pay a fine of
$1,000 and the costs of prosecution--in all, $1,451. The news of
the conviction caused great excitement; denunciatory meetings were
again the order of the day; and money was subscribed for the further
defence of the prisoners. Some of the resolutions passed at this
time did not stop short of asserting the readiness of the people to
maintain their cause with the bayonet. Application was made to the
Supreme Court of the state for a writ of habeas corpus, and Booth,
together with a colleague, Rycraft, was again released.

The controversy now came before the Supreme Court at Washington, and
on petition of the Attorney-General a writ of error was granted by
that tribunal to be served on the Supreme Court of Wisconsin. The
state court, however, refused to obey this writ. At length, on March
6, 1857, the United States Supreme Court assumed jurisdiction,
in an unusual way, acting on the basis of a certified copy of
proceedings, which did not appear upon the official record. At the
December term, 1858, the judgment of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin
was reversed, and that court was directed to return Booth into
federal custody. Again the state court would not yield obedience.
Booth was therefore rearrested by the United States marshal, March
1, 1860, and was confined in the custom-house at Milwaukee. The
friends of the prisoner once more applied to the state Supreme Court
for a writ of habeas corpus, but, failing to get it on account of
a change in the personnel of the court, they did not rest until
they had rescued him from the government prison five months later.
On October 8 Booth was again arrested, and this time he remained
in prison until, under the pressure brought to bear upon President
Buchanan, he was pardoned just before Lincoln's inauguration.[950]

  [950] Ableman _vs._ Booth; for references see Appendix B, 62,
  Glover rescue case, p. 374.

Notwithstanding the obstinacy of the highest state court in refusing
to carry out the commands of the highest United States court,
the decision rendered by the latter in Booth's case was of great
importance. It clearly defined for the first time the limits of
state authority and disclosed the powerlessness of state courts
to override the jurisdiction granted to the federal courts by the
Constitution of the United States.

The people of Wisconsin, however, were unwilling to recognize this
fact. Having enacted a personal liberty law in 1857, they made
Byron Paine, a young lawyer, who had taken a prominent part in the
defence of Booth, their candidate in 1859 for associate justice of
the Supreme Court, and elected him on a combined anti-slavery and
state rights issue. Thus the state maintained its ground until the
eve of the Civil War. Then it relinquished it to assist in coercing
South Carolina and other Southern states from their secession, the
right of which these states defended by the same doctrine of state
sovereignty.[951]

  [951] This account of Booth's case is in the main a condensation
  of the excellent and exhaustive discussion given by Mr. Vroman
  Mason in the _Proceedings of the State Historical Society_,
  1895, pp. 117-144. Other material will be found in _The Story of
  Wisconsin_, 1890, by R. G. Thwaites, pp. 247-254; _A Complete
  Record of the John Olin Family_, 1893, by C. C. Olin, pp.
  liii-lxxiv; the _Liberator_, April 7 and 24, 1854; 3 _Wisconsin
  Reports_, pp. 1-64; 21 _Howard's Reports_, p. 506 et seq.;
  Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. II, pp. 444-446.

The Glover rescue occurred while the Kansas-Nebraska Act was pending
in Congress. The attempted rescue of Burns came just after this
piece of legislation, already passed by the Senate, had been voted
by the House. This measure, which set aside the Missouri Compromise
prohibiting slavery from all the Louisiana territory lying north of
36° 30' north latitude, except that included within the State of
Missouri, deeply stirred public feeling in the free states: thus
the violence of the demonstrations in the Booth and Burns cases was
in some measure a protest against Douglas legislation. Burns was
arrested in Boston on May 24, 1854, under a warrant granted by the
United States commissioner. He felt his case to be hopeless, and so
told Richard H. Dana, Jr., and Theodore Parker; but they urged him
to make a defence, and prevailed on the commissioner to postpone the
hearing. Boston was soon ablaze with indignation kindled in part by
the inflammatory handbills scattered broadcast by members of the
Vigilance Committee. These handbills contained invectives against
the "kidnapper," and expressed a sentiment prevalent in New England,
as in other parts of the North, when they declared "the compromises
trampled upon by the slave power when in the path of slavery are to
be crammed down the throat of the North."

In response to messages from the Vigilance Committee Thomas
Wentworth Higginson, A. Bronson Alcott and others hurried to Boston
to consult with the leaders there on what was best to be done. A
mass-meeting had been called for Friday evening, the 26th, to be
held in Faneuil Hall, and it was now planned to make an attack, at
the height of this meeting, on the court-house, where Burns was in
durance, and "send the whole meeting pell-mell to Court Square,
ready to fall in behind the leaders and bring out the slave." The
city was in a state of wild excitement when the time for action
came, and it was natural that in the confusion existing some of
the arrangements should miscarry. The crowd that filled Faneuil
Hall was so dense as to cut off all communication with the speakers
on the platform, and prevented concerted action. When, under the
impassioned oratory of Phillips, Parker and others, the audience
had given evidences of its readiness to undertake the rescue,
the announcement that an attack upon the court-house was about
to begin was made from the rear of the hall, and it was proposed
that the meeting should adjourn to Court Square. Phillips had not
received notice of the project, and the other speakers had not fully
comprehended it. The alarm was thought to be a scheme to break up
the meeting and was not followed by the decisive action necessary to
success.

Arriving at the court-house the crowd found a small party under the
lead of Higginson, Stowell and a <DW64> battering in a door with
a stick of timber. Entrance was gained by a few only,--who found
themselves in the hands of the police,--while the concourse outside
was daunted at the outset by the mysterious killing of one of the
marshal's deputies. The arrest of several of Higginson's companions
followed, and a renewal of the assault, if there was any danger
of such a thing, was prevented by the approach of two companies
of artillery and two more of marines ordered out by the mayor to
preserve the peace. Troops were retained at the court-house during
the examination of Burns, and it is reported by an eye-witness that
the seat of justice "had the air of a beleaguered fortress." On the
2d of June Commissioner Loring remanded the fugitive to slavery.

The presence in Boston of a multitude of visitors attracted thither
by the annual meeting of the New England Anti-Slavery Society, the
state convention of the Free Soil party, and the spring meetings
of the religious bodies, as well as by the arrest of the <DW64>,
led the authorities to take all precautions to forestall any fresh
attempt at rescue when the fugitive should be sent out of the city.
Accordingly, over a thousand soldiers with loaded muskets, and
furnished with a cannon loaded with grape-shot, were detailed to
assist the city police and a large number of deputy marshals to
carry out the law. In the procession that accompanied Burns to the
United States revenue cutter, by which he was to be carried back
to Virginia, there were four platoons of marines and a battalion
of artillery, besides the marshal's civil posse of one hundred and
twenty-five men. Fifty thousand people lined the streets along which
this procession passed, and greeted it with hisses and groans, while
over their heads were displayed many emblems of mourning and shame.
It is little wonder that the _Enquirer_ of Richmond, Virginia,
commenting with satisfaction on the rendition of Burns, was led to
add, "but a few more such victories and the South is undone."[952]
Such was the state of public opinion in Massachusetts that the Board
of Overseers of Harvard College declined to confirm the election
of Commissioner Loring as a member of the Harvard faculty; and the
people petitioned, until their request was granted, for his removal
from the office of judge of probate.

  [952] T. W. Higginson in _The Atlantic Monthly_, for March, 1897,
  p. 349-354; Rhodes, _History of the United States_, Vol. I, pp.
  500-506; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, Vol. II, pp.
  434, 444.

Similar hostility to the Fugitive Slave Law existed in Illinois.
John Reynolds, who had been governor of the state, wrote about 1855
that when President Jackson issued his proclamation in December,
1832, condemning nullification in South Carolina, the legislature
of Illinois hailed it with gratification and pledged the state to
sustain the executive in his purpose to enforce the federal laws at
all hazards. Jackson's proclamation, he said, had a strong tendency
to suppress the spirit of nullification throughout the Union. The
law of 1850 had been framed in pursuance of the Constitution, and
was hailed as the foundation of sectional peace and happiness, but
"within a few years, a section of the State of Illinois, the city
of Chicago, is not disposed to execute this act of Congress. The
opposition in Illinois to this law is not extensive, but confined to
a single city, so far as I know. Yet in that disaffected district
the act is a dead letter...."[953] The number of centres in Illinois
in which the act was disapproved and violated was far beyond the
knowledge of ex-Governor Reynolds.

  [953] John Reynolds' _History of Illinois_, 1855, pp. 269-271.

In Ohio incidents arising out of the operations of the Underground
Railroad became the occasions for serious contests between the state
and federal authorities. On May 15, 1857, the United States deputy
marshal for southern Ohio, with nine assistants, entered the house
of Udney Hyde, near Mechanicsburg, Champaign County, in pursuit of
a fugitive slave. The approach of the posse had been observed by
the <DW64>, who took refuge in Hyde's garret. Some firing was done
by both the <DW64> and the marshal, with the result that the officer
and his party were glad to take their positions outside of the
house. Here they were soon found by a crowd of citizens from the
neighboring town, whose sympathies were so unmistakably with the
fugitive that the pursuers decided to leave without delay. Returning
twelve days later, they were told that the fugitive, Addison White,
had gone to Canada. Thereupon they arrested several persons in the
neighborhood on the charge of aiding a slave to escape, and set off
with these persons ostensibly for Urbana, where the examination was
to be held.

Instead of going to Urbana, the party took a southern course through
Clark and Green counties. The sheriff of Clark County, who organized
a company to give chase, overtook the marshal and his men, and
received at their hands a severe beating. Bands of angry citizens
now scoured the country, and, at length, after a skirmish locally
known as "the battle of Lumbarton," captured the marshal's posse. On
the charge of assault with intent to kill, the prisoners were placed
in jail at Springfield. This action occasioned a serious clash
between the United States District Court for the southern district
of Ohio and the state courts; and the federal tribunal asserted
its jurisdiction by releasing the marshal's posse, although in the
decision rendered it was admitted that there "was a question whether
the marshal had not exceeded authority in the use of unnecessary
force."

So critical had the situation now become that Governor Chase
determined to have a personal conference with President Buchanan and
the Secretary of State, General Cass. The Governor therefore sent
an officer of his staff to Washington to arrange for the meeting,
and to say to the Secretary of State that Mr. Chase "was as earnest
in support of the authority of the federal government, legitimately
exercised, as he was in support of the authority of the state; but
that he should feel compelled to protect the state officials in
the exercise of their duties, and the state courts in the exercise
of their legitimate functions, if it took every man in the state
to do it." In order to adjust the existing differences before they
culminated in open hostility between the two governments, it was
proposed on the part of Mr. Chase that the United States district
attorney at Cincinnati be instructed to drop all suits against
citizens of the state, with the understanding that a similar
course be followed by the state with regard to the marshal and his
deputies. At the formal meeting this was the plan adopted. Thus the
affair was amicably settled, although it did not fail to leave a
deep impression on the public mind, and to evoke comments from the
press indicative of the restiveness of the abolitionists under the
jurisdiction of United States courts in fugitive slave cases.[954]

  [954] The _Cincinnati Enquirer_, the leading Democratic paper of
  southern Ohio at the time, said of the contention arising out of
  the attempted arrest of Addison White: "The designation of the
  attorney-general by Governor Chase to aid the lawyer retained
  by the sheriff of Clark County, is equivalent to a declaration
  of war on the part of Chase and his abolition crew against the
  United States Courts. Let war come, the sooner the better."
  Quoted in the _Life of Chase_, by J. W. Schuckers, p. 179,
  foot-note. Material relating to the Addison White case will be
  found in Shuckers, _Life of Chase_, pp. 177-182; Warden, _Life
  of Chase_, pp. 350, 351; Beer, _History of Clark County, Ohio_;
  the same quoted by Henry Howe in his _Historical Collections of
  Ohio_, Vol. I, pp. 384-386. The writer has also had the advantage
  of a conversation with Mrs. Amanda Shepherd (the daughter of
  Udney Hyde), who was an eye-witness of the attempts to capture
  White at her father's house.

Another example of open violation of the Slave Law, which resulted
in conflict between the federal and state courts, exists in the
famous Oberlin-Wellington rescue case. On September 13, 1858, two
slave-catchers, provided with the necessary papers, and accompanied
by the proper officers, arrested a runaway near the town of
Oberlin, in which he had been living for more than two years.
News of the capture was brought to Oberlin by two young men, who
saw the <DW64> in the hands of his captors as they were proceeding
toward Wellington. A large crowd of men, among whom were several
students and a professor of Oberlin College, took the trail of the
slave-catchers, found them at Wellington, and without violence freed
the slave. The arrest of a large number of the rescuers followed,
and their arraignment took place before the United States District
Court at Cleveland. Public sentiment was clearly with the prisoners,
and their counsel were men of high rank in their profession. Two
of the offenders were tried and convicted. On account of the state
of feeling at the time, the legal proceedings were denounced as
political trials. Mass-meetings were held throughout eastern Ohio
to express the sympathy of the people with the rescuers, and to
cast odium on the federal courts. The Dred Scott decision, recently
rendered by the Supreme Court at Washington, called down upon that
tribunal much condemnation. At an immense mass-convention held in
Cleveland, May 24, 1859, resolutions were adopted, which accepted
the compact theory of government voiced in the Virginia and Kentucky
resolutions, declared the equal right of each party to the compact
"to judge for itself, as well of infractions, as of the mode and
measure of redress," and declared the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850
to be void because, "in the opinion of this assembly, passed by
Congress in the exercise of powers improperly assumed."[955] A fund
denominated "the Fund of Liberty" was created, to be applied in
defence of the Oberlin rescuers, and a committee was appointed to
take action for the release of those persons.

  [955] J. R. Shipherd, _History of the Oberlin-Wellington Rescue_.
  The resolutions appear at pp. 253, 254.

Meanwhile the grand jury of Lorain County--the county in which the
fugitive had been seized--had indicted four of the slave-catchers
under a personal liberty law passed by Ohio in 1857.[956] This
procedure led to negotiations, which finally terminated in a
compromise between the executors and the opponents of the Fugitive
Slave Act. On the one hand the United States authorities agreed
to stop prosecution in the remaining rescue cases, while on the
other hand the Lorain County people consented to dismiss the suits
against the so-called kidnappers. This conclusion of the matter was
regarded as a victory for the "higher law" by the friends of the
Oberlin parties, and the release of the prisoners was heralded in
Cleveland by the firing of a hundred guns. Their return to Oberlin
was signalized by a celebration in their honor. The _Cleveland Plain
Dealer_ said the government had been "beaten at last with law,
justice, and facts all on its side, and Oberlin with its rebellious
Higher Law creed is triumphant."[957]

  [956] _Ibid._, pp. 231-235.

  [957] The _Plain Dealer_, July 6, 1859, quoted by Shipherd, p.
  267.

That these events were not without their political influence is
apparent from the adoption of a resolution at the great Cleveland
convention above mentioned asserting that the chief reliance of
freedom in the United States rested in the Republican party.[958]
It is worthy of note also that this party at its state convention,
held in June, demanded the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act.[959] It
has been already pointed out that some of the counsel of the Oberlin
rescuers early received places of political preferment, partly at
least in consequence of distinction won by them in the defence of
those known to be guilty of violating the law of 1850.[960]

  [958] Shipherd, _History of the Oberlin-Wellington Rescue_, pp.
  253, 254.

  [959] The _Cleveland Herald_, June 3, 1859.

  [960] Chapter IX, p. 282.

The enactment of personal liberty laws by various Northern states,
with the purpose of impairing the efficiency of the Fugitive Slave
laws, is characteristic of the period during which the underground
system had its most rapid expansion, namely, the two decades from
1840 to 1860. These laws may be fairly considered as the palpable
but guarded expression of an opposition that was free to go to the
full length in its midnight operation of the Underground Road.
During the period indicated occurred the series of celebrated
fugitive slave cases, beginning with the Latimer case in 1842; and
the precautions, rarely neglected by the friend of the slave, were
often forgotten or spurned in the excitement of the instant or
in the exaltation of wrath. The rigorous character of the law of
1850 acted in two ways north of Mason and Dixon's line: first, it
created a reaction against slavery and brought many recruits into
underground work to aid the rapidly increasing number of escaping
slaves; second, in connection with the repeal of the Missouri
Compromise, it led public sentiment in many states to provide
additional safeguards in the form of personal liberty bills for the
protection of fugitives and their helpers.[961] These bills ran
counter in spirit if not always in letter to legislation that was
held by the United States Supreme Court to be in keeping with the
constitutional clause providing for the recovery of fugitive slaves.
In principle they were, therefore, like the nullification ordinance
of 1832.[962]

  [961] Joel Parker, _Personal Liberty Laws and Slavery in the
  Territories_, 1861, pp. 10, 11.

  [962] J. B. Robinson, _Pictures of Slavery and Anti-Slavery_,
  1863, pp. 332, 333; M. G. McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p.
  70; Rhodes, _History of the United States_, Vol. II, p. 74.
  Mr. Rhodes says of the personal liberty bills: "They were
  dangerously near the nullification of a United States law,
  and had not the provocation seemed great, would not have been
  adopted by people who had drunk in with approval Webster's idea
  of nationality.... While they were undeniably conceived in a
  spirit of bad faith towards the South, they were a retaliation
  for the grossly bad faith involved in the repeal of the Missouri
  Compromise. Nullification cannot be defended, but in a balancing
  of the wrongs of the South and the North, it must be averred
  that in this case the provocation was vastly greater than the
  retaliation."

While the system of the Underground Railroad was thus expanding and
pressing everywhere against legislative restraints, there arose a
man who sought to solve the whole slavery problem in his own rash
way. When John Brown led a company of slaves from Missouri to Canada
despite the attempts to prevent him; and when soon thereafter he
attempted to execute his plan for the general liberation of slaves,
he showed the extreme to which the aid to fugitives might lead.
The influence of Brown's training in Underground Railroad work is
plain in the methods and plans he followed, which have given him
a place in American history. Early convinced that action was the
thing needed to help the bondman, he set himself to find a way
of effecting the destruction of slavery. In devising his scheme
he seems to have considered an underground channel of escape as
a necessary feature of it for those lacking the courage to join
a movement sure to involve them in armed conflict with their
masters. This feature was designated the "Subterranean Pass Way."
The varying character of the testimony in regard to this feature,
as well as the natural change of view that took place in Brown's
mind with the passage of the years, does not permit one to say
definitely what importance was attached by the liberator to the
Pass Way as a part of his plan, but its utility in reducing the
value of slaves must have been apparent to him. That the whole
movement he contemplated would have the effect of making slave
property unstable he showed when speaking of the initiative of the
movement in Virginia. Brown said: "If the slaves could in this way
be driven out of the county, the whole system would be weakened in
that State."[963] In this matter the judgment of the liberator was
not at fault, for it has been estimated that his attack on Harper's
Ferry caused the value of slave property in Virginia to decline to
the extent of $10,000,000.[964] That Brown had the sympathy of a
large number of persons in the North, including some public men, was
a circumstance calculated to make a deeper impression on the minds
of the Southern men generally than this decline in the price of
Virginia slaves.

  [963] Hinton, _John Brown and His Men_, pp. 31, 32.

  [964] _Ibid._, p. 30.

[Illustration: CAPTAIN JOHN BROWN.

(From a photograph in the possession of the Kansas State Historical
Society.)]




CHAPTER XI

EFFECT OF THE UNDERGROUND RAILROAD


The effect of Underground Railroad operations in steadily
withdrawing from the South some of its property and thus causing
constant irritation to slave-owners and slave-traders has already
been commented upon. The persons losing slaves of course regarded
their losses as a personal and undeserved misfortune. Yet,
considering the question broadly from the standpoint of their own
interests, the work of the underground system was a relief to the
masters and to the South. The possibility of a servile insurrection
was a dreadful thing for Southern minds to contemplate; but they
could not easily dismiss the terrible scenes enacted in San Domingo
during the years 1791 to 1793 and the three famous uprisings of
1800, 1820 and 1831, in South Carolina and Virginia. The Underground
Railroad had among its passengers such persons as Josiah Henson, J.
W. Loguen, Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, William Wells Brown
and Henry Bibb; it therefore furnished the means of escape for
persons well qualified for leadership among the slaves, and thereby
lessened the danger of an uprising of the blacks against their
masters. The <DW64> historian, Williams, has said of the Underground
Road that it served as a "safety-valve to the institution of
slavery. As soon as leaders arose among the slaves, who refused
to endure the yoke, they would go North. Had they remained, there
must have been enacted at the South the direful scenes of San
Domingo."[965]

  [965] _History of the <DW64> Race in America_, Vol. II, pp. 58, 59.

It is difficult to arrive at any satisfactory idea of the actual
loss sustained by slave-owners through underground channels. The
charges of bad faith against the free states made in Congress by
Southern members were sometimes accompanied by estimates of the
amount of human property lost on account of the indisposition
of those living north of Mason and Dixon's line to meet the
requirements of the fugitive slave legislation. Thus as early as
1822, Moore, of Virginia, speaking in the House in favor of a new
fugitive recovery law, said that the district he represented lost
four or five thousand dollars worth of runaway slaves annually.[966]
In August, 1850, Atchison, of Kentucky, informed the Senate that
"depredations to the amount of hundreds of thousands of dollars are
committed upon the property of the people of the border slave states
of this Union annually."[967] Pratt, of Maryland, said that not
less than $80,000 worth of slaves was lost every year by citizens
of his state.[968] Mason, of Virginia, declared that the losses
of his state were already too heavy to be borne, that they were
increasing from year to year, and were then in excess of $100,000
per year.[969] Butler, of South Carolina, reckoned the annual
loss of the Southern section at $200,000.[970] Clingman, of North
Carolina, said that the thirty thousand fugitives then reported to
be living in the North were worth at current prices little less
than $15,000,000.[971] Claiborne, the biographer of General John A.
Quitman, who was at one time governor of Louisiana, indicated as one
of the defects of the second Fugitive Slave Law its failure to make
"provision for the restitution to the South of the $30,000,000, of
which she had been plundered through the 100,000 slaves abducted
from her in the course of the last forty years" (1810-1850);[972]
and the same writer stated that slavery was rapidly disappearing
from the District of Columbia at the time of the enactment of the
new law, the number of slaves "having been reduced since 1840
from 4,694 to 650, by 'underground railroads' and felonious
abductions."[973]

  [966] Benton's _Abridgment of the Debates of Congress_, Vol. VII,
  p. 296.

  [967] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-first Congress, First
  Session, Appendix, p. 1601.

  [968] _Ibid._, p. 1603.

  [969] _Ibid._, p. 1605.

  [970] Von Holst, _Constitutional and Political History of the
  United States_, Vol. III, p. 552.

  [971] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-first Congress, First
  Session, p. 202. See also Von Holst's work, Vol. III, p. 552,
  foot-note.

  [972] J. F. H. Claiborne, _Life and Correspondence of John A.
  Quitman_, Vol. II, p. 28.

  [973] J. F. H. Claiborne, _Life and Correspondence of John A.
  Quitman_, Vol. II, p. 30. His figures are, of course, not correct.

The wide divergences among the estimates here given, as well as
the obvious difficulty of getting reliable information in regard
to the number of runaway slaves, renders these figures of little
use in determining the loss of human property by the slaveholding
states. Nevertheless, the estimates are valuable in illustrating
the character of the complaints that were made in Congress, and
in enabling one to realize that the tenure of slave property in
the border states was rendered precarious by the operations of
the Underground Railroad. Can it be thought strange that the
disappearance week by week and month by month of valuable slaves
over the unknown routes of the underground system should have
produced wrath, suspicion and hostility in the minds of people who
could justly claim to have a constitutional guarantee, the laws of
Congress, and the decisions of the highest courts on their side?

In the compendiums of the United States Census for 1850 and 1860
are some statistics on fugitive slaves, which fall far short of the
most moderate estimates of the Southerners, and flatly disagree
with the testimony gathered from all other quarters. The official
reports appear to show that the number of slaves escaping from their
masters was small and inconsiderable, that it rapidly decreased, and
that it was independent of proximity to a free population. But the
censuses are not only opposed to the evidence, they are on their
face inadequate.

If, as those tables indicate, only 1,011 slaves escaped from their
masters in 1850, and only 803 in 1860, and in the latter year only
500 escaped from the border slave states, then it becomes impossible
to understand the emphasis laid by Southern men upon the value of
their runaway slaves, the steady pressure made by the border states
for a more stringent law that resulted in the Fugitive Slave Act
of 1850, and the allegation of bad faith on the part of the North
put forth by the Southern states as a reason for secession.[974]
In considering the weight to be ascribed to the figures on fugitive
slaves supplied by the census compendiums, it is proper to set
over against them the showing afforded by the same compendiums
relative to the decline of the slave population in the border slave
states during the decade 1850-1860; for it is to be noted that the
compendiums show a marked decline in these states, that they show
a greater percentage of decline in the northernmost counties of
these states than in the states as a whole, and, what is even more
remarkable, that the loss appears to have been still greater during
this time in the four "pan-handle" counties of Virginia than in any
of the other states referred to, or in the border counties of any
one of them.[975] It can scarcely be suggested that the relatively
rapid decline of the slave population in the border counties was due
to larger shipments of slaves to the far South from these marginal
regions without at the same time suggesting that the explanation
for such shipments lay in the proximity of a free population and
the numerous lines of Underground Railroad maintained by it. The
concurrence of evidence from sources other than the census reports,
and the agreement therewith of part of the evidence gathered from
these reports themselves, constrains one to say that those who
compiled the statistics on fugitive slaves did not secure the facts
in full; and that the complaints of large losses sustained by
slave-owners through the befriending of fugitive slaves by Northern
people, frequently made by Southern representatives in Congress and
by the South generally, were not without sufficient foundation.

  [974] Census of 1860, pp. 11, 12. See Table A, Appendix C, p. 378.

  [975] See Tables B and C, Appendix C, p. 379.

It is natural that there should be great variation among the guesses
made as to the total number of those indebted for liberty to the
Underground Road. Very few of the persons that harbored runaways
were so indiscreet as to keep a register of their hunted visitors.
Their hospitality was equal to all possible demands, but was kept
strictly secret. Under these circumstances one should handle all
numerical generalizations with caution.

[Illustration: RECORD OF FUGITIVES AIDED DURING FIVE MONTHS.]

[Illustration: KEPT BY DANIEL OSBORN, OF ALUM CREEK SETTLEMENT,
OHIO.]

By rare good fortune the writer has found a single leaf of a diary
kept by Daniel Osborn, a Friend or Quaker, of Alum Creek Settlement,
Delaware County, Ohio, which gives a record of the blacks passing
through that neighborhood during an interval of five months, from
April 14 to September 10, 1844. The accompanying facsimiles,
which reproduce the two sides of the leaf, show that the number
is forty-seven. The year in which this memorandum was made may be
fairly taken as an average year, and the line on which this Quaker
settlement was a station as a representative underground route in
Ohio. Now, along Ohio's southern boundary there were the initial
stations of at least twelve important lines of travel, some of which
were certainly in operation before 1830. Let us consider, as we may
properly, that the period of operation continued from 1830 to 1860.
Taking these as the elements for a computation, one may reckon that
Ohio may have aided not less than 40,000 fugitives in the thirty
years included in our reckoning.[976] That the number of refugees
after 1844 did not decrease is indicated by the statement that
during one month in the year of 1854-1855 sixty were harbored by one
member of the Alum Creek Settlement. It is to be remembered that
several families of the settlement were engaged in this work.[977]

  [976] This computation was first printed by the writer in the
  _American Historical Review_, April, 1896, pp. 462, 463.

  [977] Conversation with M. J. Benedict, L. A. Benedict and
  others, Alum Creek Settlement, Ohio, Dec. 2, 1893.

An illustration of underground activity in the East may be ventured.
Mr. Robert Purvis, of Philadelphia, states that he kept a record
of the fugitives that passed through the hands of the Vigilance
Committee of Philadelphia for a long period, till the trepidation
of his family after the passage of the Fugitive Slave Bill in 1850
caused him to destroy it. His record book showed, he says, an
average of one a day sent northward. In other words, between 1830
and 1860 over 9,000 runaways were aided in Philadelphia. But we
know that the Vigilance Committee did not begin this sort of work
in the Quaker City, and that underground activities there date back
at least to the time of Isaac T. Hopper's earliest efforts, that
is, 1800 and before. We also know that there were many centres
round about Philadelphia, some of whose work was certainly done
independently of that place.

That the resources of some of the operators in centres in the West
were being drained almost to exhaustion by the demands of the heavy
traffic towards the close of the underground period, distinctly
appears in the following letter from Col. J. Bowles, of Lawrence,
Kansas, to Mr. F. B. Sanborn:--

  LAWRENCE _April 4th 1859_

     MR. F. B. SANBOURN

     Dear Sir at the suggestion of friend Judge Conway I address you
     these few hastily written lines. I see I am expected to give
     you some information as to the present condition of the _U. G.
     R. R._ in Kansas or more particularly at the Lawrence depot. In
     order that you may fully understand the present condition of
     affairs I shall ask your permission to relate a small bit of the
     early history of this, the only _paying_, R. R. in Kansas.

     Lawrence has been (from the first settlement of Kansas) known
     and cursed by all slave holders in and out of Mo. for being
     an abolition town. Missourians have a peculiar faculty for
     embracing every opportunity to denounce, curse, and _blow_
     every thing they dislike. This peculiar faculty of theirs gave
     Lawrence great notoriety in _Mo._ especially among the <DW64>s
     to whom the principal part of their denunciations were directed
     and on whom they were intended to have great effect. I have
     learned from <DW64>s who were _emigrating_ from _Mo._ that they
     never would have known anything about a land of freedom or
     that they had a friend in the world only from their master's
     continual abuse of the Lawrence abolits. Slaves are usually very
     cunning and believe about as much as they please of what the
     master is telling him (thoug of course he must affect to believe
     every word) knowing it is to the master's interest to keep him
     ignorant of every thing that would make him likely or even wish
     to be free.

     One old fellow said "when he started to come to Lawrence he
     didn't know if all de peoples in disha town war debbils as ole
     massa had said or not, but dis he did know if he could get dar
     safe old massa was fraid to come arter him, and if dey all
     should prove to be bad as ole massa had said he could lib wid
     dem bout as well as at home." Some few of them were unavoidably
     taken back to Mo. after leaving here for Iowa. Many of them
     found an opportunity to make their escape and bring others with
     them and none ever failed to be a successful missionary in the
     cause, telling every one he had a chance to converse with of
     the land of freedom, and the friends he found in Lawrence. One
     man I know well who has been captured twice and was shot each
     time in resisting his captors (one of whom he killed) told me
     that he was confident he had assisted in the escape of no less
     than twenty five of his fellow beings, and that he had also
     given information or sown the seed that would make a hundred
     more free men. He is now with some others in or about Canada.
     The last and successful escape was made from western Texas
     where he was sent for safe keeping. You can see from the above
     why L---- has had more than would seem to be her share of this
     good work to do. At first our means were limited and of course
     could not do much but then we were not so extensively known or
     patronized. As our means increased we found a corresponding
     increase in opportunity for doing good to the white man as well
     as the black. Kansas has been preëminently a land of charity.
     The friends in the East have helped such objects liberally yet
     Kansas has had much to do for herself in that line. To give you
     an idea of what has been done by the people of this place in
     U. G. R. R. I'll make a statement of the number of fugitives
     who have found assistance here. In the last four years I am
     personally known to [cognizant of] the fact of nearly three
     hundred fugitives having passed through and received assistance
     from the abolitionists here at Lawrence. Thus you see we have
     been continually strained to meet the heavy demands that were
     almost daily made upon us to carry on this (not very) _gradual
     emancipation_. I usually have assisted in collecting or begging
     money for the needy of either class. Many of the most zealous
     in the cause of humanity complained (as they had good cause to)
     that this heavy (and continually increasing) tax was interfering
     with their business to such a degree that they could not stand
     it longer and that other provisions must be made by which they
     would be relieved of a portion of a burden they had long bourn.
     This was about the state of affairs last Christmas when as you
     are aware the slaves have a few days holiday. Many of them chose
     this occasion to make a visit to Lawrence and during the week
     some twenty four came to our town, five or six of the number
     brought means to assist them on their journey. These were sent
     on, but the remainder must be kept until money could be raised
     to send them on. $150 was the am't necessary to send them to
     a place of safety. Under the circumstances it necessarily took
     some time to raise that am't, and a great many persons had to be
     applied to. It was not enough that the sympathies and love for
     the cause of humanity was appealed to in order to raise money,
     many had to be argued with and shown that the cause was actually
     in a suffering condition and the fugitives were then in town
     and the number must also be made known in order that the person
     might give liberally. Lawrence like most all towns has her bad
     men pimps and worst of all a few democrats, all of whom will do
     _anything_ for money. Somewhere in the ranks of the intimate
     friends to the cause these traitors to God and humanity found a
     judas who for thirty pieces of silver did betray our cause. This
     was not suspected until after the capture of Dr Day.... Every
     thing goes to prove that the capture of Day's party was the work
     of a traitor who though suspected has not yet been fairly tried
     and _dealt_ with as will be done as soon as Day is bailed out
     which will be done [in] a few days.

       *       *       *       *       *

     We would like ... that you plead our cause with those of our
     friends who are disposed to censure us and convince them we are
     still worthy and in great need of their respect and coöperation.
     I am sorry to say (but tis true) that many of the most zealous
     in the cause of humanity have become somewhat discouraged by
     the hard times and the lamentable capture of Day and party and
     cannot be induced to take hold of it and lend a willing hand.
     Never the less the work has went slowly but surely on, until
     very recently. Those who have persevered like many others, have
     found _their_ bottom dollar also of the money so generously
     contributed by persons of your notable society. This is partialy
     owing to heavy expenses of the trial of Dr Day and son which has
     been principally borne by the society here and has amounted to
     near $300. Now seems to be our dark day and we are casting about
     to see what can be done. We have some eight or ten fugitives
     now on hand who cannot be sent off until we get an addition
     to our financial department. This statement of facts has been
     made with a full knowledge of the many calls that is made upon
     your generosity in that quarter. Nothing shall be urged as an
     alternative for we feel confident the case here presented will
     meet with merited assistance sympathy or advice, as you may deem
     best. One word of old Brown and his movement in the emancipation
     cause, and I will have done. I understand from some parties who
     have been corresponding with some persons in Boston and other
     places in behalf of our cause that we could and would receive
     material aid only they are holding themselves in readiness to
     assist Brown. Such men I honor and they show themselves worthy
     the highest regard yet I assure them they do not understand
     Brown's plans for carrying out his cause. I have known Brown
     nearly four years, he is a bold cool calculating and far seeing
     man who is as consciencious as he is smart. He "knows the right
     and dare maintain it." I have talked confidentially with him
     on the subject. I know he expressed himself in this way as to
     the effects that he intended to make the master pay the way of
     the slave to the land of freedom. That is he intended to take
     property enough with the slaves to pay all expenses. So you see
     there is not fear of a large demand from that quarter. By no
     means would I be understood as counciling not to assist him. No
     indeed if I counciled at all it would be to this effect, render
     him all the assistance he ever asks for he is worthy and his
     cause is a good one. _Others_ would have been with him only they
     had all they could do in another quarter. I feel myself highly
     honored to be placed where I can with propriety communicate
     with a society whom I have only known to admire. Hoping what I
     have written (disconnectedly and badly written as it is) may
     be acceptable and that I may hear from you soon. I am very
     respectfully Your obedient servant

  J. BOWLES
  Lawrence

  F. B. SANBOURN
  Concord.

The success of the Underground Road in transporting <DW64>s beyond
the limits of the Southern states was long ago commented upon as
standing in marked contrast with that of the American Colonization
Society. This association was organized in 1816, and soon had
auxiliary societies in most of the states. Its object was to remove
the free blacks and such as might be made free from the South, and
colonize them on the coast of Africa. By 1857, after an existence
of forty years, the Colonization Society had sent to Africa 9,502
emigrants, of whom 3,676 were free-born, 326 self-purchased, and
5,500 emancipated on condition of being transported. That the
informal method of the abolitionists was many times as efficient as
that adopted by the organization mentioned, with its treasury and
its board of officers, cannot be denied.[978]

  [978] E. M. Pettit, _Sketches in the History of the Underground
  Railroad_, Introduction, p. xi. Wilson gives an account of the
  American Colonization Society in his _Rise and Fall of the Slave
  Power_, Vol. I, pp. 208-222; see also the _Life of Garrison_, by
  his children, Index.

By actual count it is found that the number of persons within the
limits of Ohio named as underground workers in the collections upon
which this book is based, is about 1,540; in all other states taken
together the number found is 1,670. It is proper to observe that
these figures are minimum figures. Death and infirmity, as well as
removal, have carried many unknown operators beyond the chance of
discovery.

It is not surprising that the secret enterprises of this determined
class of people--so effectual as to make rare the pursuit of
a fugitive during the last years of the decade preceding the
War[979]--should have become the ground of an important charge
against the North in the crisis of 1860. The violation of the
Fugitive Slave Law was an accusation upon which Southern members of
Congress rang all the changes in the course of the violent debates
of the sessions of 1860-1861. Thus Jones, of Georgia, said in the
House in April, 1860: "It is a notorious fact that in a good many
of the non-slaveholding states the Republican party have regularly
organized societies--underground railroads--for the avowed purpose
of stealing the slaves from the border States, and carrying them
off to a free State or to Canada. These predatory bands are kept
up by private and public subscriptions among the Abolitionists;
and in many of the States, I am sorry to say, they receive the
sanction and protection of the law. The border States lose annually
thousands and millions of dollars' worth of property by this
system of larceny that has been carried on for years." Polk, of
Missouri, whose state had suffered not a little through the flight
and abduction of slaves, made the same complaint in the Senate in
January, 1861: "Underground railroads are established," said he,
"stretching from the remotest slaveholding States clear up to
Canada. Secret agencies are put to work in the very midst of our
slaveholding communities to steal away slaves. The constitutional
obligation for the rendition of the fugitive from service is
violated. The laws of Congress enacted to carry this provision of
the Constitution into effect are not executed. Their execution is
prevented. Prevented, first, by hostile and unconstitutional state
legislation. Secondly, by a vitiated public sentiment. Thirdly, by
the concealing of the slave, so that the United States law cannot
be made to reach him. And when the runaway is arrested under the
fugitive slave law--which, however, is seldom the case--he is very
often rescued.... This lawlessness is felt with special seriousness
in the border slave States. The underground railroads start mostly
from these States. Hundreds of thousands of dollars are lost
annually. And no State loses more heavily than my own. Kentucky, it
is estimated, loses annually as much as $200,000. The other border
States no doubt lose in the same ratio, Missouri much more. But all
these losses and outrages, all this disregard of constitutional
obligation and social duty, are as nothing in their bearing upon the
Union in comparison with the animus, the intent and purpose of which
they are at once the fruit and the evidence...."[980] Of this animus
the election of Lincoln was regarded as the crowning proof; and it
became, as is well known, the signal for secession.

  [979] McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, p. 71.

  [980] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-sixth Congress, Second
  Session, p. 356; see also _ibid._, Appendix, p. 197.

In December, 1860, the very month in which South Carolina chose to
withdraw from the Union, the arrest of a runaway <DW64> in Canada
gave rise to an extradition case that became an additional cause
of excitement. The <DW64> was William Anderson, who in 1853 had
been caught without a pass in Missouri, and had killed the man
that tried to capture him. In 1860 he was recognized in Canada
by a slave-catcher from Missouri, was arrested on the charge of
murder, and thrown into jail at Toronto. As the Ashburton treaty
contained an article providing for the extradition of slaves guilty
of crimes committed in the United States, the American government
sought to secure the surrender of Anderson for punishment. Lord
Elgin, Governor-General of Canada at the time, was appealed to
in the fugitive's behalf by Mrs. Laura S. Haviland. He made a
spirited reply to the effect that "in case of a demand for William
Anderson, he should require the case to be tried in their British
court; and if twelve freeholders should testify that he had been
a man of integrity since his arrival in their dominion, it should
clear him." Nevertheless, the case was twice decided against the
defendant, first by the common magistrate's court, then by the Court
of Error and Appeal, to which it had been carried on a writ of
habeas corpus. But this did not end the matter. Through the efforts
of the fugitive's friends application was made for a writ of habeas
corpus to the English Court of the Queen's Bench, and the writ was
granted. Anderson was defended by Gerrit Smith, whose eloquent
speech produced a profound impression in Canada, and did not fail to
attract considerable notice in all parts of the United States.[981]

  [981] Accounts of Anderson's case will be found in a collection
  of pamphlets in the Boston Public Library; in the _Liberator_,
  Dec. 3, 1860 and Jan. 22, 1861; in _A Woman's Life Work_, by
  Laura S. Haviland, pp. 207, 208; in the _History of Canada_, by
  J. M. McMullen, Vol. II, p. 259; in the _History of Canada_,
  by John MacMullen, p. 553; and in _Fugitive Slaves_, by M. G.
  McDougall, pp. 25, 26.

During the month of December, in which the Anderson case came
into prominence, the example of secession set by South Carolina
was followed by five other cotton states. Meantime Congress was
giving unmistakable evidence of the importance attaching to the
fugitive slave question. In his message of December 4, President
Buchanan gave serious consideration to this question, although he
insisted that the Fugitive Slave Law had been duly enforced in every
contested case during his administration.[982] He recommended an
"explanatory amendment" to the Constitution affording "recognition
of the right of the master to have his slave who has escaped from
one state to another restored and 'delivered up' to him, and of
the validity of the Fugitive Slave Law enacted for this purpose,
together with a declaration that all State laws impairing or
defeating this right, are violations of the Constitution, and
are consequently null and void."[983] On December 12 not less
than eleven resolutions were introduced into the House on this
subject, and on December 13, 18 and 24 other resolutions followed.
Resolutions of a similar nature continued to be presented in both
Houses during January and February of the succeeding year, ceasing
only with the end of the session.[984]

  [982] _Journal of the Senate_, Thirty-sixth Congress, Second
  Session, p. 10.

  [983] _Journal of the Senate_, Thirty-sixth Congress, Second
  Session, p. 18.

  [984] For a complete list of these resolutions see Mrs.
  McDougall's monograph on _Fugitive Slaves_, Appendix, pp. 117-119.

These efforts on the part of the national legislature to appease the
spirit of secession in the South were paralleled by efforts equally
futile on the part of various Northern state legislatures during
the same period. It was reported that towards the close of the year
1860 a caucus of governors of seven Republican states was held in
New York City, and decided to recommend to their legislatures "the
unconditional and early repeal of the personal liberty bills passed
by their respective states." As a matter of fact this recommendation
was made by the Republican governors of four states, Maine,
Massachusetts, New York and Illinois, and the Democratic governors
of Rhode Island and Pennsylvania. Rhode Island repealed her
personal liberty law in January, 1861; Massachusetts modified hers
in March; and was followed by Vermont, which took similar action
in April. Ohio had repealed her act in 1858, but her legislature
seized this opportunity to urge her sister states to cancel any of
their statutes "conflicting with or rendering less efficient the
Constitution or the laws."[985] The conciliation of the South was
clearly the purpose of these measures, but action came too late, for
confidence between the sections had already been destroyed.

  [985] Rhodes, _History of the United States_, Vol. III, pp. 252,
  253.

The fact that the border slave states, with the exception of
Virginia, remained in the Union, must not be interpreted as
indicating small losses of human property by these states. The
strong ties existing between the states lying on either side of
the sectional line, the presence of a rigorous Union sentiment in
Kentucky, western Virginia and the slaveholding regions lying east
and west of these, together with the hope of a new compromise
entertained by these states, tended to keep them in their places
in the Union. The prospect of a stampede of slaves, in case they
should join the secession movement, was a consideration that may
be supposed to have had some weight in fixing the decision of
the border slave states. Certainly it was one to which Northern
men attached considerable importance at the time in explaining
the steadfast position of these states; and the impossibility of
recovering even a single fugitive from the free states in case of a
disruption of the Union along Mason and Dixon's line was a thing of
which Southern members of the national House were duly reminded by
their Northern colleagues.

The retention of the loyalty of the border slave states was a
matter of grave concern to President Lincoln, who sought first of
all the preservation of the Union. In his inaugural address Lincoln
had declared his purpose to see to it that the Fugitive Slave Law
was executed, and when a few months later an opportunity presented
itself he kept his promise. Congress also realized the need of
caution on account of the border states, and moved slowly in framing
general enactments. The changed conditions surrounding the slaves,
due to the marshalling of forces for the War and the advance of
Northern troops into the enemy's country, multiplied the chances
for escape throughout the South, and removed the necessity for a
long and perilous journey by the slaves to find friends. <DW64>s
from the plantations of both loyal and disloyal masters flocked to
the camps of Union soldiers, and could not be separated. Under such
circumstances the need of uniformity of method in dealing with cases
early became apparent. The War had scarcely more than commenced
when protests began to be made against the employment of Northern
troops as slave-catchers. A letter read in the Senate by Mr. Sumner,
in December, 1861, made inquiry, "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 is
the policy of the government, I shall urge my son to shed no more
blood for its preservation."[986] Two German companies in one of the
Massachusetts regiments also entered protest, making it a condition
of their enlistment that they should not be required to perform such
discreditable service. "They complained, and with them the German
population generally throughout the country."[987] The inexpediency
of the return of fugitives by the army was recognized by Congress
in the early part of 1862, and a bill forbidding officers from
restoring them under any consideration was signed by the President
on May 14, 1862.[988]

  [986] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-seventh Congress, First
  Session, p. 30.

  [987] _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-seventh Congress, First
  Session, p. 30; see also M. G. McDougall's _Fugitive Slaves_, p.
  79.

  [988] _House Journal_, Thirty-seventh Congress, Second Session,
  p. 265; _Senate Journal_, Thirty-seventh Congress, Second
  Session, p. 285; _Congressional Globe_, Thirty-seventh Congress,
  Second Session, p. 1243.

The various acts of Congress and the President relative to fugitive
slaves down to the Proclamation of Emancipation, practically
circumscribed the legal effect of the Fugitive Slave laws to the
border states, for in the free states the laws had not been observed
for a long time. It was not until June, 1864, that these measures
were swept from the statute-book of the nation, notwithstanding the
insistence of Kentucky and the other loyal states of the South that
a constitutional obligation rested upon the government to retain
them. The repeal act did not remove this obligation. Such a result
could come only with the extinction of slavery, and the last vestige
of slavery did not disappear until the adoption of the Thirteenth
Amendment to the Constitution in 1865. The Amendment provides:
"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."

The general significance of the long controversy in regard to
fugitive slaves can best be understood by tracing the development
as a sectional issue of the question at the bottom of it, namely,
the obligation to restore fugitives to their masters. The creation
of a line dividing the free North from the slaveholding South in
the early years of our national history, and the enactment of the
first Fugitive Slave Law, by which the general government assumed
a certain responsibility for runaways, led to the opening of the
question. From that time on, the steadily increasing number of
escapes, together with the spread of the underground system,
which made these escapes almost uniformly successful, kept the
question open. Operations along the secret lines constantly caused
aggravation in the South; and the pursuit of passengers, mobs and
violence were results widely witnessed in the North. The other
questions between the sections were subject to compromise, but party
action could not control the workings of the Underground Railroad.
The stirring sights and affecting stories with which the North
became acquainted through the stealthy migration of slaves were well
adapted to make abolitionists rapidly, and the consequence was more
aggravation on both sides. The practice of midnight emancipation
in Northern states during the early years was accompanied, not
unnaturally, with the formulation and statement of the principle
of immediatism in neighborhoods where underground methods were
familiar. Thus the way was prepared for Garrison and his talented
coworkers, whose eloquent tongues and pens could no more be
controlled by pro-slavery forces than could the Underground Railroad
itself. Agitation reacted upon the Road and increased its activity;
this caused counter agitation by Southerners in and out of Congress
until a more rigorous Fugitive Slave Law was secured.

The Compromise of 1850 failed to reconcile the sections: Northern
men despised the Fugitive Slave Law, and displayed greater zeal than
ever before in aiding runaway slaves. Thus, in the later stages
of the controversy, as from its beginning, the fugitive was a
successful missionary in the cause of freedom. Personal liberty laws
were passed by the free states to defend him; _Uncle Tom's Cabin_
was written to portray to the world his aspirations for liberty and
his endeavors to secure it; John Brown devised a "subterranean pass
way" to assist him, as a part of the great scheme of liberation that
failed at Harper's Ferry. One of the chief reasons for withdrawing
from the Union assigned by the seceding states was the bad faith
of the North in refusing to surrender fugitives. At the outbreak
of the Civil War large numbers of slaves sought refuge with the
Union forces, the government soon found it impracticable to restore
them, and disavowed all responsibility for them in 1862. By the
Proclamation of Emancipation slavery was abolished within the area
of the disloyal states, and the controversy became merely formal,
the loyal slave states striving to maintain an abstract right based
by them upon the Constitution. In 1864, however, they were forced
to yield, and the fugitive slave legislation was repealed. The year
following witnessed the cancellation of the fugitive slave clause in
the Constitution by the amendment of that instrument. In view of all
this it is safe to say that the Underground Railroad was one of the
greatest forces which brought on the Civil War, and thus destroyed
slavery.




APPENDIX A

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AND NATIONAL ACTS RELATIVE TO FUGITIVE
SLAVES, 1787-1850


Fugitive Clause in Northwest Ordinance of 1787. [Chapter II, p. 20.]

=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 11, 1787. Passed July 13,
1787.--_Journals of Congress_, XII, 84, 92.


Fugitive Clause in the Constitution. [Chapter II, p. 20.]

=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 Statutes
of the United States_, I, 18.


First Fugitive Slave Act. [Chapter II, p. 21.]

=1793, Feb. 12.= _An Act respecting fugitives from justice and
persons escaping from the service of their masters._

"SECTION 1. _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 state 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 produce 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 fled, 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 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. _And 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 affidavit taken before and certified by a magistrate 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 enacted_, 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
attorney, when so arrested pursuant to the authority herein given
or declared; or shall harbour 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 hundred
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."--_Statutes at Large_, I, 302-305.


Fugitive Slave Clause in the Missouri Compromise. [Chapter
X, p. 298.]

=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 person
claiming his or her labor, or service, as aforesaid."--_Annals of
Congress, 16 Cong. 1 Sess._, 1469, 1587.


Second Fugitive Slave Act. [Chapter II, p. 22.]

=1850, Sept. 18.= "_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 February
twelfth, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-three._

"_Be it enacted 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.

"SEC. 2. _And be it further enacted_, That the Superior Court of
each organized Territory of the United States shall have the same
power to appoint commissioners to take 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 commissioners 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 exercise 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 discharge 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 provisions 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 claimant by 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 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 suitable
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 them, to execute process as aforesaid, to
summon and call to their aid the bystanders, or _posse comitatus_ of
the proper county, when necessary to insure a faithful observance of
the clause of the Constitution 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 be 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 be 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 testimony, duly taken and
certified by some court, magistrate, justice of the peace, or other
legal 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 willingly obstruct, hinder, or prevent such claimant,
his agent or attorney, or any person or 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 exceeding 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 or 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 are 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 discharged out
of custody for the want of sufficient 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, his 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 commissioner 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 may be 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 district 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 possession
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 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 overcome 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 compensation,
and to be allowed the same expenses, as are now allowed by law
for transportation of criminals, to be certified by the judge of
the district within which the arrest 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 satisfactory 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 proved, 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 escaping 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 in 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 authorized 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 transport such person to the
State or Territory from which he escaped: _Provided_, 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 18, 1850."--_Statutes at Large_, IX, 462-465.




APPENDIX B

LIST OF IMPORTANT FUGITIVE SLAVE CASES


The following list is not intended to be exhaustive: it by no means
includes all the cases illustrative of the work of the Underground
Road, but it represents fairly well the various phases of that work,
and does not intentionally omit any of the famous cases. Less than
one half of the list here given will be found in Mrs. McDougall's
_Fugitive Slaves_, Appendix D, pp. 124-128.

1. Early escape to Canada.

1748. <DW64> servant escapes from the English to Canada: _New York
Colonial Manuscripts_, X, 209.

2. Case of ship _Friendship_.

1770. Harbored a slave: Moore, _Slavery in Massachusetts_, 117.

3. Somersett case.

1772. England refuses to return a fugitive slave: Moore, _Slavery
in Massachusetts_, 117; Cobb, _Historical Sketch of Slavery_,
163; Goodell, _Slavery and Anti-Slavery_, 44-52; Hurd, _Law of
Freedom and Bondage_, I, 189-193; Broom, _Constitutional Law_,
6-119; Howells, _State Trials_, XX, 1; Taswell-Langmead, _English
Constitutional History_, 300, n.

4. Dalby's fugitive.

1786. Aided by Quakers in Philadelphia: Sparks, _Washington_, IX,
158; Applegarth, _Quakers of Pennsylvania_, 463.

5. Slave escaped from Drayton.

1786. Difficult to apprehend because, as Washington declared, there
were "numbers who would rather facilitate the escape of slaves than
apprehend them when runaways." Lund, _Origin of the Late War_, I, 20.

6. First recorded case of rescue. (Quincy's case.)

1793. Alleged fugitive rescued from the court-room in Boston: Edw.
C. Learned, _Speech on the New Fugitive Slave Law_, Chicago, Oct.
25, 1850; Whittier, _Prose Works_, II, 129, "A Chapter of History";
Goodell, _Slavery and Anti-Slavery_, 232; _Boston Atlas_, Oct. 15,
1850; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, 35.

7. Washington's fugitive.

1796, October. Public sentiment in Portsmouth, New Hampshire,
prevents the return of a fugitive slave to President Washington:
_Magazine of American History_, December, 1877, p. 759; Charles
Sumner, _Works_, III, 177; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, 35.

8. Columbia case.

1804. General Boude defends a runaway: Smedley, _Underground
Railroad_, 26.

9. Case of Wright _vs._ Deacon.

1819. Trial before Supreme Court of Pennsylvania to determine status
of an alleged runaway: 5 Sergeant and Rawle's _Reports_, 63.

10. Case of Hill _vs._ Low.

1822. Action brought in Circuit Court of the United States for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania for penalty under the law of 1793
for obstructing arrest of a fugitive: 4 Washington's _Circuit Court
Reports_, 327.

11. Case of Commonwealth _vs._ Griffith.

1823. Prosecution in Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts of
a slave-catcher for seizing without a warrant a runaway in New
Bedford: 2 Pickering's _Reports_, 15.

12. Escape of Tice Davids.

1831. Mysterious disappearance of a slave at Ripley, Ohio, leads to
the naming of the Underground Railroad: Rush R. Sloane, _Firelands
Pioneer_, July, 1888, p. 35.

13. Dayton (Ohio) case.

1832, January. Rendition of the fugitive, Thomas Mitchell, at
Dayton, Ohio, followed by the suicide of the <DW64>, at Cincinnati,
when on his way back to slavery: Howe, _Historical Collections of
Ohio_, II, 554, 555.

14. Case of Johnson _vs._ Tompkins.

1833. Prosecution of a claimant for seizure and removal of his
escaped slave from Pennsylvania to New Jersey; followed by counter
prosecution of the abolitionists before Circuit Court of the United
States: 1 Baldwin's _Circuit Court Reports_, 571; 13 _Federal
Cases_, 840.

15. Case of Jack _vs._ Martin.

1835. Action under New York law for recovery of a fugitive from New
Orleans: 12 Wendell's _Reports_, 311.

16. Basil Dorsey case.

1836. Trial and rescue of Dorsey in Bucks County, Pennsylvania:
Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, 356-361; E. H. Magill, "When Men
were Sold. The Underground Railroad in Bucks County," in _The Bucks
County Intelligencer_, Feb. 3, 1898.

17. Matilda case.

1837. March. Rescue of a slave at Cincinnati, Ohio, on her way
from Virginia to Missouri with her master. Later she was found in
the employ of James G. Birney, who was tried for harboring the
fugitive, while Matilda was remanded to her master: Schuckers,
_Life and Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 41-44; Warden, _Private
Life and Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 282-284; _8 Ohio Reports_.

18. Schooner _Boston_ case. (Georgia and Maine controversy.)

1837. Controversy between Georgia and Maine over a stowaway on the
schooner _Boston_, who escaped through Maine to Canada: Wilson,
_Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, I, 473; Niles's _Register_,
LIII, 71, 72, LV, 356; _Senate Journal_, 1839-40, pp. 235-237;
_Senate Doc._, 26 Cong., 1 Sess., Vol. V, Doc. 273; McDougall,
_Fugitive Slaves_, 41.

19. Case of Peter, _alias_ Lewis Martin.

1837. Fugitive adjudged to his claimant by Circuit Court for the
Southern District of New York: 2 Paine's _Reports_, 350; _16 Federal
Cases_, 881.

20. Philadelphia case.

1838. Attempted rescue of a captured fugitive by a crowd of <DW52>
people: _Liberator_, March 16, 1838.

21. Marion (Ohio) case.

1838. Rescue of a fugitive at Marion, Ohio, from the hands of his
claimant, who sought to detain him after the decision of the court
in the slave's favor: Aaron Benedict, _The Sentinel_, Mt. Gilead,
Ohio, July 13, 1893.

22. Escape of Douglass.

1838. Escape of Frederick Douglass from Baltimore to New York: _Life
and Times of Douglass_; Williams, _Negro Race in America_, II, 59,
422; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, I, 501, 502.

23. Isaac Gansey case. (Virginia and New York controversy.)

1839. Controversy between Virginia and New York over extradition of
three <DW64>s demanded by Virginia for aiding a slave to escape:
_U. S. Gazette_, "Case of Isaac," Judge Hopkinson's Speech; Wilson,
_Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, I, 474; Seward, _Works_, II,
449-518; Von Holst, _Constitutional History_, II, 538-540: _Senate
Documents_, 27 Cong., 2 Sess., Vol. II, Doc. 96; McDougall,
_Fugitive Slaves_, 41.

24. Granville (Ohio) rescue case.

1841. Discharge of fugitive, John, after a hearing obtained through
a writ of habeas corpus; followed by the departure of the <DW64> over
an underground route: Bushnell, _History of Granville_, Licking
County, Ohio, 307, 308.

25. Burr, Work and Thompson case.

1841. Prosecution for aiding fugitive slaves in western Illinois:
Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 71; Goodell,
_Slavery and Anti-Slavery_, 440; Thompson, _Prison Life and
Reflections_; Asbury, _History of Quincy, Illinois_, 74.

26. Van Zandt case. (Jones _vs._ Van Zandt.)

1842-1847. Prosecution for aiding runaways in southwestern Ohio; 5
Howard's _Reports_, 215; Letter of N. L. Van Sandt, Clarinda, Iowa;
Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, I, 475, 476; Cobb,
_Historical Sketches of Slavery_, 207; 2 McLean's _Reports_, 612;
Schuckers, _Life and Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 53-66; Warden,
_Private Life and Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 296.

27. Prigg case. (Prigg _vs._ the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.)

1842. Prosecution for causing arrest and removal of a runaway
contrary to provisions of a state law. Decision of the Supreme
Court of the United States frees state officers from taking part in
fugitive slave cases: 16 Peters' _Reports_, 539; _Report of Case
of Edward Prigg_, Supreme Court, Pennsylvania; Cobb, _Historical
Sketch of Slavery_; Bledsoe, _Liberty and Slavery_, 355; Clarke,
_Anti-Slavery Days_, 69; Hurd, _Law of Freedom and Bondage_, II,
456-492; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, I, 472, 473;
Von Holst, _Constitutional History_, III, 310-312.

28. Latimer case.

1842. Famous fugitive slave case in Boston. Fugitive released by
purchase: _Liberator_, Oct. 25, Nov. 11, Nov. 25, 1842, Feb. 3, 7,
17, 1843, and Aug. 16, 1844; _Law Reporter_, Latimer Case, March,
1843; _Eleventh Annual Report of Mass. Anti-Slavery Society_; _Mass.
House Journal_, 1843, pp. 72, 158; _Mass. Senate Journal_, 1843, p.
232; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, I, 477; McDougall,
_Fugitive Slaves_, 39, 40.

29. Milton Clark rescue case.

1842. September. Release of the fugitive, captured in Lake County,
Ohio, by writ of habeas corpus in Ashtabula County, Ohio, followed
by his disappearance by way of the Underground Railroad: _Geneva_
(Ohio) _Times_, Sept. 14, 1892.

30. Eells case.

1842-1852. Prosecution for harboring a slave in Adams County,
Illinois: _5 Illinois Reports_, 498; 14 Howard's _Reports_, 13.

31. Case of Charles T. Torrey.

1843. Prosecution for attempt to abduct slaves from Virginia:
Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 80.

32. Case of Delia A. Webster.

1844. Prosecution for attempt to abduct slaves from Kentucky: _Rev.
Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times_; _Chicago Tribune_, Jan. 29,
1893.

33. Case of Calvin Fairbank.

1844. Prosecution for attempt to abduct slaves from Kentucky: _Rev.
Calvin Fairbank During Slavery Times_; _Chicago Tribune_, Jan. 29,
1893.

34. Marysville (Ohio) rendition case.

1844, September 10. Rendition of two fugitives captured on the
Scioto River, near Marysville, Union County, Ohio: _Marysville
Tribune_, May 17, 1893; Letter of Mahlon Pickrell, Zanesfield, Ohio,
March 25, 1893.

35. Walker case.

1844. Prosecution for attempt to abduct slaves from Florida: Trial
and Imprisonment of Jonathan Walker, _Liberator_, Aug. 16, 31, Sept.
6, 13, Oct. 18, 25 and Dec. 27, 1844, Aug. 8, 15, and July 18, 1845;
Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, 83; McDougall, _Fugitive
Slaves_, 42.

36. Case of State _vs._ Hoppess. (Watson case.)

1845. Action before the Supreme Court of Ohio on the circuit
to secure the liberation of a recaptured slave: _2 Western Law
Journal_, 279; Schuckers, _Life and Public Services of S. P. Chase_,
74-77; Warden, _Private Life and Public Services of S. P. Chase_,
309.

37. Case of Vaughan _vs._ Williams.

1845. Prosecution before the Circuit Court of the United States for
the District of Indiana for rescuing fugitive slaves: _3 Western Law
Journal_, 65; _8 Law Reporter_, 375; _28 Federal Cases_, 1115; 3
McLean's _Reports_, 530.

38. Parish case. (Jane Garrison case.)

1845-1849. Prosecution of F. D. Parish for aiding fugitives at
Sandusky, Ohio: _Firelands Pioneer_, July, 1888; Warden, _Private
Life and Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 310; A. E. Lee, _History
of Columbus, Ohio_, I, 598.

39. Toledo (Ohio) rescue case.

1847, February. Rescue of a fugitive from custody while his captor
was being tried on a charge of assault and battery before a justice
of the peace: Conversation with James M. Ashley, Toledo, Ohio, July,
1895, and with Mavor Brigham, Toledo, Ohio, Aug. 4, 1895.

40. Crosswhite rescue case. (Case of Giltner _vs._ Gorham.)

1847. Prosecution for obstructing arrest of fugitives at Marshall,
Michigan: Pamphlet proposing a "Defensive League of Freedom," by E.
G. Loring, and others, pp. 5, 6; 4 McLean's _Reports_, 402.

41. Kauffman case.

1848. Prosecution of Daniel Kauffman, of Cumberland County,
Pennsylvania, for aiding fugitives: E. G. Loring and others,
Pamphlet proposing a "Defensive League of Freedom," pp. 5, 6.

42. Garrett case.

1848. Prosecution of Thomas Garrett, of Wilmington, Delaware, for
aiding fugitive slaves: Still, _Underground Railroad Records_,
623-641; Smedley, _Underground Railroad_, 237-245; McDougall,
_Fugitive Slaves_, 60; Wyman, _New England Magazine_, March, 1896.

43. Case of Drayton and Sayres. (Case of the schooner _Pearl_.)

1848, April 18. Prosecution for attempting abduction of slaves from
Washington, D.C.: _Personal Memoir of Daniel Drayton_; Wilson, _Rise
and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 104; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_,
42.

44. Ohio and Kentucky controversy.

1848. Controversy on account of extradition of fifteen persons,
charged with aiding fugitives, demanded by Kentucky: _Liberator_,
July 14, 1848.

45. Craft escape.

1848. Escape of William and Ellen Craft: _Liberator_, Nov. 1, 1850;
Still, _Underground Railroad_, 368; Clarke, _Anti-Slavery Days_, 83;
Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 325; _New England
Magazine_, January, 1890; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, 59.

46. Case of Richard Dillingham.

1848, December. Prosecution for attempting to abduct slaves from
Nashville, Tennessee: Benedict, _Memoir of Richard Dillingham_;
Stowe, _Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin_, 58, 59; _Reminiscences of Levi
Coffin_, 713-718; Howe, _Historical Collections of Ohio_, II, 590.

47. Clarksburgh (Indiana) case. (Case of Ray _vs._ Donnell and
Hamilton.)

1849, May. Prosecution for aiding fugitive slave: 4 McLean's
_Reports_, 504.

48. Case of Norris _vs._ Newton and others.

1849, September. Fugitives captured in Cass County, Michigan,
discharged on trial at South Bend, Indiana, prosecution of those who
interfered following: 5 McLean's _Reports_, 92.

49. First case under the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850. (Hamlet
"kidnapping" case.)

1850, September 26. Rendition of James Hamlet, a free <DW64>,
living in New York City: _Fugitive Slave Bill, its History and
Unconstitutionality, with an Account of the Seizure of James
Hamlet_, 3; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 304;
McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, 43, 44.

50. Chaplin case.

1850. Prosecution of William L. Chaplin for attempting to abduct
slaves of Robert Toombs and Alexander H. Stephens from Washington,
D.C.: Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 80-82; _Case
of William R. Chaplin_, etc. (Boston, 1851), p. 54.

51. Sims case.

1851. Rendition in Boston: _Liberator_, April 17 and 18; _Daily
Morning Chronicle_, April 26, 1851; _Twentieth Annual Report of
Mass. Anti-Slavery Society_, 1855, p. 19; _Trial of Sims, Arguments
by R. Rantoul, Jr., and C. G. Loring_; C. F. Adams, _Life of Richard
Henry Dana_, I, 185-301; 7 Cushing's _Reports_, 287; Wilson, _Rise
and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 333; _New England Magazine_, June,
1890; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, 44.

52. Shadrach case.

1851, February. Rescue in Boston: _Liberator_, Feb. 21, May 30,
1851; _Boston Traveller_, Feb. 15, 1851; _Boston Courier_, Feb. 17,
1851; _Washington National Era_, Feb. 27, 1851; _Cong. Globe_, 31
Cong., 2 Sess., Appendix, 238, 295, 510; May, _Fugitive Slave Law
and its Victims_, 10; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_,
II, 329; Von Holst, III, 21; _Statesman's Manual_, III, 1919; _New
England Magazine_, May, 1890; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, 47, 48;
Rhodes, _History of the United States_, I, 209, 210, 290.

53. Christiana case.

1851, September. Riot in Christiana, Pennsylvania, caused by attempt
to arrest and remove fugitives, followed by trial on the charge
of treason of the persons alleged to have prevented the arrest:
2 Wallace Jr.'s _Reports_, 159; _9 Legal Intelligencer_, 22; _4
American Law Journal_, n. s., 458; _9 Western Law Journal_, 103;
_26 Federal Cases_, 105; Still, _Underground Railroad_, 348-368;
"Parker's account," "The Freedman's Story," T. W. Higginson,
_Atlantic Monthly_, Feb. and March, 1866; _U. S. vs. Hanway,
Treason_, 247; May, _Fugitive Slave Law and its Victims_, 14;
_History of the Trial of Castner Hanway and others for Treason_; _N.
Y. Tribune_, Sept. 12, 1851, and Nov. 26 to Dec. 12; _Boston Daily
Traveller_, Sept. 12, 1851; _National Anti-Slavery Standard_, Sept.
18, 1851; _Lowell Journal_, Sept. 19, 1851; Smedley, _Underground
Railroad_, 107-130; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, II,
328, 329; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, 50, 51; Rhodes, _History of
the United States_, I, 222-224.

54. Jerry rescue.

1851, October. Rescue of Jerry McHenry in Syracuse, New York:
_Liberator_, Oct. 10-17, 1851; S. J. May, _Recollections of the
Anti-Slavery Conflict_, 349-364; _Life of Gerrit Smith_, 117; _Trial
of H. W. Allen_, 3; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_,
II, 305, 306; E. W. Seward, _Seward at Washington as Senator and
Secretary of State_, I, 169, 170; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, 44,
47-51.

55. Parker rescue.

1851, December 31. Rescue by Mr. Miller: Wilson, _Rise and Fall
of the Slave Power_, II, 324; May, _Fugitive Slave Law and its
Victims_, 15; _Liberator_, 1853, Feb. 4; _Lunsford Lane_, 113.

56. Brig Florence rescue.

1853. Rescue of a slave on board by Capt. Austin Bearse: Bearse,
_Reminiscences of Fugitive Slave-Law Days in Boston_, 34.

57. Case of Oliver _vs._ Weakley and others.

1853. Prosecution before the United States Circuit Court for the
Western District of Pennsylvania in October term for harboring
fugitives: 2 Wallace Jr.'s _Reports_, 324.

58. Louis case.

1853, October. Escape of the fugitive, Louis, from the court-room
while on trial in Cincinnati: _Liberator_, Oct. 28, 1853;
_Reminiscences of Levi Coffin_, 548-554.

59. Bellefontaine (Ohio) rescue case.

1852, November. Discharge of the Piatt slaves from custody by
the probate judge of Logan County, followed by their escape over
the Underground Railroad: _Logan County Gazette_, November, 1852;
Letter of the Hon. Robert T. Kennedy, Bellefontaine, Jan. 22, 1893;
Conversation with Judge Wm. H. West, Bellefontaine, Aug. 11, 1894;
Letter of R. H. Johnston, Belle Centre, Ohio, Sept. 22, 1894.

60. Case of Miller _vs._ McQuerry.

1853, August. Rendition of a fugitive, for several years a resident
near Troy, Ohio, by the Circuit Court of the United States at
Cincinnati, Ohio: 5 McLean's _Reports_, 481; 10 _Western Law
Journal_, 528; 17 _Federal Cases_, 335; May, The _Fugitive Slave Law
and its Victims_, 28; _History of Darke County, Ohio_, 324, 325.

61. Mitchell's case.

1853. Prosecution of Mitchell, an abolitionist of Indiana,
Pennsylvania, for harboring slaves: 2 Wallace Jr.'s _Reports_, 313;
_Pittsburgh Dispatch_, Feb. 13, 1898.

62. Glover rescue case. (Case of Ableman _vs._ Booth.)

1854, March 10. Rescue of Joshua Glover by a mob at Milwaukee;
followed by the prosecution of Sherman M. Booth, one of the
rescuers, and a conflict between the Supreme Court of Wisconsin and
the Supreme Court of the United States: _Liberator_, April 7, 24,
1854; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 444; Mason,
_The Fugitive Slave Law in Wisconsin with Reference to Nullification
Sentiment_, 1895; C. C. Olin, _A Complete Record of the John Olin
Family_, 1893; Byron Paine and A. D. Smith, _Unconstitutionality of
the Fugitive Slave Act_. _Argument of A. D. Smith_, Milwaukee, 1854.
Wisconsin Supreme Court, _Unconstitutionality of the Fugitive Slave
Act, Decision in case of Booth and Rycraft_.

63. Burns case.

1854, May 24. Rendition of Anthony Burns in Boston: _Liberator_,
May, June, 1854, Aug. 22, 1861; _Kidnapping of Burns_, Scrapbook
collected by Theodore Parker; Personal Statement of Mr. Elbridge
Sprague, N. Abington; Accounts in _Boston Journal_, May 27,
29, 1854; _Daily Advertiser_, May 26, 29, June 7, 8, July 17;
_Traveller_, May 27, 29, June 2, 3, 6, 10, July 15, 18, Oct. 3, Nov.
29, Dec. 5, 7, 1854, April 3, 4, 10, 11, 1855; _Evening Gazette_,
May 27, 1854; _Worcester Spy_, May 31; Argument of Mr. R. H. Dana;
May, _Fugitive Slave Law and its Victims_, 256; Stevens, _History
of Anthony Burns_; _New York Tribune_, May 26, 1854; Clarke,
_Anti-Slavery Days_, 87; Greeley, _American Conflict_, I, 218;
Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 435; Von Holst, VI,
62; Garrisons' _Garrison_, II, 201, III, 409; C. F. Adams, _Dana_,
I, 262-330; Rhodes, _History of the United States_, I, 500-506; T.
W. Higginson, _Atlantic Monthly_, March, 1897, 349-354; McDougall,
_Fugitive Slaves_, 45; Lillie B. C. Wyman, _New England Magazine_,
July, 1890.

64. Sloane case.

1854. Prosecution of Rush R. Sloane before the District Court of
the United States at Columbus, Ohio, for dismissing fugitives from
the custody of their captors at Sandusky, Ohio: 5 McLean's _United
States Reports_, 64; Rush R. Sloane and H. F. Paden, _Firelands
Pioneer_, 47-49, 21-22.

65. Rosetta case.

1855, March. Release of the slave girl, Rosetta, by writ of
habeas corpus from the possession of her master, who brought her
voluntarily to Columbus, Ohio; followed some time later by the
seizure and removal of the girl, and the pursuit of her captors to
Cincinnati, where they were compelled by legal process to give her
up: Warden, _Private Life and Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 344,
345; A. E. Lee, _History of Columbus, Ohio_, I, 602, 603.

66. Erican case.

1855, May 28. Unsuccessful attempt at Columbus, Ohio, to persuade
two slave girls to leave their master, P. Erican, a Frenchman from
New Orleans, _en route_ with his family to Europe: Lee, _History of
Columbus, Ohio_, 603.

67. Margaret Garner case.

1856, January. Rendition of Margaret Garner at Cincinnati, Ohio,
after she had killed one of her children to prevent its return to
bondage: _Liberator_, Feb. 8, 22, 29, 1856; May, _Fugitive Slave
Law and its Victims_, 37; _Lunsford Lane_, 119; Greeley, _American
Conflict_, I, 219; Lalor's _Cyclopaedia_, I, 207; Wilson, _Rise
and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 446, 447; James Monroe, _Oberlin
Thursday Lectures, Addresses and Essays_, 116; Schuckers, _Life and
Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 171-176; Warden, _Private Life and
Public Services of S. P. Chase_, 346-350.

68. Williamson case.

1856, January. Prosecution for aiding fugitives: _Narrative of the
Facts in the Case of Passmore Williamson_, Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery
Society; _Annual Report of the American Anti-Slavery Society_, New
York, May 7, 1856, p. 24; May, _Fugitive Slave Law and its Victims_,
9, 34; Wilson, _Rise and Fall of the Slave Power_, II, 448.

69. Johnson rescue case.

1856, July 16. Rescue of slave on ship from Mobile: _Liberator_,
July 18, 1856.

70. Gatchell case.

1857, January. Rendition of Philip Young: Chambers, _Slavery and
Color_; _Fugitive Slave Law_, Appendix, 197.

71. Addison White case.

1857, May 15. Prosecution of Udney Hyde and others for aiding the
fugitive, Addison White, at Mechanicsburg, Champaign County, Ohio:
Beer, _History of Clark County, Ohio_; Howe, _Historical Collections
of Ohio_, I, 384-386; Schuckers, _Life and Public Services of S.
P. Chase_, 177-182; Warden, _Private Life and Public Services of S.
P. Chase_, 350, 351.

72. Oberlin-Wellington rescue case.

1858, September 13. Rescue of the boy, John, at Wellington, Ohio,
followed by the prosecution of two rescuers, and the indictment
of four of the slave-catchers: Shipherd, _History of the
Oberlin-Wellington Rescue_; _Liberator_, Jan. 28, April 29, May 6,
June 3, 10, 1859; Cleveland (Ohio) _Plain Dealer_, July 6, 1859;
_Lunsford Lane_, 179; _Anglo-African Magazine_ (Oberlin-Wellington
Rescue), 209; May, _Fugitive Slave Law and its Victims_, 108; _New
Englander_, XVII, 686.

73. Nuckolls case.

1858, December. Prosecution of Nuckolls of Nebraska City, Nebraska,
for injuring a person who remonstrated against his search for
fugitives: Rev. John Todd, Tabor (Iowa) _Beacon_, 1890-91, Chapter
XXI, of a series of articles entitled "The Early Settlement and
Growth of Western Iowa."

74. John Brown's raid.

1858, December 20. Abduction of twelve slaves from Missouri, who
were conducted directly through to Canada: Sanborn, _Life and
Letters of John Brown_, 480-483; Redpath, _Public Life of Capt. John
Brown_, 219-221; Hinton, _John Brown and His Men_, 30-32, 221, 222;
Von Holst, _John Brown_, 104; I. B. Richman, _John Brown among the
Quakers, and Other Sketches_, 46-48; _Life of Frederick Douglass_,
1881, 280, 281, 318, 319; McDougall, _Fugitive Slaves_, 51, 52.

75. Charles Nalle case. (Troy, New York, rescue case.)

1859, April 28. _Troy Whig_, April 28, 1859; Bradford, _Harriet, the
Moses of Her People_, 143-149; _History of the County of Albany, N.
Y., from 1609-1886_, p. 765; _Liberator_, May 4, 1860.

76. Jim Gray case.

1859, October 20. Dismissal of fugitive from arrest by decision of
State Supreme Court at Ottawa, Illinois, followed by the rescue
of the slave from the custody of the United States marshal, and
the prosecution of several of the rescuers: _Ottawa_ (Ill.)
_Republican_, Nov. 9, 1891; _Pontiac_ (Ill.) _Sentinel_, 1891-92;
Speech of John Hossack, convicted of violation of the Fugitive Slave
Law, before Judge Drummond of the United States District Court,
Chicago, Ill. (New York, 1860.)

77. Sheldon and Woodford case.

1860, March. Prosecution of Edward Sheldon and Newton Woodford, of
Tabor, Iowa, for aiding fugitives: Rev. John Todd, _Tabor_ (Iowa)
_Beacon_, 1890-91, Chapter XXI, of series of articles on "The Early
Settlement and Growth of Western Iowa."

78. Anderson case.

1860. Extradition case between United States and Canada: _Pamphlets
on Anderson Case_, Boston Public Library; _Life of Gerrit Smith_,
15; _Liberator_, Dec. 3, 1860, Jan. 22, 1861; _British Documents_,
Parliament of Great Britain, "Correspondence Respecting Case of
Fugitive Slave, Anderson," London, 1861.

79. Cleveland (Ohio) rendition case.

1861. Rendition of the fugitive slave, Lucy, in Cleveland, Ohio, to
her master, Wm. S. Goshorn, of Wheeling, West Virginia: _Cleveland
Herald_, date unknown.

80. Iberia (Ohio) whipping case.

1861, November. Prosecution of the Rev. George Gordon, Principal of
Iberia College, for "resisting process" in the hands of a United
States deputy marshal, who was endeavoring to capture a fugitive
slave on the night of Sept. 20, 1860. The deputy and his assistants
were caught, disarmed, taken to the woods and whipped. Principal
Gordon witnessed without protest the last ten or fifteen lashes, and
for so doing was sentenced to six months' confinement in the county
jail, to pay a fine of $300, and the costs of prosecution--$1000 or
$1500 more: Rev. George Gordon in the _Principia_, Nov. 29, 1861.

81. John Dean case.

1862, June. Prosecution of John Dean, a prominent lawyer of
Washington, D.C., for protecting his client, an alleged fugitive
just released, from a second arrest: Noah Brooks, _Washington in
Lincoln's Time_, 197, 198.




APPENDIX C

FIGURES FROM THE UNITED STATES CENSUS REPORTS RELATING TO FUGITIVE
SLAVES


TABLE A

  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                |  CENSUS OF 1850                |CENSUS OF 1860
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                |         |      |Ratio   | Per  |         |     |Ratio   | Per
                | Slaves  | Fugi-|of Fugi-| Cent | Slaves  |Fugi-|of Fugi-|Cent
                |         | tives|tives to| of   |         |tives|tives to|  of
                |         |      |Slaves  | Loss |         |     |Slaves  |Loss
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Alabama       |  342,844|    29| 11,822 | .0084|  435,080|  36 |12,086  |.0082
  Arkansas      |   47,100|    21|  2,242 | .0445|  111,115|  28 | 3,968  |.0252
  Delaware      |    2,290|    26|     88 |1.1352|    1,798|  12 |    150 |.6674
  Florida       |   39,310|    18|  2,184 | .0457|   61,745|  11 |  5,613 |.0177
  Georgia       |  381,682|    89|  4,288 | .0233|  462,198|  23 | 20,096 |.0049
  Kentucky      |  210,981|    96|  2,198 | .0455|  225,483| 119 |  1,895 |.0527
  Louisiana     |  244,809|    90|  2,720 | .0366|  331,726|  46 |  7,211 |.0138
  Maryland      |   90,368|   279|    324 | .3088|   87,189| 115 |    758 |.1318
  Mississippi   |  309,878|    40|  7,558 | .0132|  436,631|  68 |  6,422 |.0155
  Missouri      |   87,422|    60|  1,457 | .0686|  114,931|  99 |  1,161 |.0860
  North Carolina|  288,548|    64|  4,508 | .0222|  331,059|  61 |  5,262 |.0184
  South Carolina|  384,984|    16| 24,061 | .0041|  402,406|  23 | 17,501 |.0057
  Tennessee     |  239,459|    70|  3,421 | .0292|  275,719|  29 |  9,509 |.0105
  Texas         |   58,161|    29|  2,005 | .0498|  182,566|  16 | 11,410 |.0087
  Virginia      |  472,528|    82|  5,693 | .0175|  490,865| 117 |  4,194 |.0238
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                |3,200,364| 1,011|  3,165 | .0315|3,950,511| 803 | 4,919  |.0203
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------


TABLE B

SHOWING THAT THE PERCENTAGE OF DECLINE OF THE SLAVE POPULATION FROM
1850-1860 WAS GREATER IN THE NORTHERNMOST COUNTIES OF THE BORDER
SLAVE STATES THAN IN THESE STATES AS A WHOLE

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
           |   Counties      |  1850 | 1860 | 1850 | 1860 |      |       |
  State    | Bordering on    |    A  |   A  |  B   |   B  |   C  |   D   |
           |   the states    |       |      |      |      |      |       |
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Kentucky |  Ill., O., Ind. |  .20  | .11  | .27  | .24  | 45   |  11   |
  Virginia |  Pa., O.        |  .018 | .0089| .53  | .47  | 55   |  11   |
  Missouri |  Ia., Ill.      |  .11  | .081 | .15  | .108 | 25   |  28   |
  Maryland |  Pa.            |  .058 | .032 | .201 | .16  | 33   |  20.4 |
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Average | 39.5 | 17.6  |
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

Table B legend:

  A = Ratio between White and Slave Population in the Counties bordering
        on the Free States
  B = Ratio between White and Slave Population in Whole State
  C = Per Cent of Decline of Slave Population in Counties in 10 Years
  D = Per Cent of Decline of Slave Population in States in 10 Years


TABLE C

SHOWING THE PERCENTAGE OF DECLINE OF THE SLAVE POPULATION IN THE
"PAN HANDLE" COUNTIES OF VIRGINIA FROM 1850-1860

  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          |            |  1850  | 1850  |  1860  | 1860  |  1850 | 1860  |     |
          |      "Pan  |        |       |        |       |       |       |     |
  State   |    Handle" | White  | Slave | White  | Slave |       |       |     |
          |  Bordering | Popu-  | Popu- | Popu-  | Popu- |    A  |   A   |  B  |
          |  Pa. and O.| lation | lation| lation | lation|       |       |     |
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Virginia|  Hancock   | 4,040  |   3   |  4,442 |   2   |.00074 |.00045 | 39  |
      "   |  Brooke    | 4,923  | 100   |  5,425 |  18   |.0203  |.0033  | 83  |
      "   |  Ohio      |17,612  | 164   | 22,196 | 100   |.0093  |.0045  | 51  |
      "   |  Marshall  |10,050  |  49   | 12,911 |  29   |.0048  |.0022  | 54  |
      "   |  Wetzel    | 3,319  |  32   |  6,691 |  10   |.0096  |.0015  | 84  |
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  For all the Counties |39,944  | 348   | 51,665 | 159   |.0089  |.0030  | 56  |
  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table C legend:

  A = Ratio between White and Slave Population
  B = Per Cent of Decline of Slave Population in 10 Years




APPENDIX D

BIBLIOGRAPHY


1. UNPUBLISHED REMINISCENCES

The materials upon which in large measure this book is based are
reminiscences gathered by correspondence and conversation with more
than a thousand persons, many of whom were old-time abolitionists,
while the remainder included the families and intimate friends of
abolitionists, and a number of fugitive slaves. It was discovered
by the author after only a short search for published sources that
little was to be gleaned in the libraries and that information
sufficient in amount for an extended study could be obtained only
by what geologists and botanists call field-work. The collection of
materials went on as time could be spared for this purpose until
a great mass of letters and notes had been brought together, and
then the work of sorting, arranging and classifying began. The
reminiscences were grouped by states and counties, so as to bring
out as far as possible the coincident and confirmatory character
of evidence relating to the same neighborhood or district; and the
value of the materials appeared in the tracings of underground
lines the author was able to make, county by county and state
by state, throughout the region of the free states from Iowa to
Maine. For the purpose of showing the extent and importance of the
underground movement these unpublished reminiscences have proved to
be invaluable.


2. PRINTED COLLECTIONS OF UNDERGROUND RAILROAD INCIDENTS

There are a few volumes that supply us with numerous illustrations
of the Underground Railroad in operation. These books are not
general treatises on the underground system, but give us an insight
into the clandestine work of several limited localities; they are
important because they exhibit the methods and devices of operators,
show the sacrifices made by them in behalf of the midnight seekers
after liberty, and supplement with valuable matter the unpublished
reminiscences. In addition to the well-known books of Still, Smedley
and Coffin, the author has found the three smaller, and hitherto
unquoted books by W. M. Mitchell, E. M. Pettit and H. U. Johnson, to
be useful.


3. PERSONAL RECOLLECTIONS

A few of those who were active in aiding slaves to escape to Canada
have published volumes of personal recollections, in which, among
other things, they tell more or less about their connection with
the humane but illegitimate work of the abolitionists, and give
vivid sketches of some of their associates, as well as of some
of their dark-skinned protégés. Such books are the Rev. James
Freeman Clarke's _Anti-Slavery Days_, the Rev. Samuel J. May's
_Recollections of our Anti-Slavery Conflict_, J. B. Grinnell's _Men
and Events of Forty Years_, Mrs. Laura S. Haviland's _A Woman's Life
Work_ and Mrs. E. B. Chace's _Anti-Slavery Reminiscences_.

A small class of books, of which the _Personal Memoirs_ of Daniel
Drayton, and the books by Dr. A. M. Ross and the Rev. Calvin
Fairbank are representatives, are indispensable as sources of
information relating to the abduction of slaves from the South.
The little book entitled _Harriet, the Moses of her People_, in
which that remarkable guide of fugitives, Harriet Tubman, relates
her exploits through the pen of her friend, Mrs. S. H. Bradford,
properly belongs to this group.


4. LETTERS, DIARIES AND SCRAP-BOOKS

The liability of Underground Railroad operators to severe penalties
for harboring runaways explains the dearth of evidence in the form
of letters, diaries and scrap-books they have left behind; such
evidence would have been incriminating. It is known that a few
abolitionists kept diaries and scrap-books and even wrote letters
in regard to the business of the Road, but most of these records
appear to have been destroyed before the beginning of the Civil
War. The author has been able to secure only two or three letters
and the single leaf of a diary in centres where much work was
done. Three scrap-books in the Boston Public Library, containing
memoranda, clippings, handbills, etc., that refer in particular to
the experiences of Theodore Parker, shed much light on the work of
the Vigilance Committee of Boston, and supply important information
in regard to the famous case of Anthony Burns.


5. BIOGRAPHIES AND MEMOIRS

Biographies and memoirs of anti-slavery men not infrequently contain
references to aid rendered to fugitives, explain the motives of the
philanthropists, and give their versions of the fugitive slave cases
that came within their immediate knowledge; such books are often
indices of the public sentiment of the localities in which their
subjects lived, and when read in conjunction with the biographies
of pro-slavery advocates help us to realize the conflicting
interests that expressed themselves in the slavery controversy.
Lydia Maria Child's _Life of Isaac T. Hopper_ has preserved to us
the record of one of the pioneers of the underground movement, while
the biographies of _Gerrit Smith_ and _James and Lucretia Mott_,
show these persons to have been worthy successors of the benign
and shrewd Hopper. In the biographies of John Brown by Redpath,
Hinton and Sanborn, and in the _Life of Harriet Beecher Stowe_, by
her son, Charles E. Stowe, we have proofs of the deep and enduring
impression made by underground experiences upon strong characters
capable of assimilating and transforming these into forces of
historical moment. Chase, Seward and Sumner were among our public
men who acted as counsel for fugitive slaves; it is not surprising
therefore that their biographers have given considerable space to
the consideration of cases with which these men were connected. The
prominence of the statesmen just named and others of their class
as party leaders makes their biographies indispensable in tracing
the political history of the ante-bellum period. Claiborne's _Life
and Correspondence of John A. Quitman_ may properly be named as
an excellent and valuable example of the class of biographies of
prominent men of the South.

A few obituary pamphlets have been gathered, which have proved to
be of some service: such are A. L. Benedict's _Memoir of Richard
Dillingham_, and pamphlets relating to Mr. John Hossack, of Ottawa,
Illinois, and Mr. James M. Westwater, of Columbus, Ohio.


6. SLAVE BIOGRAPHIES AND AUTOBIOGRAPHIES

A recital of the life and sufferings of many  refugees
in books written by themselves or by sympathetic friends, and
published in various free states during the two or three decades
preceding 1860, tended to increase the Northern feeling against
slavery and doubtless also to carry to many minds convictions that
found a partial expression in underground efforts. These books
contain descriptions of slave life on the plantation and tell with
the omission of particulars, which it would have been imprudent
at the time to relate, the story of the escape to liberty. The
omission of these particulars renders these sources of little use
in tracing the secret routes to Canada followed by the refugees, or
in confirming, in part or in whole, the routes of others. In the
case of Frederick Douglass, the gaps and omissions appearing in the
first autobiography are filled with much valuable information in the
second, written after slavery was abolished. The books by Josiah
Henson, the Rev. J. W. Loguen and Austin Steward are interesting as
the narratives of <DW64>s of superior ability who spent a part at
least of their time after self-emancipation in Canada, and could
therefore write intelligently on the condition of their people
there.


7. MATERIALS RELATING TO SLAVERY AND FUGITIVE SLAVES IN CANADA

There is but little material in regard to slavery and fugitive
slaves in Canada. The question of slavery in the provinces is
clearly presented in a few pages of Vol. XXV of the _Magazine of
American History_, while the life of the  refugees in Canada
during the period of immigration and settlement can only be seen in
anything like a sufficient light in Benjamin Drew's _North-Side View
of Slavery_, and Dr. S. G. Howe's _Refugees from Slavery in Canada
West_.


8. STATE, COUNTY AND LOCAL HISTORIES

Many contributions on the Underground Railroad appear in the
collections of historical, biographical and other materials that
make up a large number of our state, county and local histories
so-called. Accounts, which when taken by themselves are fragmentary
and therefore of little importance, have been brought to light by
searching through these histories; and not unnaturally, perhaps,
the largest number have been found in the county histories of Ohio.
Six or seven of these histories afford articles relating to the
Underground Railroad; and characteristic items and incidents have
been printed in both state and local histories besides. Illinois
comes next in the number of contributions preserved in its local
histories. The utmost diligence of the student in the library
alcoves devoted to Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York,
Pennsylvania and Wisconsin, will result in the finding of from one
to three contributions only, as the case may be; while from the
shelves given to Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire and New Jersey, he is
not likely to secure anything to his purpose.


9. REPORTS OF SOCIETIES

The reports of anti-slavery societies, especially those of
Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, are rich in comments upon the
prosecutions in the South of abductors of slaves, and do not fail to
show the effect of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 upon the activity
of Underground Railroad lines. They also tell something of the
missionary work done among the refugees in Canada. In the last-named
respect they are secondary to the _Reports of the Anti-Slavery
Society of Canada_, _the Refugees' Home Society_, and the _Canada
Mission_.

Within the past ten years various societies of the historical type
have been instrumental, directly or indirectly, in the publication
of addresses bearing upon the violation of the Fugitive Slave laws.
A series of lectures before the Political Science Association of
the University of Michigan, several of which involve this theme,
were published in 1889 under the general title, _Constitutional
History of the United States as seen in the Development of American
Law_. A collection of letters and addresses commemorative of the
anti-slavery movement and some of its leaders was printed in 1893
in a book, called _Old Anti-Slavery Days_, by the Danvers (Mass.)
Historical Society. An address on "The Underground Railroad" by
ex-President James H. Fairchild, of Oberlin College, forms _Tract
No. 87_ in Vol. IV. of the publications of the Western Reserve
Historical Society. The best account of the Glover rescue case will
be found in a pamphlet by Mr. Vroman Mason on the _Fugitive Slave
Law in Wisconsin, with Reference to Nullification Sentiment_, issued
in 1895 by the State Historical Society of Wisconsin.


10. RECORDS OF TRIALS

The reader who acquaints himself even superficially with John Codman
Hurd's two volumes, entitled the _Law of Freedom and Bondage in
the United States_, can not fail to be impressed with the value of
legal reports for the study of the great contention over slavery.
Hurd's pages are full of descriptions and discussions of cases in
their judicial bearing, and his foot-notes are largely made up of
references to the published reports of trials.

In the series of these records of trials, one may trace the history
of legal opposition to the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave laws,
note the decision in the Prigg case, by which the efficiency of the
law of 1793 was destroyed, and the Southern demand for a new law
made imperative, mark the clash of state and federal jurisdictions,
and see the growth of the spirit of nullification in the North.
For these purposes, one should consult not only the records of
the Supreme Court and the lower courts, such as _Federal Cases_,
Howard's _Reports_, McLean's _Reports_, _Ohio State Reports_,
_Wisconsin Reports_, etc., but also the various law periodicals, for
example, the _American Law Register_, the _Legal Intelligencer_, and
the _Western Law Journal_. Some important cases have been published
in pamphlet form, while two at least are more minutely set forth in
books; a volume is devoted to the Oberlin-Wellington rescue case,
and several relate to the trial of Anthony Burns.


11. PERIODICALS AND NEWSPAPERS

In marked contrast with the legal reports and law periodicals,
little can be gleaned from the popular magazines of fugitive slave
days. The ethics of resistance to the laws for the recovery of
runaways is discussed in the _North American Review_ for July,
1850, and in the _Democratic Review_, Vol. V, 1851, and incidents
typical of the experience of the underground operator and his
confederates are recited in _Once a Week_ for June, 1862. Careful
and extended search has revealed nothing in the better known
periodicals published during the War and the two decades following.
Recently, however, abolitionists have become retrospective and
reminiscent, and the tales of their midnight adventures in
contravention of those laws of their country which they deemed
subversive of the "higher law" begin to appear in periodicals and
newspapers. For example, the first of a series of stories, which
are founded upon facts, was printed in the _Lake Shore and Home
Magazine_ for July, 1887, an article on the Underground Railroad
appeared in the _Magazine of Western History_ for March, 1887, and
a "symposium" of reminiscences was published in the _Firelands
Pioneer_ for July, 1888. Articles of a miscellaneous nature, in
which points of interest are brought out, have been appearing
in some of the monthly magazines within more recent years, for
instance, in the _Atlantic Monthly_, the _Century Magazine_, and the
_New England Magazine_.

Only vague and rare references to the Underground Railroad and its
workings are made in the newspapers of ante-bellum days, and these
are of little value. The _Liberator_ was fierce in its opposition
to the Fugitive Slave Laws, and contains many stories of fugitives,
but in this, as in less radical newspapers, the editor observed a
discreet silence concerning the secret efforts of his colaborers in
emancipating the bondman. It is necessary, therefore, to rely upon
the long delayed accounts contributed by operators now advanced in
years to the columns of the press. In 1885, interesting articles
were printed in the _Western Star_, of Indiana, and the _New
Lexington_ (Ohio) _Tribune_, and since then, especially since 1890,
many others have been published. These have been patiently gathered,
and form a part of the author's collections.


12. HISTORIES OF RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES

Materials relative to the attitude of various religious
denominations towards slavery are to be found in the histories of
the different church organizations, such as William Hodgson's _The
Society of Friends in the Nineteenth Century_, Dr. H. N. McTyeire's
_History of Methodism_, and Dr. R. E. Thompson's _History of the
Presbyterian Churches in the United States_.

Other works, for example A. C. Applegarth's _Quakers in
Pennsylvania_ and S. B. Weeks' _Southern Quakers and Slavery_,
which, while dealing with a single denomination, are not to be
regarded as denominational histories in any strict sense, contain
points of interest and value.


13. MATERIALS BEARING ON LEGISLATION

The study of our colonial legislation supplies ample proof that the
harboring of the hunted slave early became a source of annoyance
to slave-owners. Laws against this misdemeanor, with curious
penalties attached, are included in the collections of statutes
of various colonies, for example, in the _Laws and Ordinances of
New Netherlands_, the _Maryland Archives_ (Assembly Proceedings),
the _Acts of the Province of New York_, the _Province Laws of
Pennsylvania_, the _Laws of Virginia_, etc. These statutes have been
made accessible through their publication in series of volumes,
a good collection of which may be found in the State Library in
Boston. Among the most important editions are Leaming and Spicer's
collection for New Jersey, Hening's series of Virginia Statutes at
Large, Bacon's collection for Maryland, and Iredell's edition of
South Carolina Statutes.

The history of our national legislation respecting fugitive slaves
may be traced in outline in the _Journals of the Senate and House_.
For the voicing of the need of this legislation, which one would
naturally expect to find in the speeches of members from the
Southern states, one must turn to the _Annals of Congress_, covering
the period from 1789 to 1824, the _Congressional Debates_, for the
period from 1824 to 1837, and the _Congressional Globe_ from 1833
to 1864. The provisions of the Fugitive Slave laws one may find,
of course, in the _Statutes at Large_, and some of the effects of
the law of 1850 may be studied in a pamphlet entitled _The Fugitive
Slave Law and Its Victims_, compiled by Samuel May, Jr., and first
published in 1856. An enlarged edition of this pamphlet was issued
in 1861.


14. CONTEMPORANEOUS AND MODERN BOOKS ON SLAVERY

Under this heading are brought for convenience several different
classes of books on slavery. The first of these classes comprises
the three small volumes, published during the interval from 1816
to 1826, in which immediate emancipation was advocated by the Rev.
George Bourne, the Rev. James Duncan, and the Rev. John Rankin. Our
interest here in the teaching of these men arises primarily from the
circumstance that two of them, at least, are known to have done what
they could to advance the work of the Underground Railroad, while
all of them lived, at the time of the appearance of their books, on
or near the border line over which came the trembling fugitive in
search of freedom.

Another class is made up of volumes descriptive of slavery. Such
are Mrs. Frances A. Kemble's _Journal of a Residence on a Georgian
Plantation in 1836-1839_, Frederick Law Olmsted's _Cotton Kingdom_,
G. M. Weston's _Progress of Slavery in the United States_, and
a book that has but recently come from the press, Edward Ingle's
_Southern Sidelights_.

In a third class must be grouped such recent monographs as Mrs.
Marion G. McDougall's _Fugitive Slaves_, and Miss Mary Tremaine's
_Slavery in the District of Columbia_. The former has been found to
be especially serviceable, not only because of its subject matter,
but also because of its numerous and accurate references and its
long list of notable fugitive slave cases.


15. SECONDARY WORKS

One will seek in vain in the secondary works for an adequate account
of the Underground Railroad, or a proper estimate of its importance,
whether one looks in the general histories of the United States,
such as the works of Von Holst, Schouler, and Rhodes, the more
condensed books of which we have an example in Prof. J. W. Burgess's
_The Middle Period_, or the histories of slavery, like Wilson's
_Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America_, Greeley's _American
Conflict_, Williams' _History of the <DW64> Race_, and Willey's
_History of the Anti-Slavery Cause in State and Nation_. These works
are important for their discussions from different points of view of
the political forces and constitutional questions involved in the
struggle for emancipation, and in general they present descriptions
of the famous contested fugitive slave cases and cases of rescue,
but they have failed, on account of the small amount of evidence
hitherto available, to arrive at a proper view of the political
significance of the underground system.


16. LIBRARIES

While the great mass of evidence that has made this volume possible
was collected by field work, the author did not neglect to search
libraries, both public and private, in the prosecution of his
undertaking. He was able to make use of the public libraries of
Cincinnati, besides the private library of Major E. C. Dawes of that
city, the state library, and the library of Ohio State University at
Columbus, the library of C. M. Burton, Esq., of Detroit, Michigan,
and during two years' residence in Cambridge, Massachusetts, he was
able to avail himself of the splendid collections of anti-slavery
books and pamphlets to be found in the Boston Public Library and
the library of Harvard University. The materials for the chapter
on "Prosecutions of Underground Railroad Men" were gathered in the
Harvard Law Library.




PRINTED COLLECTIONS OF UNDERGROUND RAILROAD INCIDENTS


LEVI COFFIN. Reminiscences of Levi Coffin, the Reputed President
of the Underground Railroad; being a Brief History of the Labors
of a Lifetime in Behalf of the Slave, with the Stories of Numerous
Fugitives, who gained their Freedom through his Instrumentality; and
Many Other Incidents. Second Edition. Cincinnati, 1880.

ASCOTT R. HOPE (a _nom de plume_ for Robert Hope Moncrieff). Heroes
in Homespun, 1894.

H. U. JOHNSON. From Dixie to Canada. Romances and Realities of
the Underground Railroad. (Reprinted from the Lake Shore and Home
Magazine.) Vol. I. Orwell, Ohio, 1894.

REV. W. M. MITCHELL. The Underground Railroad. London, 1860.

EBER M. PETTIT. Sketches in the History of the Underground Railroad;
comprising Many Thrilling Incidents of the Escape of Fugitives from
Slavery, and the Perils of those who aided them. Fredonia, N. Y.,
1879.

R. C. SMEDLEY. History of the Underground Railroad in Chester and
the Neighboring Counties of Pennsylvania. Lancaster, Pa., 1883.

WILLIAM STILL. Underground Railroad Records. Revised Edition. With
a Life of the Author. Narrating the Hardships, Hairbreadth Escapes,
and Death Struggles of the Slaves in their Efforts for Freedom.
Together with Sketches of Some of the Eminent Friends of Freedom,
and Most Liberal Aiders and Advisers of the Road. Hartford, Conn.,
1886.


PERSONAL RECOLLECTIONS

AUSTIN BEARSE. Remembrances of Fugitive Slave Days in Boston.
Boston, 1880. (Pamphlet.)

HENRY THOMAS BUTTERWORTH. Reminiscences and Memories of Henry Thomas
Butterworth and Nancy Irwin Wales, His Wife, with Some Account of
their Golden Wedding. Nov. 3, 1880. Lebanon, Ohio, 1886. (Pamphlet.)

ELIZABETH BUFFUM CHACE. Anti-Slavery Reminiscences. Central Falls.,
R.I., 1891. (Pamphlet.)

JAMES FREEMAN CLARKE. Anti-Slavery Days. A Sketch of the Struggle
which ended in the Abolition of Slavery in the United States. New
York, 1883.

DANIEL DRAYTON. Personal Memoirs, etc., including a Narrative of
the Voyage and Capture of the Schooner _Pearl_. Published by the
American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society. Boston and New York,
1855.

THE REV. CALVIN FAIRBANK. During Slavery Times. How he "Fought
the Good Fight" to Prepare "the Way." Edited from his Manuscript.
Chicago, 1890.

JOSIAH BUSHNELL GRINNELL. Men and Events of Forty Years.
Autobiographical Reminiscences of an Active Career from 1850 to
1890. Boston, 1891.

LAURA S. HAVILAND. A Woman's Life-work: Labors and Experiences of
Laura S. Haviland. Fourth Edition. Chicago, 1889.

SAMUEL J. MAY. Some Recollections of our Anti-Slavery Conflict.
Boston, 1869.

JOSEPH MORRIS. Reminiscences. Richland Township, Marion Co., Ohio.
Date unknown.

A. G. RIDDLE. Recollections of War Times. New York, 1873.

GEORGE W. JULIAN. Political Recollections. 1840-1872. Chicago, 1884.

DR. ALEXANDER MILTON ROSS. Recollections and Experiences of an
Abolitionist. Second Edition. Toronto, 1876.


BIOGRAPHIES AND MEMOIRS

CHARLES FRANCIS ADAMS. Richard Henry Dana. A Biography. 2 Vols. Vol.
I. Boston, 1890.

GEORGE E. BAKER, Editor. The Life of William H. Seward, with
Selections from his Works. 3 Vols. New York, 1853, 1861, 1864.

A. L. BENEDICT. Memoir of Richard Dillingham. Philadelphia, 1852.
(Pamphlet.)

WILLIAM BIRNEY. James G. Birney and his Times. The Genesis of the
Republican Party, with Some Account of Abolition Movements in the
South before 1828. New York, 1890.

JOHN HOWARD BRYANT. Life and Poems. 1894.

LYDIA MARIA CHILD. Isaac T. Hopper: A True Life. Twelfth Thousand.
Boston, 1854.

J. F. H. CLAIBORNE. Life and Correspondence of John A. Quitman. 2
Vols. New York, 1860.

W. G. DESHLER and Others. Memorial on the Death of James M.
Westwater. Published by the Board of Trade, Columbus, Ohio, 1894.
(Pamphlet.)

O. B. FROTHINGHAM. Life of Gerrit Smith. New York, 1878.

WENDELL PHILLIPS GARRISON and FRANCIS JACKSON GARRISON. William
Lloyd Garrison, 1805-1879: The Story of his Life, told by his
Children. 4 Vols. 8vo. New York, 1885.

MRS. ANNA D. HALLOWELL. James and Lucretia Mott. Life and Letters.
Boston, 1884.

REV. D. HEAGLE. The Great Anti-Slavery Agitator, Hon. Owen Lovejoy
as a Gospel Minister, with a Collection of his Sayings in Congress.
Princeton, Ill., 1886. (Pamphlet.)

RICHARD J. HINTON. John Brown and his Men, with Some Account of the
Roads they traveled to reach Harper's Ferry. New York, 1894.

In Memoriam. John Hossack. Deceased Nov. 8, 1891. (Reprinted from
the Republican Times,) Ottawa, Ill., 1892. (Pamphlet.)

OLIVER JOHNSON. William Lloyd Garrison and his Times. Boston, 1880.

GEORGE W. JULIAN. Life of Joshua R. Giddings. Chicago, 1892.

Memoir of Jervis Langdon, Elmira, N.Y. (Pamphlet.)

J. C. LEGGETT. Oration. Ceremonies attendant upon the Unveiling of
a Bronze Bust and Granite Monument of Rev. John Rankin. (Ripley,
Ohio), 1892. (Pamphlet.)

THOMAS J. MUMFORD, Editor. Memoir of S. J. May. Boston, 1873.

JOHN G. NICOLAY and JOHN HAY. Abraham Lincoln. A History. Vol. III.
New York, 1890.

C. C. OLIN. A Complete Record of the John Olin Family. Indianapolis,
1893.

MRS. L. D. PARKER. Scrap-book containing Newspaper Clippings, etc.,
relating to Theodore Parker and Others. Boston Public Library.

THEODORE PARKER. Scrap-book collection, with Hand-bills and his own
Manuscript relating to Anthony Burns. Boston Public Library.

E. L. PIERCE. Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner. 4 Vols. Vols.
III and IV. Boston, 1877-1893.

FLORENCE and H. CORDELIA RAY. Sketch of the Life of Rev. Charles B.
Ray. New York, 1887. (?)

JAMES REDPATH. The Public Life of Captain John Brown, with an
Autobiography of his Childhood and Youth. Boston, 1860.

F. B. SANBORN. The Life and Letters of John Brown, Liberator of
Kansas, and Martyr of Virginia. Boston, 1885.

---- ----. Dr. S. G. Howe, The Philanthropist. New York, 1891.

J. W. SCHUCKERS. The Life and Public Services of Salmon Portland
Chase, United States Senator, and Governor of Ohio; Secretary of the
Treasury, and Chief Justice of the United States. New York, 1874.

F. W. SEWARD. Seward at Washington, as Senator and Secretary of
State. 2 Vols. New York, 1891.

C. E. STOWE. Life of Harriet Beecher Stowe: compiled from her
Letters and Journals. Boston, 1889.

MISS C. C. THAYER. Two Scrap-books relating to Theodore Parker.
Boston Public Library.

ROBERT B. WARDEN. An Account of the Private Life and Public Services
of Samuel Portland Chase. Cincinnati, 1874.

JOHN WEISS. Life and Correspondence of Theodore Parker. 2 Vols. New
York, 1864.


SLAVE BIOGRAPHIES AND AUTOBIOGRAPHIES

W. I. BOWDITCH. The Rendition of Anthony Burns. Boston, 1850.

SARAH H. BRADFORD. Harriet, The Moses of Her People. New York, 1886.

Boston Slave Riot and Trial of Anthony Burns. Boston, 1854.

WILLIAM W. BROWN. Narrative of William W. Brown. A Fugitive Slave.
Second Edition. Boston, 1848.

FREDERICK DOUGLASS. My Bondage and My Freedom. Part I.--Life as a
Slave. Part II.--Life as a Freeman. With an Introduction by Dr.
James M'Cune Smith. New York and Auburn, 1855.

---- ----. Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, Written by himself.
His Early Life as a Slave, His Escape from Bondage, and His Complete
History to the Present Time. With an Introduction by Mr. George L.
Ruffin, of Boston. Hartford, Conn., 1881.

JOSIAH HENSON. Life of Josiah Henson, formerly a Slave, now an
Inhabitant of Canada, as narrated by himself. Preface by T. Binney.
Boston, 1849.

---- ----. Story of His Own Life with an Introduction by Mrs. H. B.
Stowe. Boston, 1858.

REV. J. W. LOGUEN. As a Slave and as a Freeman. Syracuse, N.Y., 1859.

MRS. K. E. R. PICKARD. The Kidnapped and Ransomed. Personal
Reflections of Peter Still and his Wife Vina after Forty Years of
Slavery. Syracuse, N.Y., 1856.

CHARLES STEARNS. Narrative of Henry Box Brown, who escaped from
Slavery enclosed in a Box 3 feet long and 2 wide, written from a
Statement of Facts made by Himself. 1849.

CHARLES EMERY STEVENS. Anthony Burns. A History. Boston. 1856.

AUSTIN STEWARD. Twenty-two Years a Slave, and Forty Years a Freeman;
Embracing a Correspondence of Several Years, While President of
Wilberforce Colony, London, Canada West. Rochester, N.Y., 1857.


MATERIALS RELATING TO SLAVERY AND FUGITIVE SLAVES IN CANADA

GEORGE BRYCE. Short History of the Canadian People. London, 1887.

JOHN CHARLES DENT. The Last Forty Years, Canada Since the Union of
1841. Vol. I, 1881.

BENJAMIN DREW. A North-Side View of Slavery: The Refugee, or the
Narratives of Fugitive Slaves in Canada related by Themselves, with
an Account of the History and Conditions of the <DW52> Population
of Upper Canada. Boston, 1856.

J. C. HAMILTON. Slavery in Canada. Magazine of American History,
Vol. XXV.

SAMUEL G. HOWE. The Refugees from Slavery in Canada West. Report to
Freedman's Inquiry Committee. Boston, 1864.

JOHN M. MCMULLEN. History of Canada. 2 Vols. Vol. II, 1892.


STATE, COUNTY, AND LOCAL HISTORIES


Illinois.

A. T. ANDREAS. History of Chicago from the Earliest Period to the
Present Time. Chicago, 1884.

S. J. CLARKE. History of McDonough County, Ill. Springfield, Ill.,
1878.

History of Knox County, Ill.; with Record of its Volunteers in the
late War, Portraits, Biographical Sketches, History of Illinois,
etc. Chicago, 1878.

EDWARD G. MASON. Early Chicago and Illinois. Chicago, 1890.

GEORGE H. WOODRUFF. Forty Years Ago. A Contribution to the Early
History of Joliet, and Will County, Ill. 1874.

---- ----. History of Will County, Ill. 1878.


Indiana.

History of Henry County, Ind.

History of Wayne County, Ind., from its First Settlement to the
Present Time; with numerous Biographical and Family Sketches.
Cincinnati, 1872.


Iowa.

L. P. ALLEN and Others. The History of Clinton County, Iowa,
containing a History of the County, its Cities, Towns, etc. Chicago,
1879.


Massachusetts.

LEONARD BOLLES ELLIS. History of New Bedford and its Vicinity,
1602-1892. Syracuse, N.Y., 1892.

MASON A. GREEN. Springfield, (Mass.) 1836-1886. History of Town and
City, including an Account of the Quarter-Millennial Celebration.
Issued by the Authority and Direction of the City. Springfield, 1888.

JOSEPH MARSH. Article on "The Underground Railway," in the History
of Florence, Mass.


Michigan.

SILAS FARMER. Article on "Slavery and the <DW52> Race," in the
History of Detroit and Michigan. Detroit, 1884.

E. G. RUST. Calhoun County (Mich.) Business Directory. For
1869-1870. Together with a History of the County. Battle Creek,
Mich., 1869.


New York.

GEORGE ROGERS HOWELL and JONATHAN TENNY, Editors, assisted by Local
Writers. Bi-Centennial History of Albany, N.Y., with Portraits and
Biographies and Illustrations. New York, 1886.

BENSON JOHN LOSSING. The Empire State. A Compendious History of the
Commonwealth of New York. Hartford, Conn., 1888.

ANDREW W. YOUNG. History of the Town of Warsaw, New York. Buffalo,
1869.


Ohio.

History of Ashtabula County, Ohio; with Illustrations and
Biographical Sketches of its Pioneers and Most Prominent Men.
Philadelphia, Williams Bros., 1878. Article on the Underground
Railroad contributed by S. D. Peet.

ALEXANDER BLACK. The Story of Ohio. Boston, 1888.

REV. HENRY BUSHNELL. The History of Granville, Licking Co., Ohio.
Columbus, 1889.

JAMES H. FAIRCHILD. Oberlin--The Colony and the College. Oberlin,
Ohio, 1883.

History of Franklin and Pickaway Counties, Ohio.

History of Geauga and Lake Counties, Ohio, with Illustrations and
Biographical Sketches of its Pioneers and Most Prominent Men.
Philadelphia, Williams Bros., 1878.

HENRY HOWE. Historical Collections of Ohio. 3 Vols. Columbus, 1891.

RUFUS KING. Ohio, First Fruits of the Ordinance of 1787. Boston and
New York, 1888.

ALFRED E. LEE. History of the City of Columbus. New York and
Chicago, 1892. Chapter XXXI, by Leander J. Critchfield, on "Bench
and Bar."

W. H. MCINTOSH and Others. The History of Darke County, Ohio:
containing a History of the County; its Cities, Towns, etc. Chicago,
1880.

WILLIAM T. MARTIN. History of Franklin County. Columbus, Ohio, 1858.

History of Medina County, Ohio.

J. R. SHIPHERD. History of the Oberlin-Wellington Rescue, with an
Introduction by Prof. Henry C. Peck and Hon. Ralph Plum. Boston,
1859.

JACOB H. STUDER. Columbus, Ohio; Its History, Resources, and
Progress. Columbus, 1873.

History of Summit County, Ohio.

History of Washington County, Ohio, with Illustrations and
Biographical Sketches. H. Z. Williams and Bros., Publishers.
Cleveland, Ohio, 1881.


Pennsylvania.

J. SMITH FUTHEY and GILBERT COPE. History of Chester County, Pa.,
with Genealogical and Biographical Sketches. Philadelphia, 1881.


Wisconsin.

C. W. BUTTERFIELD and Others. History of Waukesha County, Wis.;
preceded by a History of Wisconsin. Chicago, 1880.

R. G. THWAITES. The Story of Wisconsin. Boston, 1891.


PERIODICALS

F. BOWEN. Extradition of Fugitive Slaves. North American Review,
Vol. LXXI, July, 1850.

S. E. B. Fugitive Slaves in Ohio. Once a Week, Vol. VI, June 14,
1862.

RICHARD BURTON. The Author of Uncle Tom's Cabin. Century Magazine,
1896.

THOMAS E. CHAMPION. The Underground Railroad and One of its
Operators. The Canadian Magazine of Politics, Science, Art and
Literature, May, 1895.

GEORGE WILLIS COOKE. Article on Harriet Beecher Stowe. New England
Magazine, September, 1896.

Fugitive Slave Law; Shall it be Enforced? The Democratic Review,
Vol. V, 1851.

ARCHIBALD H. GRIMKE. Anti-Slavery Boston. New England Magazine,
December, 1890.

THOMAS WENTWORTH HIGGINSON. Cheerful Yesterdays. Atlantic Monthly,
March, 1897.

G. W. E. HILL. Underground Railroad Adventures. The Midland Monthly
Magazine, Des Moines, Iowa, 1895.

JOHN HUTCHINS. The Underground Railroad. Magazine of Western
History, Cleveland, Ohio, March, 1887.

H. U. JOHNSON. Romances and Realities of the Underground Railroad.
Lake Shore and Home Magazine, July, 1885 to May, 1888.

LIDA ROSE MCCABE. The Oberlin-Wellington Rescue. Godey's Magazine,
October, 1896.

H. F. PADEN. Underground Railroad Reminiscences. Firelands Pioneer,
Norwalk, Ohio, July, 1888.

WILBUR H. SIEBERT. The Underground Railroad for the Liberation
of Fugitive Slaves. Annual Report of the American Historical
Association for 1895.

---- ----. Light on the Underground Railroad, with Map. American
Historical Review, April, 1896.

RUSH R. SLOANE. The Underground Railroad of the Firelands. Firelands
Pioneer, July, 1888.

G. T. STEWART. The Ohio Fugitive Slave Law. Firelands Pioneer, July,
1888.

NINA MOORE TIFFANY. Stories of the Fugitive Slaves. New England
Magazine, (William and Ellen Craft) January, 1890; (Shadrach) May,
1890; (Sims) June, 1890; (Anthony Burns) July, 1890.

CHARLES DUDLEY WARNER. The Story of Uncle Tom's Cabin. Atlantic
Monthly, September, 1896.

LILLIE B. C. WYMAN. Black and White [Margaret Garner]. New England
Magazine, N. S., Vol. V; Harriet Tubman. _Ibid._, March, 1896.

CAPTAIN C. WOODRUFF. Some Experiences in Abolition Times. Firelands
Pioneer, July, 1888.


NEWSPAPERS

Andover Old and New. Boston _Evening Transcript_, May 16, 1896.

PHILIP ATKINSON. Anecdotes of Owen Lovejoy. New York _Weekly
Witness_, Oct. 2, 1895.

AARON BENEDICT. The Underground Railroad. _Sentinel_, Mt. Gilead,
Ohio, July 13, 20, 27, Aug. 3, 10, 1893.

ROBERT W. CARROLL. An Underground Railway. Cincinnati _Times-Star_,
Aug. 19, 1890.

The Cleveland Fugitive Slave Case. Cleveland _Herald_, 1861.

NATHAN COGGESHALL. Reminiscences of the "Underground R. R."
_Leader_, Marion, Ind., Feb. 15, 1896.

JUDGE JOSEPH COX. Early Cincinnati. Cincinnati _Times-Star_, Feb. 6,
1891.

MARY E. CROCKER. The Fugitive Slave Law and its Workings. Fitchburg
(Mass.) _Daily Sentinel_, Oct. 31, 1893.

E. C. DAWES. Some Local History. Marietta (Ohio) _Tri-Weekly
Register_, Aug. 30, 1890.

TERESA DEAN. White City Chips. _Daily Inter-Ocean_, Chicago, 1893.

J. M. DONNOHUE. The Underground Railroad. _Banner Times_,
Greencastle (Ind.), Dec. 16, 1895.

Exploits of Calvin Fairbank. _Illustrated Buffalo Express_, Jan. 29,
1893.

Fight for Freedom. _Pittsburgh Dispatch_, Feb. 13, 1898.

MRS. J. M. FITCH. The Rescue of a Slave [Oberlin-Wellington Rescue
Case]. New York _Sun_, April 7, 1895.

W. B. FYFFE. A History of Anti-Slavery Days and Afterwards. Pontiac
(Ill.) _Sentinel_, 1890-1891.

WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON. _The Liberator_.

MARIANNA GIBBONS. In Slavery Days. Lewiston _Gazette_, reprinted in
Bedford (Pa.) _Enquirer_. Date unknown.

Glorious Old Thief [Calvin Fairbank]. Chicago _Tribune_, Jan. 29,
1893.

THOMAS L. GRAY. Underground Railroad. New Lexington (Ohio)
_Tribune_, October, 1885, February 1886.

JOSIAH HARTZELL. And Milly and Martha were Free; a True Story of the
Underground Railway of Later Slavery Days. Cleveland _Leader_, Feb.
16, 1896.

Helped Many Slaves; William Cratty talks of Underground Railroad
Days. Chicago _Evening Post_, July 18, 1893.

E. HUFTELEN. Local History; The Underground Railroad of Forty Years
Ago. _Spirit of the Times_, Batavia, Genesee County, N.Y., Feb. 8,
1896.

---- ----. The Underground Railroad. Some of its Early History, by
a Le Roy Man. (Same as the preceding article.) Le Roy _Gazette_,
Genesee County, N.Y., Feb. 26, 1896.

M. E. H. A Reminiscence of Slave Times. Miami (Ohio) _Union_, April
10, 1895.

WILLIAM T. KELLEY. Underground R. R. Reminiscences. _Friends'
Intelligencer and Journal_, Fourth Month 2, 9, Fifth Month 28, 1898.

JOHN KENNEDY. Local History. Batavia _Times_, Genesee County, N.Y.,
Feb. 15, 1896.

GEORGE S. MCDOWELL. Uncle Tom's Cabin; Originals of Some of the
Characters in the Great Book. Cincinnati _Commercial Gazette_. Date
unknown.

DR. EDWARD H. MAGILL. When Men Were Sold; the Underground Railroad
in Bucks County. _The Bucks County_ (Pa.) _Intelligencer_, Feb. 3,
1898. The same in _Friends' Intelligencer and Journal_, Second Month
19, 26, Third Month 5, 12, 1898.

---- ----. Underground Railroad Additions. _Friends' Intelligencer
and Journal_, Fourth Month 16, 1898.

CHARLES MERRICK. Reminiscences of the Jerry Rescue. _Northern
Christian Advocate_, Nov. 15, 1893.

J. B. NAYLOR. A Spike From the Underground Railway. Ohio _Farmer_,
Aug. 1, 8, 1895. Signed, S. Q. Lapius.

DAVID NEWPORT. Fugitive Slaves. _Friends' Intelligencer and
Journal_, Sixth Month 11, 1898.

MRS. J. F. NICHOLSON. Memoirs of Long Ago. _Western Star_ (Ind.),
Dec. 10, 1885.

An Old House with a Wonderful History. Marysville (Ohio), _Tribune_,
May 17, 1893.

DOUGLAS P. PUTNAM. A Station on the Old Underground Railroad.
Marietta (Ohio) _Register_, Oct. 25, 1894.

Recollections of the "Underground Railroad" of Antebellum Days.
Felicity (Ohio) _Times_, July 6, 1893.

Reminiscences of Slavery. Marietta (Ohio) _Daily Register_, Jan. 12,
1895.

CARLTON RICE. Reminiscent. _Oneida_, Madison County, N.Y., May 16,
20, 23, 1896.

L. L. RICE. Lewis and Milton Clark. Geneva (Ohio) _Times_, Sept. 14,
1892.

A. M. ROSS. A Democratic Abolitionist. Somerset (Pa.) _Standard_,
Jan. 31, 1896.

The Semi-Centennial of the First Church. Galesburg (Ill.)
_Republican Register_, March 5, 1887.

JOHN SHEARER. Old Uncle Joe Mayo. Marysville (Ohio) _Tribune_, April
27, 1881.

Sketches of the Life of Carver Tomlinson; assisted in the Great
"Underground Railroad." _Lostant Reporter_ (La Salle Co., Ill.),
Aug. 10, 1896.

Slavery Days Recalled. Detroit _Free Press_, Jan. 24, 1893.

In Slavery Days. New Castle (Ind.) _Daily News_, March 5, 1897.

Slave Raid. Story of the _Pearl_ Expedition. Interesting Episode
of Antebellum Days. The Failure of the Affair. Some Very Exciting
Scenes. From the Washington Post, reprinted in the Cincinnati
_Enquirer_, Sept. 14, 1895.

GILES B. STEBBINS. Thomas Garrett. Detroit _Post_, 1871.

Stories of Runaway Slaves. Detroit _Sunday News-Tribune_, Aug. 12,
1894.

Stories of Runaway Slaves. From Detroit _Sunday News-Tribune_,
reprinted in Louisville (Ky.) _Sunday Morning Journal_, Aug. 12,
1894.

Story of Calvin Fairbank. Cincinnati _Commercial Gazette_, March 18,
1893.

JAMES STOUT. A Bit of History; the Rescue of the Slave, Jim Gray, in
1859. Pontiac _Sentinel_, Livingston Co., Ill, 1890.

REV. JOHN TODD. Reminiscences of the Early Settlement and Growth of
Western Iowa. Tabor (Iowa) _Beacon_, 1890-1891.

E. HICKS TRUEBLOOD. Reminiscences of the Underground Railroad.
_Republican Leader_, Salem, Ind., Nov. 17, Dec. 1, 1893, Jan. 26,
Feb. 2, 23, March 2, 16, 23, April 6, 27, 1894.

JOHN W. TUTTLE and F. P. AMES. Reminiscences of Slavery. Marietta
(Ohio) _Register_, 1893-1894. Four articles.

Two Good Men. Sketch of the Lives of John B. Tolman and S. Silsbee;
Reminiscences of the Underground Railroad. Lynn (Mass.) _Daily
Evening Item_, Dec. 19. Year unknown.

The Underground Railroad. Chicago _Inter-Ocean Curiosity Shop_,
1881, 1884.

The Underground Railroad. From a History of Hancock County, dated
1880. _La Harper_, Hancock Co., Ill., April 3, 1896.

The Underground Railroad. Ohio _State Journal_, Nov. 14, 1894.

James M. Westwater, Pioneer Merchant and Friend of the Oppressed.
Columbus (Ohio) _Dispatch_, Feb. 21, 1894.

Where Harriet Beecher Stowe witnessed the Scenes depicted in her
Uncle Tom's Cabin. Cincinnati _Enquirer_ (Supplement), Nov. 3, 1895.

RUFUS R. WILSON. Exploits of Calvin Fairbank. _Illustrated Buffalo
Express_, Jan. 29, 1893.

Joel Wood. Noticed in the Martin's Ferry (Ohio) _Evening Times_, May
2, 1892.


MATERIALS BEARING ON LEGISLATION

Acts and Laws of His Majestie's Colony of Connecticut, 239 (1730?).

Maryland Archives, Assembly Proceedings, 147, May, 1666.

Charters and Laws of the Colony and Province of Massachusetts Bay,
750, October, 1718.

New Jersey Laws, 82, May 30, 1668.

Laws and Ordinances of New Netherlands, 32, Aug. 7, 1640; 32, April
13, 1642; 104, Oct. 6, 1648.

Laws of New Netherlands, 344, April 9, 1658.

Acts of Province of New York from 1691 to 1718; 58, 1702.

Acts of Province of New York, 77, 1705; 218, 1715.

Laws of North Carolina, 89, 1741; 371, 1779.

Province Laws of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1725; Province Laws of
Pennsylvania, 325 (1726?).

Plymouth Colony Records, IX, 5, Aug. 29, 1643. (Fugitive Slave
Clause of the Articles of Confederation.)

Records of Colony of Rhode Island, 177, Oct. 27, 1714.

Hening, Laws of Virginia, I, 401, March, 1655-1656; II, 239,
October, 1666; II, October, 1705; IV, 168, May, 1726.

Annals of Congress, 1789-1824.

THOMAS HART BENTON. Abridgment of the Debates of Congress from 1789
to 1856. 16 Vols. Washington, 1857-1861.

Congressional Debates, 1824-1837.

Congressional Globe, 1833-(1873).

Journals (House and Senate).

SAMUEL MAY, JR. The Fugitive Slave Law and Its Victims. New York,
1856. Enlarged Edition, N.Y., 1861.

J. H. MERRIAM. Legislative History of the Ordinance of 1787.
Worcester, 1888.

Niles' Weekly Register, September, 1828, to March, 1829. Vol. XXXV.

JOEL PARKER. Personal Liberty Laws, and Slavery in the Territories
(pamphlet). Boston, 1861.

Statutes at Large.

GEORGE M. STROUD. A Sketch of the Laws relating to Slavery in the
Several States of America. Second Edition with Alterations and
Considerable Additions. Philadelphia, 1856.

HENRY WILSON. History of the Antislavery Measures of the
Thirty-seventh and Thirty-eighth United States Congresses,
1861-1864. Boston, 1864.


CONTEMPORANEOUS AND MODERN BOOKS ON SLAVERY

REV. GEORGE BOURNE. The Book and Slavery Irreconcilable.
Philadelphia, 1816.--A summary of this book by Wm. Orland Bourne,
under the title "Anti-Slavery Leaders; the Pioneer Abolitionist."
_Boston Commonwealth_, July 25, 1885.

WILLIAM CHAMBERS. American Slavery and Colour. London, 1857.

EZRA B. CHASE. Teachings of Patriots and Statesmen, or the "Founders
of the Republic" on Slavery. Philadelphia, 1860.

JOHN NELSON DAVIDSON. <DW64> Slavery in Wisconsin. Address delivered
before the State Historical Society of Wisconsin, December, 1892.

REV. JAMES DUNCAN. A Treatise on Slavery, in which is shown forth
the Evil of Slaveholding, both from the Light of Nature and Divine
Revelation. Vevay, Ind., 1824.

WILLIAM GOODELL. Slavery and Anti-Slavery; a History of the Great
Struggle in Both Hemispheres; with a view of the Slavery Question in
the United States. New York, 1852.

EDWARD INGLE. Southern Sidelights; a Picture of Social and Economic
Life in the South a Generation before the War. New York, 1896.

FRANCIS ANNE KEMBLE. Journal of a Residence on a Georgian Plantation
in 1836-1839. New York, 1863.

MARION GLEASON MCDOUGALL. Fugitive Slaves (1619-1865). Fay House
Monographs, No. 3. Boston, 1891.

FREDERICK LAW OLMSTED. The Cotton Kingdom. 2 Vols. New York, 1861.

REV. JOHN RANKIN. Letters on American Slavery addressed to Mr.
Thomas Rankin, Merchant at Middlebrook, Augusta County, Virginia.
(First published in 1826.) Fifth edition. Boston, 1838.

J. B. ROBINSON. Pictures of Slavery and Anti-Slavery; Advantages of
<DW64> Slavery and the Benefits of <DW64> Freedom. Philadelphia, 1863.

HARRIET BEECHER STOWE. A Key to Uncle Tom's Cabin, presenting the
Original Facts and Documents upon which the Story is founded,
together with Corroborative Statements verifying the Truth of the
Work. Boston, 1853.

MARY TREMAIN. Slavery in the District of Columbia; the Policy of
Congress and the Struggle for Abolition. New York, 1892.

G. M. WESTON. Progress of Slavery in the United States. Washington,
D.C., 1858.


REPORTS OF SOCIETIES

Annual Reports presented to the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society
by its Board of Managers. See Reports 13, 15, 18, 19.

Annual Reports of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society.

DANVERS HISTORICAL SOCIETY. Old Anti-Slavery Days. Proceedings of
the Commemorative Meeting held by the Danvers Historical Society at
the Town Hall, Danvers, April 26, 1893; with Introduction, Letters,
and Sketches. Danvers, Mass., 1893.

JAMES H. FAIRCHILD. The Underground Railroad. Tract No. 87 in Vol.
IV. Western Reserve Historical Society. An Address delivered for the
Society in Association Hall, Cleveland, Ohio, Jan. 24, 1895.

First Annual Report presented to the Anti-Slavery Society of Canada
by its Executive Committee. Toronto, March 24, 1852.

VROMAN MASON. The Fugitive Slave Law in Wisconsin, with Reference to
the Nullification Sentiment. State Historical Society of Wisconsin,
1895.

REFUGEES' HOME SOCIETY. Report of Committee. Winsor, 1852.

HENRY WADE ROGERS, Editor. Constitutional History of the United
States as seen in the Development of American Law. Lectures before
the Political Science Association of the University of Michigan. New
York, 1889.

Seventh Annual Report of the Canada Mission. Rochester, N.Y.


HISTORIES OF RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES

A. C. APPLEGARTH, Ph.D. Quakers in Pennsylvania. Baltimore, 1892.

WILLIAM HODGSON. The Society of Friends in the Nineteenth Century; a
Historical View of the Successive Convulsions and Schisms during the
Period. Vol. II. Philadelphia, 1875.

HOLLAND N. MCTYEIRE, D.D. History of Methodism; with some Account
of the Doctrine and Polity of the Episcopal Methodism in the United
States down to 1884. Nashville, Tenn., 1887.

WILLIAM B. SPRAGUE, D.D. Annals of the American Pulpit.

PROFESSOR A. C. THOMAS. The Society of Friends. In Vol. XII of the
American Church History Series. 1894.

ROBERT E. THOMPSON, D.D. History of the Presbyterian Churches in the
United States. American Church History Series, New York, 1895.

STEPHEN B. WEEKS, Ph.D. Southern Quakers and Slavery; a Study in
Institutional History. Baltimore, 1896.


SECONDARY WORKS

JOHN W. BURGESS. The Middle Period, 1817-1858. New York, 1897.

JAMES FORD RHODES. History of the United States from the Compromise
of 1850. 3 Vols. New York, 1893.

JAMES SCHOULER. History of the United States under the Constitution.
Vols. III, IV, V. Washington, 1880. New York, 1880-1891.

H. E. VON HOLST. Constitutional and Political History of the United
States. Chicago, 1877-1892.

REV. AUSTIN WILLEY. The History of the Anti-Slavery Cause in State
and Nation. Portland, Maine, 1886.

GEORGE W. WILLIAMS. History of the <DW64> Race in America from 1619
to 1880. 2 Vols. New York, 1883.

HENRY WILSON. History of the Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in
America. 3 Vols. Boston, 1872-1877.

J. S. WALTON and M. G. BRUMBAUGH. Stories of Pennsylvania. New York,
1897.

WOODROW WILSON. Division and Reunion, 1829-1889. New York, 1893.


IMAGINATIVE WORKS

HARRIET BEECHER STOWE. Uncle Tom's Cabin.

J. M. C. SIMPSON. The Emancipation Car, being an Original
Composition of Anti-Slavery Ballads, composed exclusively for the
Underground Railroad. Janesville, Ohio, 1874.

CHARLES HUMPHREY ROBERTS. Down the Ohio (a work of fiction,
containing scenes from the Underground Railroad). Chicago, 1891.

JOHN GREENLEAF WHITTIER. Poetical Works (anti-slavery poems printed
in Vol. III of the Riverside edition). Boston, 1896.




APPENDIX E

DIRECTORY OF THE NAMES OF UNDERGROUND RAILROAD OPERATORS

ARRANGED ALPHABETICALLY BY STATES AND COUNTIES[989]

  [989] The names of  operators are marked with a +.


CONNECTICUT

_Fairfield_

Daskam, Benjamin Jas.

_Litchfield_

  Blakeslee, Dea. Joel.
  Bull, Wm.
  Dunbar, Dea. Ferrand.

_Middlesex_

Reed, Dea. George.

_Windham_

  Alexander, Prosper.
  Brown, Benjamin.
  Brown, John.
  Conant, J. A.
  Fox, Joel.
  Griffin, Ebeneser.
  Lewis, J. A.
  Pearl, Phillips.


DELAWARE

_Queen Anne_

Hardcastle, Wm.

_Wilmington_

  Flint, Isaac S.
  Garrett, Thomas.
  Hunn, John.
  Walker, Joseph G.
  Webb, Benjamin.
  Webb, Thomas.
  Webb, Wm.


ILLINOIS

_Adams_

  Andrew, Lewis.
  Baldwin, Eben.
  Ballard, Dea.
  Barnet, Berryman.
  Bartholomew, Darwin.
  Battell, Wm.
  Benton, Erastus.
  Brown, Dea.
  Burns, Capt. John.
  Burr.
  Chapin, John.
  Chittenden, Henry.
  Clark, Nathan.
  Eells, Dr. Richard.
  Fowler. W. E.
  Griffin, Ed.
  Hammond, Julius.
  Hart, Martin.
  Hubbard, Jonathan.
  Hunter, Andrew.
  Hunter, George.
  Kirby, Rev. Wm.
  Mullen, Wm.
  Nelson, Dr. David.
  Platt, Dea. Josiah.
  Platt, Enoch.
  Platt, H. D.
  Platt, I.
  Reynard, John.
  Reynolds, L. E.
  Safford.
  Sartle, Rasselas.
  Stillman, Henry.
  Stillman, Levi.
  Stillman, S. O.
  Thompson, George.
  Turner, Edward.
  Van Dorn, John K.
  Van Dorn, Wm.
  Weed, Dea. L. A.
  Wickwire, James.
  Wilcox, L. H.
  Work, Alanson.

_Alexander_

Burroughs, George L.

_Bond_

  Davis, Bloomfield.
  Harnard, Rev.
  Hunt, N. A.
  Leeper, John.
  McCord, David.
  McCord, Robert.
  McLain.
  Rosber, Ed.
  Rosebrough, James.
  Wafer.
  Wood, Charles.

_Bureau_

  Bryant, Arthur.
  Bryant, Cyrus.
  Bryant, John Howard.
  Clark, Daniel.
  Clark, Seth C.
  Collins.
  Cook, Dea. Caleb.
  Foster.
  Frary, Roderick B.
  Hall, George.
  Hall, John.
  Hart, Dr. Langley.
  Holbrook, Dea. J. T.
  Lovejoy, Owen G.
  Mather, Benj.
  Phelps, Charles.
  Pilkerton, Wm.
  Reeve, Dea.
  Stannard.
  Weldon, John.
  Wells, Dea.
  Wilson.

_Cook_

  Blanchard, President.
  Bliss.
  Carpenter, Philo.
  Collins, James H.
  Crandall.
  Dyer, Dr. C. V.
  Eastman, Hon. Z.
  Farnsworth, Col.
  Johnson, J.
  Kellogg, H. H.
  Paine, Seth.
  Phillips, W. I.
  Pinkerton, Allen.
  Stoddard, J. P.
  Webster, Prof.
  Weiblen, John G.

_Dupage_

Fowler, Dea.

_Fulton_

  Birge, Luther.
  Dobbins.
  Field, H. H.
  Lyman, Dea.
  Marsh, Rev. M.
  Miles, Freeman.
  Thomas, A. B.
  Wickwire.
  Wilson, Eli.

_Hancock_

  Adkins family.
  Austin, Strong.
  Burton, Dea.
  Cook, L. A.
  Cook, Marcus.
  Maynard, Louis Calvin.
  Wilcox, L. L.

_Henderson_

Thomson, John.

_Henry_

  Allen, James M.
  Allen, Wm. S.
  Allen, Wm. T.
  Bernard.
  Buck, Dea.
  Jones, Elder.
  McFarlane.
  Pomeroy, Dr.
  Stewart, E. M.
  Stewart, Roderick R.
  Ward, Dea.
  Wilcox.

_Jersey_

  Carter, Ebenezer.
  French, Josiah.
  Garesche.
  Henderson, Ben.
  Snedeker.
  White, Hiram.
  Wolcott, Elihu.

_Kane_

  Fitch, Ira H.
  Johnson, Dea. Reuben.
  Mighels, Ezekiel.
  Pierce, Thomas.
  Root, Dr.
  Strong, Dea.
  Wagner, John.

_Kendall_

Whitney, Dea. Isaac.

_Knox_

  Blanchard.
  Camp, C. F.
  Child, E.
  Cross, Rev. John.
  Davis, George.
  Hitchcock, Samuel.
  Kimball, Solon.
  Neeley.
  Powell, Hod.
  West, John.
  West, Nehemiah.

_La Salle_

  Brown.
  Butler, Benj.
  Campbell.
  Carter, Wm.
  + Freeman.
  Fyfe, George.
  Gooding, Dr.
  Hard, Dr. Chester.
  Hart.
  Hossack, H. L.
  Hossack, John.
  Kelsy, Levi.
  King, Claudius B.
  Lewis, Samuel R.
  McLaughlin.
  Stout, James.
  Stout, Joseph.
  Strawn, Hon. Wm.

_Lee_

Towne.

_Livingston_

  Croswell, Dr. James.
  Fyfe, W. B.
  Hinman, Rev. H. H.
  Richardson, Otis.

_McDonough_

Blazer, John.

_McHenry_

Russel.

_McLean_

Moss, Dea.

_Marshall_

  Bell, John.
  Ranney, Joel.
  Stone.

_Mercer_

  Carnahan, David.
  Carnahan, John.
  Carnahan, Wm. M.
  Cowden, John.
  Graham, J. C.
  Higgins, Dr.
  Hill, James.
  Hoagland, Henry.
  Markham, S. A.
  Sample, John.

_Montgomery_

  Bryce, Robert.
  Merritt, W. W.

_Morgan_

  Chamberlain, Timothy.
  Jackson, Rev. Andrew W.
  Miller, Henry M.

_Ogle_

  Bogue, Virgil A.
  Gammell, Rev. George.
  Perkins, Dea. Timothy.
  Shaver, Solomon.
  Waterbury, Dea. John.

_Peoria_

  Brown, Edwin R.
  Huey, Virgil.
  Pratts, Jonathan.
  Webster, W. W.
  Wright, S. G.

_Putnam_

  Childs.
  Lewis, Wm.
  Willes, Stephen.

_Randolph_

  Breath, Samuel.
  Chambers, Mathew.
  Crawford, Bryce.
  Crawford, James.
  Davis, I. B.
  East, Henry.
  Gault, Hugh C.
  Harshaw, Rev.
  Hayes, Wm.
  Hill, Anthony.
  Hood.
  Lippincott, Charles.
  McLain, Thomas.
  McLurkins family.
  Milligan, Rev. Jas.
  Moore family.
  Morrison, Daniel.
  Ramsey, Robert.
  Sloane, Rev. Wm.
  Todd family.
  Wafer, Thomas.
  Wilson.
  Wylie, Adam.

_Rock Island_

Delany, Robert.

_Sangamon_

  Stevenson, James.
  Webster.
  Wyckoff.

_Stark_

  Buswell, James.
  Dunn, Agustus.
  Hall, Dr. Thomas.
  Hall, Wm.
  Hodgson, Jonathan.
  Rhodes, Hugh.
  Rhodes, Joseph.
  Stone, Liberty.
  Winslow, Calvin.
  Wright, Rev. S. W.

_Tazewell_

  Dillon, Ellis.
  Holland.
  Holton.
  Mathews.
  Mickle.
  Phillips.
  Woodron, Samuel.

_Vermilion_

Harper.

_Washington_

  Henry, John.
  McClurken, John.

_Wayne_

Ambler.

_Whiteside_

  Hamilton, Dea.
  Millikin, Dea.

_Will_

  Beach, Dea.
  Cushing, Dea.
  Denny, Allen.
  Goodhue.
  Haven, Samuel.
  Stewart, Col. Peter

_Woodford_

  Bayne, James G.
  Drennan, Thomas.
  Kern, George.
  McCoy, John.
  Morse, Joseph T.
  Morse, Levi P.
  Morse, Dea. Mark.
  Morse, Parker, Jr.
  Morse, Captain Parker.
  Piper, James A.
  Ranney, James.
  Whitemire, Dr. James.
  Work, James.
  Work, Samuel.

_Miscellaneous_

  Turner, Asa.
  Lukins.


INDIANA

_Bartholomew_

  Hall, John.
  Newsom, Willis.
  Parker.
  Parks, Willis.
  Thomas, John.
  Wears.

_Bond_

  Douglass, James.
  Hill, Anthony.
  McFarland, Robert.
  McLain, John A.
  Rosbrough, James.
  Wafer, James.

_Boone_

Johns, Samuel.

_Carroll_

Montgomery, Robert.

_Cass_

  Crain, J. E.
  Faber, Dr. Ruel.
  + Hill, Jim.
  Keep, Barton R.
  Kreider, Wm. M.
  Manly, W. T. S.
  Patterson, Joseph.
  Powell, Jeptha.
  Powell, Josiah G.
  Powell, Lemuel.
  Powell, Lycurgus.
  Powell, Wm.
  Tomlinson, Thomas T.
  Turner.
  Vigus, Capt.
  White, Batley.

_Dearborn_

  Collier, John.
  Collier, Ralph.
  Hansell, John.
  Smith, Thomas.

_Decatur_

  Cady.
  Capen.
  Donnell, Luther.
  Knapp, A. W.
  Taylor.

_Delaware_

Swain.

_Elkhart_

Matchett, Dr.

_Gibson_

McCormack, Rev.

_Grant_

  Baldwin, Charles.
  Coggeshall, Nathan.
  Hill, Aaron.
  Jay, David.
  Ratliff, John.
  Shugart, John.

_Hendricks_

  Harvey, Harlan.
  Harvey, Dr. T. B.
  Harvey, Dr. Wm. F.
  Hobbs, Elisha.

_Henry_

  Adamson, Isaac.
  Bales, John.
  Bond, Jonathan.
  Burley, Charles.
  Charuness, Wm., Jr.
  Edgerton, Roger.
  Hinshaw, Seth.
  Iddings, Dr.
  Jessup, Jesse.
  Jessup, Tidaman.
  Macy, Enoch.
  Macy, Jonathan.
  Macy, Lilburne.
  Macy, Phebe.
  Macy, Wm.
  Saint, Alpheus.
  Schooley, W. D.
  Small, Mrs. Jane.
  Wickersham, Caleb.

_Howard_

Jones, Daniel.

_Jackson_

  Cox, Richard.
  + Parks, Willis.

_Jefferson_

  Baxter, James.
  Carr, John.
  Eliott, Robert.
  Hickland, Louis.
  Stephens, Judge.
  Stephenson, Rev. Robert.
  Waggner, Isaac.
  Wagner, Jacob.

_Jay_

  Baird.
  Brown family.
  Gray, Thomas.
  Haines family,
  Hopkins family.
  Ira, Jonah.
  Lewis, Enos.
  Mendenhall family.
  Puxon, Joshua.
  Williams family.
  Wright family.

_Jennings_

  Bland.
  Deney, Aaron.
  Deney, Thomas.
  Hale, Jacob.
  Hicklen, Felix.
  Hicklen, James.
  Hicklen, Dr. John.
  Hicklen, Louis.
  Hicklen, Thomas.
  Marshall.
  Stanley, Eli.
  Stott, James.
  Stott, Samuel.

_Kosciusko_

  Gordon.
  Harpers, Thomas.
  Hurlburts, Chauncey.

_La Porte_

  Dakin, Dr. George M.
  Harper.
  Williams, Rev. W. B.

_Montgomery_

  Clarke, Samuel.
  Doherty, Fisher.
  Elmers.
  Emmons.
  Speed, John.

_Morgan_

Williams.

_Noble_

  Waterhouse.
  Whitford, Stutely.

_Parke_

  Hadley, Alfred.
  Stanley, W. P.

_Putnam_

  Browder, Parker S.
  Hillis, "Singing" Joe.

_Randolph_

  Alexanders.
  Bond, Amos.
  Bond, John H.
  Clayton, John.
  Crane, Willis.
  Diggs, Bury, Jr.
  Jones, Daniel.
  Moorman, John A.
  Rinard, Solomon.
  Smith, Samuel.
  Wiggins, Lemuel.
  Worth, A.
  Wright, Solomon.
  Zimri.

_Ripley_

  Bland, James.
  Cady, Dr. A. P.
  Dautherd.
  Holton, Francis.
  Hughes, Henry.
  Hulse, Walter.
  King, Henry.
  McDowell, Duncan.
  McDowell, Washington.
  Merrell, F. M.
  Neil, Willett.
  Passmore, George.
  Passmore, Joseph H.
  Queer, Ervin.
  Smith, Hiram.
  Van Cleave, John S.
  Van Cleave, Jared.
  Waddle, Henry.
  Waggoner, James.

_Rush_

  Cogeshall, Tristan.
  Frazee, John H.
  Gray, Jonathan H.
  Henley, Henry.
  Hill, Milton.
  Jessop, Sidiman.
  Macy, Henry.
  Patterson, Robert.
  Small, Zachareal.
  Smawl, Abraham.
  White, Elisha B.

_Steuben_

  Barnard, Lewis.
  Barry, Capt.
  Butler, Henry P.
  Butler, M. B.
  Butler, Seymour S.
  Clark, S. W.
  Fox, Allen.
  Fox, Denison.
  Fox, J. A.
  Gale, Judge.
  Hendry.
  Jackson, Samuel.
  Kimball, Augustus.
  McGowan, S.
  Newton, Nelson.
  Spear, Rev. E. R.
  Waterhouse.

_Tippecanoe_

  Falley, Lewis.
  Hockett, Moses.
  Hollingsworth, Benjamin.
  Hollingsworth, John.
  Robinson, John.

_Union_

  Beard, Wm.
  Casterline, Dr.
  Elliott, J. P.
  Gardner, Edwin.
  Hayworth, Joel.
  Huddleson, Wm.
  Maxwell, John.
  Smith, Gabriel.

_Vermilion_

Beard, Wm.

_Wabash_

  Brace, Avery.
  Hayward, Wm.
  Place, Maurice.

_Washington_

  Thompson, James L.
  Trueblood, Wm. Penn.

_Wayne_

  Charles, John.
  Charnnese, Wm.
  Clark, Daniel.
  Coe, John.
  Coffin, Levi.
  Cogshalls.
  DeBaptiste, George.
  Edgerton, Thomas.
  Frazier, Thomas.
  Goems, Reuben.
  Haddleson, Jonathan.
  Harris.
  Hayworth, James.
  Hill, Daniel.
  Hough, Wm.
  Huff, Daniel.
  Huff, Zimri.
  Johnson, Dr.
  Lewis.
  Malsbys.
  Mareys.
  Maxwell family.
  Moore, Samuel.
  Nixon, Samuel.
  Overman.
  Puckett, Daniel.
  Roberst, Able.
  Stanton, Dr. Benj.
  Stanley, Ira.
  Thomas, Luke.
  Thornburg, Lewis.
  Unthank, Jonathan.
  Way, Dr. Henry H.
  Whippo, John.
  Wilcuts, David.
  Williams, John F.
  Wooton, Martha.

_White_

Lawrie, James.

_Miscellaneous_

  Brandt, Hon. Isaac.
  Maxwell.
  Smith, Dr. A. J.
  Talberts.


IOWA

_Appanoose_

  Adamson, H.
  Armstrong.
  Calverts.
  Fulcher, John.
  Gilbert, Josiah.
  Green, Jacob.
  Hedgecock, Wm.
  Hollbrook, Luther R.
  McDonald, D.
  Martin, Wesley.
  Robinson, Moses.
  Root, George.
  Stanton, Nathan.
  Stanton, Seth B.
  Tulcher, John.

_Cass_

  Coe, J. N.
  Grindley, Amos.
  Hitchcock, Rev. George B.
  Mills, Hon. Oliver.

_Cedar_

Maxon, Wm.

_Clinton_

  Bather, Andrew.
  Bather, J. R.
  Brindell, G. W.
  Burdette, Capt.
  Campbell, C. B.
  Gleason, Abel B.
  Graham, Judge.
  Jones, J. B.
  Leslie, H.
  Mix, Lawrence.
  Olin, Nelson.
  Palmer, B. R.
  Savage, T.
  Star, W. B.
  Stillman, Mrs. J. D.
  Weston, George W.

_Davis_

  Corner, Albert.
  Corner, Arthur.
  Conner, W. E.
  Elliott, George.
  Elliott, John.
  Hardy, David.
  Hardy, James.
  Klingler, Wm.
  Paggett, Hiram.
  Stanton, Seth B.
  Truit, Adbell.

_Fremont_

  Adams, S. H.
  Avery. E.
  Blanchard, Dr. Ira D.
  Bottsford, Rev.
  Brooks, Wm. M.
  Case, Cephas.
  Clark, Wm. L.
  Cummings, Origin.
  Dea, S. D.
  Gaston, A. C.
  Gaston, George B.
  Gaston, James K.
  Hallam, John.
  Horton, H. B.
  Hill, Rev. E. S.
  Hill, L.B.
  Hunter, George.
  Irish, Henry.
  Jones, Jonas.
  Lambert, Mrs. Lydia Blanchard.
  Lane, William.
  Lawrence, Charles F.
  Mason.
  Platt, Mrs. E. G.
  Platt, Lester.
  Platt, Rev. M. F.
  Sheldon, Hon. E.T.
  Shepardson, Mrs. S. R.
  Smith, James L.
  Todd, Rev. John.
  Williams, Reuben.
  Williams, Hon. Sturgis.
  Woods, D.
  West, Jesse.

_Henry_

  Armstrong, J. H. B.
  Corey, Benj.
  Edwards, James.
  Holbrake, L.
  Howe, Prof. S. L.
  Pickering, John H.

_Johnson_

Clark, Wm. Penn.

_Keokuk_

Durfee family.

_Lee_

Adamson, Brown.

_Madison_

  Roberts, Hon. B. F.
  Scott, Dr. John.

_Mahaska_

  Hockett, Isaac.
  McCormick, Mathew.
  Montgomery, Wm.

_Mills_

  Bradburgh.
  Bradshaw.
  Briggs, Daniel.
  Morse.
  Tolles, C. W.
  Wing.
  Woodford, Newton.

_Pottawattamie_

Bradway, Calvin.

_Poweshiek_

  Bailey, John F.
  Bixby, Amos.
  Bliss, Harvey.
  Brande, Elder T.
  Cooper, Col. S. F.
  Grinnell, Hon. J. B.
  Hamlin, Homer.
  Harris family.
  Parker, Prof. L. F.
  Parks, Philo.

_Wapello_

  English.
  Wilson.

_Washington_

Rankin, Samuel.


KANSAS

  Bowles, Col. J.
  Brown, John, and his men.
  Gossard, Rev. S. J.


KENTUCKY

  Fee, Rev. John Grigg.
  Fee, John S.
  Jones.


MAINE

_Androscoggin_

Cheney, Rev. O. B.

_Cumberland_

  Appleton, Gen.
  Dennet, Oliver.
  Fessenden, Gen. Samuel
  Hall, Col. Levi.
  Hussey, Samuel F.
  Morrill, Peter.
  Packard, Prof. A. S.
  Parsons, A. F.
  Parsons, Dr. C. G.
  Pease, Dr.
  Smyth, Wm.
  Thomas, Mrs. Elias.
  Thurston, Brown.
  Winslow, Nathan.
  Woodman, Hon. J. C.

_Kennebec_

Chadwick, Abel.

_Oxford_

  Blago.
  Morse, Capt. Seth.
  Moulton, Col. John.


MARYLAND

  Hubbard, Daniel.
  Kelly, Jonah.
  Leaverton, Jacob and Hannah
  Tyson, Elisha.


MASSACHUSETTS

_Bristol_

  Adams, Robert.
  Bailey, John.
  Torrey, Rev. Charles T.

_Essex_

  Bibb, Henry.
  Bingham, D. L.
  + Brown, Henry Box.
  + Brown, Wm. Wells.
  Buffum, Jonathan.
  Coffin, Joshua.
  Crocker, Samuel.
  Dodge, Simeon.
  Goodwin, Hooper R.
  Goodwin, John.
  Goodwin, Samuel.
  Hathaway, Benjamin G.
  Innis, John A.
  Orne, A. C.
  + Redmond, Chas. Lennox.
  Silsbee, S.
  Tolman, John B.
  Ware, Erastus.
  Young, Dr. Samuel.

  _Franklin_

  Andrews, Erastus.
  Blake, Hosea.
  Craft.
  Fisk, Dr. C. L.
  Leavitt, Hart.
  Monson, Osee.

  _Hampden_

  Buell, Joseph C.
  Church, Dr. Jefferson.
  Coolidge, Jonas.
  Elmer, Rufus.
  Howland, John.
  Osgood, Dr. Samuel.
  Woods, John M.

  _Hampshire_

  Abel, George.
  Breck, Moses.
  Critchlow, A. P.
  Fairbank, Rev. Calvin.
  Hammond.
  Hill, Arthur G.
  Hill, Samuel L.
  Hingman.
  Lyman.
  Ross, Austin.
  Williston, J. Payson.

  _Middlesex_

  Bigelow, Mrs. Francis E.
  Brooks, Mrs. Mary M.
  Farnsworth, Dr. Amos.
  White, Wm. S.

  _Norfolk_

  Fisher, Hon. Milton M.
  Southwick, Miss Sarah.

  _Suffolk_

  Andrew, Hon. John A.
  Apthorp, Robert E.
  Atkinson, Edward (?).
  Bearse, Capt. Austin.
  Bowditch, Henry I.
  Bowditch, Wm. I.
  Browne, John W.
  Davis, Chas. G.
  Gilbert, Timothy.
  + Hayden, Lewis.
  Hilliard, Mrs. Geo. S.
  Jackson, Edmund.
  Jackson, Francis.
  Kemp, Henry.
  List, Charles.
  Loring, Ellis Gray.
  Marjoram, Wm. W.
  Morris, Robert.
  Parker, Theodore.
  Phillips, Wendell.
  Scott, James.
  Sewall, Samuel E.
  Smith, Joshua B.
  Southwick, Joseph.
  Spear, John M.
  Waugh, Rev. George.
  Whipple, Charles K.
  Whitmore, Joseph Benj.
  Wright, Elizur.

  _Worcester_

  Capron, Effingham L.
  Crocker, S. S.
  Drake, Jonathan.
  Earle, Edward.
  Everett, Joshua T.
  Hadwin, Charles.
  Higginson, Col. T. W.
  Smith, Joel.
  Snow, Benj.
  Ward, Alvin.

  _Miscellaneous_

  Jackson, Dr. James Caleb.


  MICHIGAN

  _Calhoun_

  Fitch, Jabez.
  Hussey, Erastus.
  McMahon, Edward.
  Muzzy.

  _Cass_

  Bogue, Steven.
  Bonine, Isaac.
  Shugart, Zachariah.

  _Genesee_

  Northrop, Rev. H. H.

  _Kalamazoo_

  Thomas, Dr. N. M.

  _Kalkaska_

  Gillett, Amasa.

  _Lenawee_

  Carpenter.
  Chandler, Thomas.
  Coe, John M.
  Dolbear, F.
  Gilbert, Warren.
  Haviland, Laura S.
  Horkney, Richard.
  Mason, Joseph.
  Moore, Samuel.
  Owen, Dr. Woodland.
  Reed, Fitch.
  Wells, James B.

  _Oakland_

  Frost, A. P.
  Powers, Nathan.

  _St. Joseph_

  Clarke, Rev. Chas. G.
  Cleveland, Rev. John P.
  Gurney, Chester.
  Kanouse, Rev. John S.
  Mills, Rev. Louis.
  Northrop, H. H.
  Weed, Rev. Ira M.

  _Washtenaw_

  Bartlett, Moses.
  Beckley, Guy.
  Camp, Ira.
  Fowler, Joseph.
  Goodell, Jotham.
  Harwood.
  Lowy, John.
  Ray.

  _Wayne_

  + De Baptiste, George.
  + Dolarson, George.
  Finney, Seymour.
  Foote, Rev. C. C.
  Howard, Jacob M.
  Sheeley, Alanson.
  Tyler, Capt. Elisha.
  Watson, Walter.


  NEW JERSEY

  _Burlington_

  + Coleman, John.
  Evans, Robert.
  Middleton, Enoch.
  + Stevens, Samuel.

  _Cumberland_

  Bond, Leven.
  Cooper, Ezekial.
  Murry, Nathaniel.
  Sheppard, J. R.
  Sheppard, Thomas R.
  Stanford, Alges.
  Stanford, Julia.

  _Gloucester_

  Douden, Wm.
  + Louis, Pompey.
  + Sharper, Jubilee.

  _Hudson_

  Everett, John.
  Mott, Dr. James.
  Phillips, Peter James.

  _Mercer_

  Conove, Elias.
  Earl, J. J.
  Plumly, B. Rush.

  _Middlesex_

  Freedlyn, Jonathan.
  Sickler, Adam.

  _Salem_

  Goodwin, Abigail.
  + Oliver, Rev. Thomas Clement.

  _Union_

  Garrison, Joseph.

  _Miscellaneous_

  Reeve, Wm.


  NEW HAMPSHIRE

  _Belknap_

  Chamberlain, Wm.

  _Carroll_

  Dearborn.

  _Coos_

  Chase, Hon. Aurin M.
  Colby, Col. Joseph.

  _Grafton_

  Furber, James.
  Harris, James.
  Hughes.

  _Hillsboro_

  Cheney, Dea. Moses.
  Wilson, Hon. James.
  Wood, James.
  Wood, Moses.

  _Merrimack_

  Brooks, Mrs.
  Chamberlain, John A.
  Chamberlain, Moses.
  Rice, Miss.

  _Rockingham_

  Philbrick.
  Snow, Solomon P.

  _Strafford_

  Cartland, Jonathan.
  Cartland, Joseph.
  Thompson, S. Millett.


  NEW YORK

  _Albany_

  Chaplin, Gen. Wm. L.
  Delavan, E. C.
  Goodwin.
  Jackson, Dr. J. C.
  Mott, Abigail.
  Mott, Lydia.
  + Myers, Stephen.
  Williams.

  _Allegany_

  Case, Dea.

  _Cattaraugus_

  Chapman, Capt.
  Cooper, Wm.
  Welles.

  _Chautauqua_

  Andrew.
  Cranston.
  Frink, Rev.
  Knowlton.
  Little, John.
  Pettit, Dr. J.
  Pettit, Eber M.

  _Chemung_

  + Jones, John W.
  Langdon, Jervis.

  _Chenango_

  Berry, Col.

  _Erie_

  Aldrich.
  Barker, Gideon.
  Haywood, Hon. Wm.
  Johnson, Geo. W.
  Moore, Dea. Henry.
  Williams.

  _Genesee_

  Brewster, Judge.
  Comstock, Dea.
  Huftelen, E.
  McDonald, Daniel.

  _Livingston_

  Sleeper, Col. Reuben.

  _Madison_

  Jarvis, Dr.
  Smith, Hon. Gerrit.

  _Monroe_

  Anthony, Asa.
  Anthony, Daniel.
  Anthony, Mary.
  Avery, Geo. A.
  Bishop, W. G.
  Bloss, Wm. C.
  Bostwick, Nelson.
  Carpenter.
  Croffts, Mrs.
  Degarmo.
  Dolley, Dr.
  + Douglass, Frederick.
  Doy, Dr. John.
  Falls, Wm. S.
  Fish, Benj.
  Fish, Mrs. Sarah.
  Gibbs, Isaac.
  Gilbert, Grove S.
  Hallowell, Mary.
  Hallowell, Wm.
  Humphry, Geo. H.
  Husbands, J. D.
  James, Thomas.
  Kedzie, John.
  Marsh, Joseph.
  Moore, Lindley Murray.
  Morris, J. P.
  Porter, Samuel D.
  Post, Amy.
  Post, Isaac.
  Quinby, Henry.
  Sampson, A. S.
  Sherman, Dr.
  Thayer, George.
  Williams, Capt.
  Williams, E. C.

  _New York_

  Briggs.
  Downing, George T.
  Gibbs.
  Hopper, Isaac T.
  Johnson, Oliver.
  + Pennington.
  Bay, Rev. Chas. B.
  + Ruggles, David.
  + Smith, Dr. McCune.

  _Niagara_

  Binmore, Thomas.
  Childs, W. H.
  Richardson, M. C.
  Spauling, Lyman.

  _Oneida_

  Stewart, Alvan.

  _Onondaga_

  Barbour.
  Bates, Abner.
  Carson.
  Lee, Rev. Luther.
  + Loguen, Rev. J. W.
  May, Rev. Samuel J.
  Minor, Rev. Ovid.
  Wheaton, Charles.

  _Oswego_

  Bragdon, George L.
  Fox, Edward.
  French.
  Jackson, James C.
  Salmon, George.
  Salmon, Wm. Lyman.
  Stevens, Ard. H.
  Wing, Asa S.

  _Rensselaer_

  + Hooper, John H.
  Shipherd, Rev. Fayette.

  _Steuben_

  Balcom, Judge.
  Thacher, Judge Otis.

  _Ulster_

  Chase.
  Colby, Col.

  _Wyoming_

  Andrews, Josiah.
  Breck, Allen Y.
  Chapin, Willard J.
  Frank, Dr. Augustus.
  Galusha, Rev. Ellin.
  Gates, Seth M.
  Lyman, R. W.
  McKay, F. C. D.
  Miller, Frank.
  Poenix, Samuel F.
  Shepard, Col. Chas. O.
  Waldo, H. N.
  Young, Andrew W.


  NORTH CAROLINA

  Coffin, Vestal.


  OHIO

  _Adams_

  Baldridge, Samuel T.
  Blackstone, Benj. D.
  Burgess, Rev. Dyer.
  Cannon, Edward.
  Cannon, Urban.
  Caskey, James.
  Caywood, John.
  Cooley.
  Copples, Daniel.
  Hollingsworth, Abraham.
  Kirker.
  Kirkpatrick, Nathaniel.
  Lafferty, Absolem.
  McClanahan.
  McIntire, General.
  McKinley, Charles.
  McKinley, David.
  McKinley, John.
  McKinley, Wm.
  Nobles, Dr.
  Ourslers.
  Puntenney.
  Ralston, Robert.
  Ralston, Thomas.
  Rothrock, Joseph.
  Stroups, Wm.
  Taber, Oliver.
  Taylor, James.
  Torrence, James W.
  Vandermans.
  Waites.
  Wickersham.
  Wilson, John T.

  _Ashland_

  Garrett, Ezra.
  Gordon, James.
  Lawson, John.
  Rose.
  Stott, George.
  Talentire, John.
  Wilson, Robert.
  Woods, John.

  _Ashtabula_

  Austin, Aaron C.
  Austin, Eliphalet.
  Austin, Joab.
  Austin, L. B.
  Bartlett, Dea.
  Bigelow, Capt. Saxton.
  Bissell, L.
  Brown, Alex.
  Brown, James.
  Bushnell.
  Carpenter, Jehaziel.
  Coleman, Alby.
  Conklin, Rev.
  Cowles, Miss Betsey.
  Cowles, Miss Martha.
  Culbertson, Jacob.
  Denny, Judge Wm. S.
  Edwards, Lawrence.
  Edwards, Smith.
  Edwards, T. S.
  Farrington, Dr. S. H.
  Fisk, Amos.
  Garlic, A. K.
  Giddings, Hon. Joshua R.
  Hall, James.
  Hancock, Capt. Wm.
  Harris, Dr. Henry.
  Hawley.
  Hezlet, George.
  Hubbard, Henry.
  Hubbard, Wm.
  Hylop, George.
  Jones, Lynds.
  King, Alexander.
  King, Edward.
  McDonald, James.
  McDonald, Jesse.
  McDonald, Lyman.
  Nellis, J. I. D.
  Parsons, Wm. Henry.
  Peck, Lyman.
  Plumb, Ralph.
  Plumb, Samuel.
  Savage, Amasa.
  Shipman, Amos.
  Terrell, Rev. Sherman.
  Tinan, Joseph.
  Trescott, Samuel.
  Wick, C. C.
  Wilson, Wm.
  Wing, J. K.

  _Athens_

  Alderman, Hosea.
  Barker, Judge Isaac.
  Beaton, T. A.
  Blake, Edward.
  Brown, Eli F.
  Brown, John.
  Brown, Leonard.
  Day, Artemus.
  Glazier, Abel.
  Glazier, Walter.
  Harold, Joseph.
  Hibbard, Elansome.
  Hibbard, Elisha.
  Hibbard, J. S.
  Hibbard, John M.
  Jewett, Dr. Leonard.
  Kessinger, Joseph C.
  Lewis, John.
  McCoy, Rev. J. C.
  Moore, David.
  Moore, Eliakim H.
  Morse, Peter.
  Newton, Solomon.
  Potter, Orville.
  Smith, Hon. Lot L.
  Vorhes, Albert.
  Vorhes, John.
  Winn, John T.

  _Belmont_

  Bailey, Dr. Jesse.
  Branson, Isaiah.
  Campbell.
  Cope, Joshua.
  Cottrell, Robert.
  Dickens, John.
  Dillon, Wm.
  George, Travis.
  Halper, Sandy.
  Hargrave, Joseph.
  Holloway, Isaac.
  Howard, Horton.
  Kirk, Robert.
  Nichols, Elf.
  Palmer, Wm.
  Reynolds, John.
  Rivers, James L.
  Schoolies, Dr.
  Smith, John W.
  Wood, Joel.
  Wright, Charles.
  Wright, John.
  Wright, Nehemiah.
  Wright, Wm.

  _Brown_

  Baird, Wm.
  Beasley, Dr. Alfred.
  Beck, Dr. Isaac M.
  Borroughs, Dr.
  Bowers, Robert.
  Brown, Isaac H.
  Bull, Kirby.
  Campbell, Dr. Alex.
  Collins, Eli C.
  Collins, James.
  Collins, Theodore.
  Collins, Thomas.
  Concade.
  Crane, A. B.
  Crosby, Robert.
  Dunlap, Wm.
  Frazier, Wm.
  Gilliland, S. W.
  Graham.
  Heinman.
  Hopkins, Godin.
  Hopkins, Thomas.
  Hudson, John D.
  Huggins, Amzi.
  Huggins, J. E.
  Huggins, J. N.
  Huggins, M. H.
  Huggins, R. I.
  Huggins, Robert.
  Huggins, W. D.
  Huggins, Wm.
  Johnson, Alex.
  Kincaid.
  Kirker, Thomas.
  Mace, Richard.
  Macklem, Wm.
  McCague, Thomas.
  McCoy, James.
  McCoy, Kenneth.
  McCoy, Wm.
  McFerson, James.
  McGee, Isaiah.
  McKegg, George.
  McMaken, Mark Campbell.
  McVey.
  Mahan, Rev. John.
  Mathews, George.
  Menaugh, Wm.
  Miller, R. S.
  Miller, Scott.
  Minnaw, Wm.
  Moore.
  Norton, Dr. Greenleaf.
  Pangburn.
  Patton, Joseph.
  Pettijohn.
  Pogue, Mary.
  Porter, John.
  Rankin, Rev. John, and sons.
  Rice, Benj.
  Robinson, John R.
  Saulsbury, Thomas.
  Scott, James.
  Shepard, John.
  Simpson, John.
  Snedigher, John.
  Turney, Alston.
  Turney, David.
  Wilson, Alexander.

  _Butler_

  Elliott, Wm.
  Falconer, Dr.
  Lewis, Jane.
  Marshall, Samuel.
  Rigden, Dr.
  Scobey, Dr. Wm. H.
  Woods, John.

  _Carroll_

  Campbell, Wm.
  Farmer, Dr. Wm.
  George, J. D.
  George, Robert.
  Holmes.
  McLaughlin, John.
  McLaughlin, Wm.
  Palmer, John.
  Rutan, Daniel.
  Thompson, Hance.

  _Champaign_

  Adams, Lewis.
  Atkinson, Cephas.
  Baldwin, Thomas.
  Baldwin, Wm. H.
  + Bird, Owen.
  Boucher, Joshua.
  Brand, Maj. Joseph C.
  Butcher, Dr. J. M.
  + Byrd, Peter.
  Corwin, Moses B.
  Cowgill, Henry.
  Cowgill, Dr. Thomas.
  Davenport, Dr.
  Hitt, John W.
  Howard, Anson.
  Hyde, Udney.
  Jamison, Wm.
  Lewis, Griffith.
  McCoy, George.
  Pierce, Jonathan.
  Rathburn, Levi.
  Reno, Frank.
  Reno, Joseph.
  Reno, Lewis.
  Stanton, Benjamin.
  Ware, J. R.
  Winder, Abner.
  Winder, Edward.
  Winder, Henry.
  Winder, James.
  Winder, Joshua.
  Winder, Levi.
  Winder, Moses.
  Winder, Thomas.
  Winslow, S. A.

_Clarke_

  Anderson, Abijah.
  Borton, Thomas,
  + Delaney, Henry.
  Dudale, Joseph.
  Dugglas, Joseph A.
  Face, Chauncey.
  Farr, James.
  + Fields, George,
  + Fields, Jacob.
  + Gazway, John W.
  + Guy, Henry.
  Heiskell, D. O.
  Howell, Samuel C.
  + Martin, Henry.
  Newcomb, Isaac.
  Nichols, John D.
  + <DW42>, Abraham.
  + <DW42>, Henry.
  Pierce, Jacob.
  Pierce, Jonathan.
  Pierce, Wm.
  + Piles, Robert.
  Smith, Seth.
  Stanton, Benjamin,
  + Stanup, Levi.
  Stout, Charles.
  Stout, James.
  Thomas, Pressly.
  Thorne, Thomas.
  Thorne, Wm.
  Van Meter, Joel.
  Wildman, John.
  Wilson, Daniel.
  Wright, Richard.

_Clermont_

  Barber, W. S.
  Brown, Isaac H.
  Buntin, James.
  Burrows, Salathiel F.
  + Davis, Sandy.
  Ebersole, Jacob.
  Edwards, Fred.
  Fee, Enos.
  Fee, Lee.
  Fee, M. T.
  Fee, Oliver Perry Spencer.
  Fee, Robert E.
  Gibson, Dr. M.
  Hayden, James.
  Hayden, Joseph.
  Hoover.
  House, David.
  Huber, Boerstler.
  Huber, Charles B.
  Larkin, Moses.
  Mace, Richard.
  Melvin, "Jack."
  Miller, Lewis.
  Morris, Thomas.
  Parrish, Joseph, Sr.
  Pease, Dr. L. T.
  Pettijohn, Rev. John.
  Poage, Rev. Smith.
  Powell, Andrew L.
  Reese, Wm. J.
  Reilley, Jeret.
  Rice, Benjamin.
  South, James W.
  Sowards, James.
  Utter, Hon. Dowty.
  Waite, Deloss S.

_Clinton_

  Allen, Abram.
  Allen, David.
  Bales, Isaac.
  Betts, Aaron.
  Brooke, Dr. Abram.
  Brooke, Edward.
  Brooke, James B.
  Brooke, Samuel.
  Brooke, Wm.
  Dakin, Dr. George M.
  Dakin, Perry.
  Davis, Isaac.
  Davis, Joel P.
  Furguson, Samuel
  Hadley, John.
  Haines, Mark.
  Haines, Samuel.
  Haynes, Wright.
  Hiatt, Christopher.
  Hibben, Thomas.
  Johnson.
  King, D. S.
  Linton, Seth.
  Nicholson, Artemas.
  Oren, Elihu.
  Osburn, Wm.
  Sewell, David.
  Strickle, Andrew.
  Thompson, H. B.
  Waln, W. M.
  Woodmansee, Thomas.

_Columbiana_

  Bonsall, Daniel.
  Bowen, Benj. F.
  Bronson, Daniel.
  Brooks, Samuel.
  Carey, Dr.
  Cattell.
  Coppoc.
  Davis, Benj. B.
  Evans, Philip.
  Farmer, Dr. James.
  French, Thomas.
  French, Esther.
  Galbraith, David.
  Galbraith, James.
  Galbraith, Nathan.
  Galbraith, Thomas.
  Garretson.
  George, "Squire."
  Heaton, Jacob.
  Hise, Howell.
  Irish, Wm. B.
  Irwin, Malon.
  Irwin, Samuel.
  + Lucas, George W. S.
  McMillan, Joel.
  Myers, Samuel.
  Negus, West.
  Robinson, Marius Racine.
  Smith, David J.
  Stanley, Jonathan.
  Street, John.
  Street, Zadock.
  Trescott, Isaac.
  West.

_Coshocton_

  Boyd, James.
  Boyd, Luther.
  Boyd, Wm. Miller.
  Campbell, Alexander.
  Elliott, Wm.
  Foster, Prior.
  Lawrence, Solon.
  Nichols, Eli.
  Powell, Thomas.
  Seward, Ebenezer.
  Shannon, John P.
  Shannon, Isaac.
  Wier, Samuel.
  White, Benj.

_Crawford_

  Quaintance, Fisher.
  Roe, Joseph.

_Cuyahoga_

  Adams, Ezekiel.
  Atkins, Quintus F.
  Bell, John.
  Cady, Asa.
  Cay, Capt.
  Ford, Cyrus.
  Ford, Frank.
  Ford, Horace.
  Mackelwrath, Michael.
  Paine, Robert.
  Wade, Edward.

_Darke_

  Clemens.
  Gilpatrick, Dr. Rufus.
  Hanway, James.
  Spencer, Anderson.

_Delaware_

  Benedict, Aaron.
  Benedict, Aaron L.
  Benedict, Cyrus.
  Benedict, Daniel.
  Benedict, G. G.
  Benedict, M. J.
  Cratty, John.
  Cratty, Robert.
  Cratty, Wm.
  Dillingham, Micajah.
  Dodds, Wm.
  Flannigan, Dea.
  Levering, Griffith.
  Lewis, John.
  Mosher, Joseph.
  Osborn, Aaron L.
  Osborn, Daniel.
  Osborn, Wm.
  Ream, Samuel.
  Wood, Daniel.

_Erie_

  Alsdorf, Col. V. B.
  Anderson, Elijah.
  + Anderson, Peter.
  Barber, Rev. Eldad.
  Barney, George.
  Beatty, John.
  + Boston, Rev. Thomas.
  Brainard.
  + Brown, Bazel.
  + Brown, Isaac.
  + Butler, Thomas.
  + Butler, Wm.
  + Carr, Samuel.
  Clark, Wm. H., Jr.
  Clark, Wm. H., Sr.
  Darling, Isaac.
  Davidson, J. N.
  Drake, Thomas.
  + Floyd, Samuel.
  Goodwin, Homer.
  Hadley, Clifton.
  + Hamilton, Andrew.
  + Hamilton, John.
  + Hampton, John.
  Hathaway, Peter.
  Hitchcock, S. E.
  + Holmes, Robert.
  Irvine, John.
  Irvine, Samuel.
  + "Black Jack."
  + Jackson, John.
  Jennings, R. J.
  + Johnson, Benjamin.
  + Jones.
  Keech, C. C.
  Lewis, L. H.
  Lockwood, George.
  Lockwood, Henry.
  + Loot, John B.
  McGee, Thomas C.
  McLouth, O. C.
  Merry, H. F.
  Nugent, Capt. James.
  Parish, F. D.
  Peck, Otis L.
  Pool, John G.
  Reynolds, Geo. J.
  + Ritchie, Grant.
  + Robertson, George.
  + Robinson, Andy.
  Root, J. M.
  Ruess, Herman.
  Scott, Lyman.
  Sloane, Hon. Rush R.
  Starr, Perez.
  Thorpe, Rev. John.
  Tillinghast, O. C.
  Walker, Samuel.
  Williams, H. C.
  + Wilson, Wm.
  + Winfield, Alfred.
  + Winfield, John.

_Fayette_

  Atkins, Isaac.
  Browder, Fletcher.
  Connor, James.
  Dickey, Rev. Wm.
  Eastman, David.
  Edwards, Wm.
  Elliott, Wilson.
  Eustick, Robert.
  Eustick, Wm.
  Gillespie, Dr.
  Gillespie, George.
  Hopkins, Jerry.
  Larmour, James.
  Larmour, Thomas.
  McNara, James.
  Orcutt, Barrack.
  Pinkerton, Wm.
  Puggsly, Jacob.
  Rodgers, Thomas.
  Roeback, Hugh.
  Steele, Adam.
  Steele, Robert.
  Steward, Dr. Hugh.
  Steward, Col. James.
  Stewart, George.
  Wilson, Samuel.

_Franklin_

  Alexander, Shepherd.
  Black, George W.
  Bookel, John.
  Bull, Jason.
  Clarke.
  Coulter, Dr.
  Dickerman, Benonah.
  Ferguson, Wm.
  Freeland, Jeremiah.
  Gardner, Ozem.
  Gardner, Wilson.
  Graham, David.
  Hambleton, Isaac H.
  Hambleton, Thomas.
  Hoffman, John.
  Jenkins, David.
  Kline, Jacob.
  Kilbourne, Col. James.
  Kline, Thomas.
  Mattoon, Ansel.
  Patterson, David.
  Park, James.
  Pettibone.
  + Poindexter, Rev. James.
  Rees, John.
  Rollison, L.
  Sebring, Edward L.
  Sharp, Garrett.
  Smith, Dr. Samuel.
  Thompson, Daniel.
  Thompson, John W.
  + Ward, John.
  + Washington, Lewis, Sr.
  + Washington, Thomas.
  + Washington, Wm.
  Westwater, James M.
  Wilson, James.

_Gallia_

  Allen, Richard.
  Audrey, James P.
  Bingham, Dr. Julius A.
  Blodgett, Reuben.
  + Chavis, John.
  Clark, Daniel.
  Clark, Wm.
  + Cousins, Joseph.
  + Crossland, Chas.
  Davis, Hiram.
  Eaton, Dr. Henry.
  Eblen, James.
  + Ellison, Wm.
  Glenn, Andrew.
  Glenn, Curry.
  Glenn, James.
  Glenn, M. K.
  Hanger, Frederick.
  Hanger, George.
  + Harvey, Henry.
  Heacock, J. D.
  + Hocks, Wm.
  Holcomb, A. J.
  Holcomb, E. J.
  Holcomb, E. T.
  Holcomb, J. E.
  Holcomb, Hon. Samuel R.
  + James, Caliph.
  + James, Howell.
  Jarrett, Gabriel.
  Kent, Abel.
  Payne, George J.
  Porter, John D.
  Porter, Marshall.
  Porter, Sumner.
  Ross, N. D.
  Sisson, N. B.
  + Stewart, Isaac.
  + Stewart, Jacob.
  + Stewart, James W.
  + Stewart, John J.
  + Stewart, John S.
  + Stewart, T. N.
  Symmes, Wm.
  Tate, David.

_Green_

  Arnett, James H.
  Atkinson, Thomas.
  Barrett, James.
  + Bell, John H.
  Beven, Abel.
  Clemons, James.
  Coates, Lindley.
  Coat, Joseph.
  Compton, John.
  + Conway.
  + Davis, James.
  Fletcher, Robinson.
  Fletcher, Wm.
  + Gillingham, Wm.
  + Johnson, Hezekiah.
  Johnson, Simeon.
  Little, Cyrus.
  Little, Robert.
  + Lucas, Wm.
  + McAllister, John.
  + Martin, Harry.
  Martin, Dr.
  Monroe, David.
  Orcutt, Barach.
  + Overton, Lewis.
  + Shelton, Walter.
  + Sloan, Frederick.
  + Washington, Henry.
  Watson, Dr.
  Whitney, Wm.
  Wynins, Judge.

_Guernsey_

  Boyd, James.
  Broom, Daniel.
  Brown, Thomas.
  Craig, John.
  Craig, Samuel.
  Crooks, John.
  Green, John.
  Hall, Edward.
  Leeper, John.
  McCracken, Alex.
  McCracken, Wm.
  Miller, Adam.
  Miller, Joseph.
  Oldham, M.
  Patterson, Samuel.
  Reed, Judge.
  Richey, Andrew.
  Swayne, Samuel.
  Thompson, Ebenezer.
  Thompson, Eleazer.
  Thompson, Rev. Evan.
  White, P. H.

_Hamilton_

  Aten, Adrian.
  Bailey, Dr. Gamaliel.
  Bales, Asa.
  Birney, Wm.
  Ball, Flamen.
  Brisbane, Dr. Benj. Lawton.
  Brisbane, Rev. Wm. Henry.
  Burgoyne, Judge.
  Burnett, Cornelius.
  Burnett, Thomas.
  Bushnell, Horace.
  Butterworth, Wm.
  Cable, Rev. Jonathan.
  Carey, Wm.
  Chase, Salmon P.
  Cheney, Charles.
  Coffin, Addison.
  Coffin, Levi.
  Colby, Dr.
  Coleman, Mrs. Elizabeth.
  Coleman, John H.
  Donaldson, A.
  Donum, Thomas.
  Fairfield, John.
  Franklin, Thomas.
  Glenn, Edward R.
  Harwood, Dr. Edward.
  + Hatfield, John.
  Hayes, Rutherford B.
  Hogans, Judge.
  Jolliffe, John.
  Lewis, Henry.
  Lewis, Rev. Samuel.
  Lindley, Aaron.
  Mussey, Dr. W. H.
  Pennington, Levi.
  Pfaff, Dr. J. L.
  Pugh, A. M.
  Pyle, Mrs. M. J.
  Reynolds, Samuel.
  Roberts, Hansel.
  Roberts, Wade.
  Robinson, Mrs. Emily.
  Rusk, Rev.
  Schooley, Nathaniel.
  Stowe, Professor Calvin E.
  Stowe, Harriet Beecher.
  Townshend, Dr. Norton S.
  Van Zandt, John.
  White, Micajah.
  Williams, Hatfield.
  Wilson, Rev. D. M.
  Wilson, J. G.
  Wilson, Samuel.

_Hancock_

  Adams, David.
  Ardinger, P. D.
  Beach, Dr. Belizur.
  Bigelow, Henry.
  Brown, Ezra.
  Bushon, A.
  Chadwick, C.
  Cory, David J.
  Cox, Hiram.
  Cox, John.
  Engleman, John.
  Haglar, E.
  Henderson, Fred.
  Huber, Benjamin.
  Hurd, R. B.
  King, John, Sr.
  Markle, Joel.
  Morall, Joseph.
  McCaughey, W.
  Newell, Hugh.
  Parker, Jonathan.
  Porch, Henry.
  Strothers, Robert.
  Wheeler, Jesse.

_Hardin_

  + Bray, Tapler.
  Edgars, David H.
  Elder, Culbertson.
  + Harris, Henry.
  + Hunster, Wm.
  McConnell, Isaiah.
  Newcomb, Cromwell.
  + Newlan, Henry.
  + Newlan, John A.
  Watson, John.
  Williams, Obadiah H.

_Harrison_

  Carnehan, John.
  Clarke, George P.
  Cope, Jacob.
  Cope, John.
  Cope, Joseph.
  Goff, J. H.
  Hammond, Richard.
  Hanna, Wilson.
  Hazlett, John.
  Huggins, Henry M.
  Hunt, John.
  Johnson, Micajah T.
  + Johnson, West.
  Lee, Rev. J. B.
  Lee, Judge Thomas.
  Lucas, Henry.
  Lucas, Edward.
  McFaddin, Wm.
  McFarland.
  McNealy, Cyrus.
  Mead, Joseph.
  Paul, Samuel.
  Rogers, Wm.
  Steele, Dr.
  Swain, Thomas.
  Walker, Rev. John.
  + Willis, Lot.
  Wilson, Dr. Martin.
  Wilson, Wm.
  Work, Alexander.
  Work, David.

_Highland_

  Bales, W.
  Beatty, Alexander.
  Brooks, Wm.
  Campbell, Richard.
  Cowgill, Benjamin.
  Cowgill, John.
  Doster, Henry.
  Douglas, Wm.
  Dunlap, Dr. Milton.
  Evans, Noah.
  Fullerton, George.
  Ghormley, David.
  Ghormley, Wm.
  Gillispie.
  Hibben, Samuel.
  Hunter, John V.
  Keys, Wm.
  Lucas, Richard.
  McClure, "Squire."
  McElroy, Ebenezer.
  McElroy, Thomas.
  Nelson, John.
  Nelson, Wm.
  Parker, Samuel.
  Patterson, Alexander.
  Rodgers, Col. Thomas.
  Sewell, David.
  Smith, Wm.
  Somers, Absalom.
  Strain, John R.
  Strickel, Stephen.
  Sumner, Robert.
  Templeton, Robert.
  Templeton, Wm.
  Thuma, Peter.
  Tomlinson, Jacob.
  Tomlinson, Moses.
  Ustick, W. A.
  Van Pelt, Jonathan.
  Williams, Nat.
  Wilson, Adam R.
  Wilson, Thomas.
  Wilson, Wm.
  Young.

_Holmes_

  Bell, Alexander.
  Bigham, Ebenezer.
  Bigham, J. C.
  Crocko, John.
  Crocko, Kieffer.
  Finney, John.
  Fleming, James.
  Johnson, Andrew.
  Johnson, James.
  McClellan, Andrew.
  McClellan, Samuel.
  McClure, John.
  Whitten, Rev.

_Huron_

  Adams, Henry.
  Bly, Rouse.
  Buckingham, Henry.
  Healy, Jacob.
  Healy, Joseph.
  Palmer, Rundell.
  Palmer, Samuel.
  Palmer, Seeley.
  Parker, "Elder" Benj.
  Parker, Nelson.
  Parker, Rev. Seth C.
  Sherman, Lemuel.
  Smith, Willis R.
  Strong, Abner.
  Townsend, Hiram.
  + Wilson, Wm.
  Wright, Judge Jabez.

_Jackson_

  Bingham, Julius A.
  Crookham, George L.
  Ford, Rev. I. N.
  Isham, Asa W.
  + Janes.
  Montgomery, Samuel G.
  + Nooks, Noah.
  + Steward family.
  + Woodson family.

_Jefferson_

  Clarke, Samaria.
  Clark, Wm.
  Cope, Joseph H.
  Crab, Henry.
  Crab, John.
  + Davis, John.
  George, A. W.
  George, David.
  George, James.
  George, Robert.
  George, Judge Thomas.
  Griffith, John.
  Hammond, Alexander.
  Hammond, Hon. John.
  Hammond, Joseph.
  Herford family.
  Holloway, Jacob.
  Jenkins, George K.
  Ladd, Benj.
  Ladd, James D.
  Ladd, James L.
  Ladd, Wm. H.
  Lindsay, Dr.
  Lukens.
  McGrew, Finley B.
  McGrew, J. C.
  Mendenhall, Cyrus.
  Orr, George.
  Orr, John.
  + Pointer, Thomas.
  Powell, John.
  + Ray, Wm.
  Roberts, Ezekiel.
  Robinson, Wm.
  Stanton, Dr. Benj.
  Tetirick, Elias.
  Tomlinson, Carver.
  Updegraff, David.
  Underwood, Johnson.
  Watson, John M.
  Watson, Mathew.
  Wolcott, C. C.

_Knox_

  Delanow.
  Frederick.
  Townsend, Thomas.

_Lake_

  Butler, Samuel.
  Howe, Mrs. Sophia Hull.
  Marshall, Seth.
  Pepoon, A. C.
  Pepoon, Benjamin.
  Perkins.
  Root, Phineas.

_Lawrence_

  Beaman, Rev.
  Campbell, Hiram.
  Campbell, John.
  Chester, Rev. Joseph.
  + Coker, Tolliver.
  Cratoff.
  Creighton, Rev. Joseph H.
  + Dicher, James.
  Hall, Dr. Cornelius.
  + Holly, Benjamin.
  + Johnson, Gabe N.
  Leete, Ralph.
  + Lynch, Philip.
  McGugin, Wm.
  + Mathews, John.
  Reckard, Judge Wm.
  Wilgus, Chas.
  Wilson, Stephen.

_Licking_

  Bancroft, Dr. W. W.
  Cane, Norton.
  Dunlop, Wm.
  Green.
  Hillyer, Justin.
  Howe, Curtis.
  Knowlton, L. W.
  Linnel, Joshua.
  Rees, John.
  Rose, Lamuel.
  Whiting, Christopher L.
  Wright, E. C.
  Wright, Wm. S.

_Logan_

  Aiken, James.
  Aiken, Joseph.
  Barnet, James.
  + Bird, Erasmus.
  + Bird, Redmond.
  Boyd, David.
  Boyd, Robert.
  + Day, John.
  + Day, Solomon.
  Dickinson, Robert.
  Elliot.
  Forsyth, J. M.
  Fulton, James.
  Fulton, Thomas.
  George, Henry.
  + Hicks, John.
  Hunt, David.
  + Hunt, Howell.
  Jameson, Cornelius.
  Jeffers, Dr.
  Johnston, J. B.
  Johnston, Renwick.
  Johnston, Samuel P.
  McAyral, Dr. R. A.
  McRaille, George.
  McWelly, Paul.
  Milligan, J. C. K.
  Milligan, J. S. T.
  Mitchell, Mathew.
  + Mocksley, Wm.
  + Overly, Barney.
  Patterson, Abraham.
  Patterson, David.
  Patterson, Isaac.
  Pickerell, Henry.
  Pickerell, Mahlon.
  Pickerell, Wm.
  Rankin, James.
  Richie, Jonathan.
  + Scott, Henry A.
  Scott, Thomas.
  Sloane, J. R. W.
  + Spragne, Esau.
  Stanton, Benjamin.
  + Tabor, Allen.
  Townsend, Levi.
  Trumbull, James.
  Trumbull, John.
  Walker, Judge James.
  + White, Henry.
  Williams, Asa.
  Williams, Silas.
  Young, John.

_Lorain_

  Boise, Eli.
  Brooks, Samuel.
  Bushnell, Simeon.
  + Cox, Sabraham.
  DeWolf, Mathew.
  Fitch, J. M.
  Gillet, Mathew.
  Hewes, Lewis.
  Langston, Chas. H.
  Loveland, Abner.
  Manderville, John.
  Niles, Henry.
  Siples, Wm.
  Soules, Walter.
  Wadsworth, Loring.
  Warren, Luther.

_Lucas_

  Anderson, David.
  Ashley, James M.
  Brigham, Mavor.
  Conlisk, James.
  Mott, Richard.
  Scott, Dr. H.

_Madison_

  Allen, Wm. V.
  Baskerville, James.
  Baskerville, Marshall Pinkerton.
  Baskerville, Richard A.
  Baskerville, Samuel.
  Baskerville, Wm. B.
  Byers, Moses.
  Byers, Newton.
  Creamer.
  Orcutt, Daniel.
  Rapp, Jonah.
  Slagle, Christian K.

_Mahoning_

  Adair, James.
  Andrews, Chauncey.
  Bailey, David.
  Barnes, Jacob.
  Bonsell, Daniel.
  Burnet, Henry.
  Eaton, Daniel.
  Garlic, Dr. Theodatus.
  Hart, Ambrose.
  Henry, Francis.
  Hoge, Wesley.
  Holcombe, John R.
  Holland, Richard.
  Kidwalader, Edward.
  Kidwalader, Eli.
  Kirk, John.
  Kirtland, Dr. Jared Potter.
  Laughridge, John.
  Moore, Sampson.
  Morse, Elkinch.
  Sharp, Thomas.
  Squires, John.
  Thorn, Wilson.
  Truman, Daniel.
  Van Fleet, John.
  Wells, John.

  _Marion_

  Ashbaugh, Arminens.
  Ashbaugh, Frederick.
  Botsford, Wm. Hiram.
  Clark, Enoch.
  Clements, Anson.
  David.
  Dudley, Moses.
  Fisher, Wm.
  Morris, Joseph.
  Petus, Nathan.
  Spelman, E. G.

  _Medina_

  Burr, Timothy.
  Hulburt, Halsey.
  Matteson, Cyrus.

  _Meigs_

  Barrets family.
  Holt, Horace.
  Jiles, Cyrus.
  Milles family.
  Rathbon family.
  Simpson family.

  _Miami_

  Abbott, Dr. N.
  Brandriff, Rev. Richard.
  Clyde, George C.
  Coate, Elijah.
  Coates, Jonathan.
  Coates, Joshua.
  Davis, Henry.
  Dooling, Dr. Wm.
  Fairfield, Mikey P.
  Green, Wm.
  Hutchins, Josiah.
  Jay, Denny.
  + Lawrence, Henry.
  McCampbell, John Milton.
  McMurd, Robert T.
  Miles, Ephraim.
  Miles, John.
  Miles, Samuel.
  + Nelson, John.
  Pearson, Isaac.
  Pemberton, Jesse.
  Pickering, Burrell.
  Scudder, James.
  Smith, Lester.
  Stevens, Andrew.
  Stevens, Samuel.
  Tullis, John T.

  _Morgan_

  Adams, James.
  Arkins, E. W.
  Bagley, Samuel.
  Beckwith, David.
  Beckwith, Solomon.
  Bundy, Wm.
  Byers, Thomas.
  Cheadle, Rial.
  Coldasure, Mrs.
  Cope, Charles.
  Cope, Nathan P.
  Cope, Wm.
  Corner, Arthur.
  Corner, Edward.
  Corner, Wm.
  Coulson, Jehu.
  Deaver, David H.
  Deaver, Jonas.
  Deaver, Mrs. Affadilla.
  Dennis, Adam.
  Devore, John.
  Doudna, Joseph.
  Dunlap, Adam.
  Everett, John.
  Eves, James.
  Folk, Wm.
  Gift, Mrs. Jane.
  Glendenon, David.
  Glendenon, Isaac
  Glines, Wm.
  Graham, Benjamin.
  Gray, Thomas L.
  Guthrie, Erastus.
  Hambleton, James.
  Hambleton, John.
  Harrison, Wm.
  Hart, James W.
  Harvey, John.
  Hughes, Edward.
  Jones, J. K.
  Lavery, Joseph.
  Lee, Dr. John.
  Little, Dr. H. H.
  Mariam, Cyrus.
  Martin, George.
  Matson, Enoch.
  Millhouse, Wm.
  Millions, Daniel.
  Millions, Robert.
  Millions, Wm.
  Multon, James.
  Nowlton, George.
  Penrose, Thomas.
  Porter, Ralph.
  Reese, Mrs. Rhoda.
  Sheppard, Isaiah.
  Smith, Humphrey.
  Smith, Thomas K.
  Stanbery, Elias.
  Stanbery, Jacob.
  Stanbery, Perly.
  Stokely, Mrs. Lydia.
  Stone, John B.
  Weller, Henry.
  Williams, Enoc.
  Williams, Isaac.
  Williams, Jno. Thos.
  Wood, John.
  Wood, Joshua.
  Woodward, Joseph.
  Woodward, William.

  _Morrow_

  Andrews, Samuel.
  Auld, James.
  Benedict, Wm.
  Brownlee, Archy.
  Dillingham, Richard.
  Eaton, Joseph.
  Ford, Gen. Henry.
  Gordon, Rev.
  Hammond, John.
  Hammond, Richard.
  Hindman, Rev. Samuel
  Hughes, Benjamin.
  Hull, George.
  Keese, John.
  Luke, Thomas.
  McClaren, Robert.
  McGinnis.
  McKibben, James.
  McNeal, Allen.
  McNeal, J. F.
  Mosher, Asa.
  Mosher, John.
  Oshel, James.
  Patent, Mark.
  Preshaw, Wm.
  Roberts, Dr. Reuben L.
  Steele, Wm.
  Tabor, Wm.
  Taylor, James.
  Walker, Andrew.
  Walker, John.
  Willets, Joel.
  Wood, David.
  Wood, Israel.
  Wood, Jonathan.

  _Montgomery_

  Aughey, John.
  Bruen, Luther.
  Coates, David.
  Coates, Henry.
  Herrman, Henry.
  Jay, Denny.
  Jay, Samuel.
  Jewett, Dr. Adams.
  Jewett, Dr. Hibbard.
  Shedd, James A.

  _Muskingum_

  Bells.
  Brown family.
  Buckingham.
  Elliot family.
  Emerson family.
  Gillespie, Mathew.
  Gutherie, Austin Albert.
  Hodly family.
  Harmon family.
  McAtier family.
  Marlow.
  Nye, Maj. Horace.
  Pennock, Elwood.
  Speer, Robert.
  Stitt, James, Sr.
  Terrell, Adam.
  Terrell, Marlow.
  Wallace, David.
  Ward, Hudson Champlin.
  Whipple, Levi.

  _Noble_

  Calland, Robert.
  Cleveland, Timothy.
  Garner, Peter M.
  Horton, Richard.
  Horton, Thomas.
  Leeper, Rev. Wm.
  Lingo, Achilles.
  Phillips, Rev.
  Steele, Wm.
  Tuttles, Church B.

  _Perry_

  Burrell, Almond Hervey.

  _Pickaway_

  Doddridge, Wm.
  Drisback, Jonathan.
  Hanby, Rev. Wm.

  _Pike_

  + Barretts family.
  + Munces family.

  _Portage_

  Case, Truman.
  Folgier, Wm.
  Frazer.
  Hutton, Mrs. Massey.
  Keen, Greenbury.
  Quier, A. C.
  Sloane, John.
  Steadman, General.

  _Preble_

  Brown, Rev. Jas. R.
  Brown, Nathan, Jr.
  Elliott, Hugh.
  Geeding, Adam H.
  Gifford.
  Graves.
  Kinnelly, Daniel.
  Maddock, John.
  Mitchel.
  Silvers, Samuel.
  Stubbs, Jesse.
  Stubbs, John W.
  Stubbs, Newton.
  Talberts.

  _Richland_

  Blymyers.
  Craig, Dr. I. U.
  Finney, James.
  Finney, John P.
  Gass, Benjamin.
  McClure, Benjamin.
  McClure, James.
  McClure, John.
  McClure, Samuel.
  McClure, Wm.
  Martin, Isaac.
  Martin, James.
  Mitchell, George.
  Reed, John.
  Robbins.
  Roe, Joseph.
  Sandersall, Thomas.
  Wood, James.

  _Ross_

  Anderson, James.
  Chancelor, Richard.
  Chancelor, Robert.
  Claypool, Isaac.
  Fidler, Jesse.
  Fidler, John.
  Fullerton, Rev. Hugh S.
  Galbraith, Robert.
  + Green.
  Harmon, John.
  Jackson, James.
  Langstren, Chas. H.
  Lunbeck, Joseph.
  + Mitchell, Rev. W. M.
  Prizer, David.
  Redmond, Andrew.
  Sample, John.
  Scott, Sutterfield.
  + Skillgess, Joseph.
  Steward, Col. Robert.
  Tulley, Erasmus.

  _Sandusky_

  Bidwell, Iberias.
  La Fever, John.
  Paden, Hon. H. F.

  _Scioto_

  Ashton, Joseph.
  Kennedy, Milton.
  + Love, Joseph.
  + Lucas, Dan.
  McClain, Capt.

  _Seneca_

  Grimes family.
  Whetsels family.

  _Shelby_

  Bennet, John S.
  Ogden, Pharaoh A.
  Roberts, James M.

  _Stark_

  Austin, James.
  Blakesley, Jonathan.
  Bowman, Isaac.
  Brooks, Dr. Abram.
  Brooks, Edward.
  Brooks, James.
  Brooks, Samuel.
  Coates, Isaac.
  Coffin, Chas.
  Cole, Dr. Joseph.
  Cope, Hiram.
  Cope, Mary Ann.
  Edgerton, Gov. Sidney.
  Erwin, Mahlon.
  Folger, Capt. Robert H.
  Fox, Jehial.
  Gaskin.
  Gilbert, Barclay.
  Grant, Chas.
  Hall, John.
  Johnson, Ellis.
  Lukens, Joseph.
  Macy, Mathew.
  Macy, Samuel.
  Marshall, Benj.
  Mead, Abner.
  Peirce, I. Newton.
  Purdy, Fitch.
  Purdy, Gerden.
  Quier, Arome.
  Quier, Mary.
  Rockhill, Samuel.
  Rotch, Thomas.
  Sperry, I. P.
  Stout, Zebbes.
  Williams, Irvine.
  Williams, Richard.
  Wright, Alpha.
  Wright, Dr. Amos.
  Wright, Clement.

  _Summit_

  Brown, Jason.
  Brown, John.
  Clarke, Ezra.
  Hudson, David.

  _Trumbull_

  Braden, John.
  Brown, Col.
  Brown, Ephraim.
  Bushnell, Gen. Andrew.
  <DW53>.
  Douglass, Thomas.
  Fenn, Benjamin.
  Fuller, Samuel.
  Green, Cyrel.
  Haines, Acyel.
  Harris, Milo.
  Hart, Ambrose.
  Hayes, Col.
  Hayes, Seth.
  Hoffman, B. F.
  Hutchins, John.
  Jenkins.
  King, Judge Leicester.
  Stewart, Charles.
  Sutliff, Judge Levi.
  Tracy, Azel.
  Weed, John.

  _Tuscarawas_

  Craig, Wm. H.
  Fox, J. W.
  Lindsey, Samuel.
  McClain, Edward.
  McClain, Wm.
  Meek, Robert.
  Powell, F. W.
  Powell, Thomas.

  _Union_

  Carroll, Asa.
  Cherry, Samuel A.
  Ferris, Herman.
  Kinney, Dr. S. M.
  + Mayo, Joe.
  Rathbon, Dr. Charles.
  Skinner, Aaron.
  Skinner, W. H.
  Wood, Judge Wm. W.

  _Vinton_

  Brown, Henry.
  Castor, James.
  Fogg, Thomas P.
  Hawk, Benjamin.
  Hudson, S.
  Morris, Abram.
  Ogle, Henry.

  _Warren_

  Allen, Abram.
  Allen, David.
  Bateman, Jacob.
  Bateman, John.
  Bateman, Warner M.
  Bedford, Wm.
  Brooks, Dr.
  Butterworth, Henry T.
  Butterworth, Samuel.
  Butterworth, Wm. B.
  Carr, Job.
  Corwin, R. G.
  Evans, Joseph.
  Farr, Angelina.
  Farr, Franklin.
  Hopkins, Thomas.
  Miller.
  Mullin, Isaac.
  Mullin, Job.
  Nicholson, Valentine.
  Potts, Edward.
  Potts, John.
  Potts, Samuel.
  Pugh, Achilles.
  Thomas, Jonah D.
  + Wilson, Fred.
  Wilson, Jesse.
  Wright, Jonathan.

  _Washington_

  Bailey, Uriah.
  Cottle, Hamilton.
  Curtis, Liberty.
  Curtis, Eli.
  Dufer, Abe.
  Eastman, Adoniram.
  Fairchild, Hiram.
  Fairchild, Joseph.
  Fulcher, Andrew.
  Garner, Peter M.
  Gould, Ephraim.
  Hale, Smith.
  Hale, Levi.
  Harris, Asa.
  + Harrison, Geo. Wm.
  Heald, Wm. S.
  Hibbard, T. B.
  Hovey, Harvey.
  Hughes, Benjamin.
  Jones, Jerry.
  Lawton, James.
  Lee, Jonathan.
  Loraine, Craton.
  Lund, Isaac.
  McCoy, Rev. J. C.
  Mallett, Albert.
  Morris, Andrew.
  + Norman, Frank.
  Norton, Rev. Richard.
  Porter, Thomas.
  Powells, Washington.
  Preston, Col.
  Price, Abraham.
  Putnam, David.
  Rice, James.
  Ridgeway, Thomas.
  Shepard, Courtland.
  Shotwell, Isaac.
  Shotwell, Titus.
  Smith, Harvey.
  Smith, Wm. Joseph.
  Steel, Wm.
  Stephenson, Dr.
  Stanton, Burdin.
  Stanton, Nathan.
  Stone, Frank.
  Stone, Col. John.
  Tuttle, C. B.
  Vickers, Dr.
  Wilson, Thomas.

  _Wayne_

  Battles, Thomas S.
  Bell, Charity.
  Burr, Timothy.
  Clark, David.
  Cheney, Hibben.
  Daniels, Isaac.
  Degarmon, Dr. Joseph.
  Ladd, Benjamin W.
  McClelland, H. R.
  May, Daniel.
  Oldroyd, Charles.
  Perdu.
  Rose, James.
  Seibert, Samuel.
  Smith, Thomas L.
  Taggart, Robert.

  _Western Reserve_

  Brown, Owen.
  King, Leicester.
  Perkins, Gen.
  Wright, Elizur.

  _Wood_

  Merriton, Wm.
  Moore, Lee.

  _Miscellaneous_

  Cross, Joseph.
  Fulcher, John.
  Heberling, A.
  Palmer, Rundell.


  PENNSYLVANIA

  _Adams_

  Everett, Hamilton.
  Stevens, Thaddeus.
  Walker, Benjamin.
  Wright, Wm.

  _Allegheny_

  Taylor, Charles.

  _Beaver_

  Brown, Rev. Abel.
  Gilbert, Joshua.
  Rakestraw.

  _Bedford_

  + Crawley, Joseph.
  + Fidler, Rev. John.
  Perry, Wyett.
  + Rouse, Rev. Elias.

  _Berks_

  Lewis, Thomas.
  Scarlett, Joseph P.

  _Blair_

  Nesbet, Wm.

  _Bucks_

  Atkinson family.
  Beause family.
  Blackfan family.
  Brown family.
  Buckman family.
  Burgess, William.
  Corson, George.
  Fell, Joseph.
  Heston, Jacob.
  Ivins, Barclay.
  Jackson, Wm.
  Janney, Richard.
  Johnson, Wm. H.
  Kenderdine, John E.
  Linton, Mahlon B. and wife.
  Lloyd, William.
  Longshore, Jolly.
  Magill, Jonathan P.
  Moore, Richard.
  Palmer, Jonathan.
  Paxson family.
  Pierce family.
  Price, Kirk J.
  Schofield, Benjamin.
  Simpson family.
  Smith, Chas. and Martha.
  Swain family.
  Trego family.
  Twining family.
  Warner, Isaac.
  Williams, Edward.

  _Butler_

  Brown.
  McGee, John.
  McGee, George.

  _Chester_

  Agnew, Allen.
  Agnew, Maria.
  Barnard, Eusebius.
  Barnard, Sarah D.
  Barnard, Sarah Marsh.
  Barnard, Simon.
  Barnard, Wm.
  Bonsall, Abram.
  Bonsall, Thomas.
  Carson, Charles.
  Cain, Dr. Augustus W.
  Coates, Levi.
  Corson.
  Cox, John.
  Cox, Hannah.
  Darlington, Chandler.
  Darlington, Hannah M.
  Darlington sisters.
  Evans, Nathan.
  Fulton, James, Jr.
  Fulton, Joseph.
  Fussell, Dr. Bartholomew.
  Fussell, Dr. Edwin.
  Fussell, Wm.
  Groff, John A.
  Haines, Joseph.
  Hambleton, Charles.
  Hambleton, Eli.
  Hambleton, Thomas.
  Hamer, Jesse.
  Hayes, Esther.
  Hayes, Mordecai.
  Haynes, Jacob.
  Hopkins, Thomas.
  Jackson, Wm.
  Kent, Benj.
  Kent, Hannah.
  Kimber, Emmor.
  Kirk, Isaiah.
  Lewis, Elizabeth.
  Lewis, Esther.
  Lewis, Grace Anna.
  Lewis, Marianne.
  Lindley, Jacob.
  Maris, Morris.
  Marsh, Gravner.
  Mendenhall, Dinah.
  Mendenhall, Isaac.
  Meredith, Isaac.
  Meredith, Thamazine.
  Moore, Charles.
  Moore, Joseph.
  Painter, Samuel M.
  Peart, Lewis.
  Pennypacker, Elijah F.
  Pierce, Benjamin.
  Pierce, Gideon.
  Price, George D.
  Preston, Amos.
  Preston, Mahlon.
  Richards, Henry.
  + Shadd, Abraham D.
  Speakman, Micajah.
  Speakman, Wm. A.
  Sugar, John.
  Sugar, Wm.
  Taylor, Wm. W.
  Thomas, Zebulon.
  Thorne, J. Williams.
  Trimble, Wm.
  Vickers, John.
  Vickers, Paxson.
  Vickers, Thomas.
  Walton.
  Walker, Enoch.
  Whitson, Moses.
  Williams, James.
  Williamson, Seymour C.
  Wood, James.

  _Clearfield_

  Atcheson, George.
  Atcheson, Wm.
  Cochran, Isaac.
  Gallaker, James.
  Kirk, Jason, and sons.
  Westover, Wm.

  _Crawford_

  Benn, Jonathan.
  Brown, M. M.
  Churchill.

  _Dauphin_

  Lewis, Dr.

  _Delaware_

  Dannaker, James T.
  Garrett, Isaac.
  Garrett, Philip.
  Garrett, Samuel.
  Jackson, John.
  Lewis, James.
  Price, Benjamin.
  Price, Philip.
  Truman, George S.

  _Erie_

  Henry, Frank.
  Judson, Dr.
  Towner, Jehiel.
  Reeder, James.
  Reeder, Job.

  _Fayette_

  Benson, Joe.
  + Black, Joe.
  Chalfant, Mathew.
  Jackson, John.
  Jackson, Joseph.
  McClure, Potan.
  Miller, Jacob B.
  Waller, Thomas.
  Wares, Joe.
  Webster, Cato.

  _Hampden_

  Osgood, Dr.

  _Indiana_

  Baker, James.
  Baker, John.
  Campbell, Joseph.
  Dixon.
  Gamble, George.
  Hamilton, James.
  Henry.
  Huston, John.
  Huston, Robert.
  Mitchell, Dr.
  Mitchell, Robert.
  Morehead, James.
  Park, James L.
  Powell, Wilson.
  Rank, C. R.
  Rank, George.
  Rank, Samuel.
  Rank, S. K.
  Rank, Zenas.
  Spaulding, George.
  Swispelm, Jane G.
  Thomas, Jesse.
  White, S. P.
  White, Wm., and three sons.
  Work, the brothers.

  _Lancaster_

  Bessick, Thomas.
  Bond, Samuel.
  Brinton, Joseph.
  Brinton, Joshua.
  Brown, Ellwood.
  Bushong, Henry.
  Carter, Henry.
  Coates, Lindley.
  Eshelman, Dr. J. K.
  Furniss, Oliver.
  Gibben, Daniel.
  Gibbons, Joseph.
  Haines, Joseph.
  Hood, Caleb C.
  Hood, Joseph.
  Jackson, Thomas.
  Mifflin, Jonathan.
  Mifflin, Samuel W.
  Moore, James.
  Moore, Jeremiah.
  Peart, Thomas.
  Russell, John Neal.
  Smith, Allen.
  Smith, Joseph.
  Smith, Stephen.
  Thorne, I. Wm.
  Webster, George.
  Whipper, Wm.
  Whitson, Micah.
  Whitson, Thomas.
  Wright, Wm.

  _Lawrence_

  Anderson, Alex.
  Bradford, A. B.
  Bushnell, Rev. Wells.
  Cadwalader.
  Enwer, Daniel.
  Enwer, John N.
  Hart, Dr. A. G.
  McKeever, Judge.
  McKeever, Mathew.
  McMillen, White.
  Minich, James.
  Mitchell, S. W.
  Semple, Amzi C.
  Semple, Eli.
  Sharpless, Benjamin.
  Stevenson, E. M.
  Walker, W. W.
  White, Joseph S.
  Wright, Alexander.
  Young, David.
  Young, John.
  Young, William.

  _Luzerne_

  Gildersleeve.

  _Mercer_

  Bishop.
  Gilbert, John.
  Gordon, Rev. George.
  Grierson, Robert.
  Hogue, John I.
  Hogue, Wesley.
  Jansan, Mathew.
  Minich, James.
  Squires, John.
  Thorn, Wilson.
  Travis, Richard.
  Ward.
  Wilson, George.
  Young, John.

  _Mifflin_

  Johnston, Wm. B.
  Maclay, Dr. Samuel.
  Nourse, Rev. Joseph.
  Thompson, James.
  Thompson, Samuel.

  _Monroe_

  Singmaster, Jacob.
  Vail family.

  _Montgomery_

  Aaron, Rev. Samuel.
  Corson, E. Hick.
  Corson, George.
  Corson, Lawrence E.
  Corson, Dr. Wm.
  Garrigues, Benjamin.
  Newport, David.
  Paxson, Dr. Jacob I.
  Pierce, Eli D.
  Read, Thomas.
  Roberts, Isaac.
  Roberts, John.
  Ross, Daniel.
  Warner.

  _Philadelphia_

  Aaron, Rev. Samuel.
  Bias, James Gould.
  Brown, David Paul.
  Burr, John P.
  + Burris, Sam'l D.
  Coates, Edwin H.
  Davis, Edward M.
  + Depee, N. W.
  Earle, Hon. Thomas.
  Elder, Dr.
  Fortune, James.
  Furness, Rev. Wm. H.
  + Garnet, Henry Highland.
  Harrison, Benj.
  Harrison, Thomas.
  Hastings, Samuel D.
  Johnson, Wm. H.
  Lambson, Capt.
  McKim, J. Miller.
  Moore, Esther.
  Mott, James.
  Mott, Lucretia.
  Purvis, Robert.
  Rhoads, Samuel.
  + Ruggles, David.
  + Still, Wm.
  Smith, Stephen,
  + Tubman, Harriet.
  Twining, Henry M.
  Ware, Isaiah.
  Whildon, Capt.
  + White, Jacob C.
  Williamson, Hon. Passmore.
  Wise, Charles.

  _Somerset_

  + Smith.
  Willey, Wm.

  _Susquehanna_

  Bard, Sam'l.
  Brewster, Horace.
  Carmalt, Caleb.
  Foster, Wm.
  Lyons, B. R.
  Post, Albert.
  Post, Isaac.
  Warner, Sam'l.

  _Venango_

  Conley.
  Clapp, B. Ralph.
  Howe, John W.
  Hughes, John.
  Kingsley, James.
  + Lawson, James.
  + Lawson, Job.
  McDowell, Alex.
  Raymond, Wm.
  Rodgers, James.
  Small, S. H.
  Travis, Rich.

  _Washington_

  Lemoin, Dr.
  McKeever, Mathew.

  _Wyoming_

  Drake, Jonathan.
  Overfield, Nicholas.

  _York_

  Fisher, Joel.
  Goodrich, Wm. C.
  Jourdon, Cato.
  Loney, Robert.
  Mifflin, Jonathan.
  Mifflin, Susan.
  Mifflin, Sam'l.
  Wallace.
  Wierman, Joel.
  Willis, Samuel.
  Wright, Wm.


  RHODE ISLAND

  _Newport_

  Mitchell, Jethro.
  Mitchell, Anne.

  _Providence_

  Adams, Robert.
  Buffum, Arnold.
  Buffum, Wm.
  Chace, Mrs. Elizabeth Buffum.
  Chace, Samuel B.
  Mitchell, Daniel.
  Walker, Capt. Jonathan.


  VIRGINIA

  _Brock_

  Bryant, Joseph.

  _Wheeling_

  + Naler, Dick.
  Steele, Joshua.

  _Miscellaneous_

  Smith, Samuel A.


  VERMONT

  _Addison_

  Barber, E. D.
  Barker, Samuel.
  Fuller, R. L.
  Gordon, Joseph.
  Robinson, Rowland T.
  Rogers, Joseph.
  Wicker, Cyrus W.

  _Bennington_

  Robert, Daniel, Jr.
  Wilcox, Dr. S.

  _Caledonia_

  Bailey, Rev. Kiah.

  _Chittenden_

  Bigelow, L. G.
  Briggs, Wm. P.
  Byington, Anson.
  Dean, Professor.
  French, Wm. H.
  Hoag, Nathan C.
  Lovely, Noble.
  McNeil.
  Stansbury, E. A.
  Young, Rev. Joshua, D.D.

  _Franklin_

  Brainerd, Hon. Lawrence.
  Comings, Andrew.
  Felton, Charles.
  Green, Rev.
  Kendall, Col. Samuel.
  Martin, Jefferson.
  Sanborn, E. S.
  Sabin, Hon. Alvah.

  _Lamoille_

  Caldwell, A. W.
  Dodge, Jonathan.
  Gleed, Rev. John.
  Hotchkiss, J. M.
  Safford, Madison.
  West, Hon. John.

  _Orange_

  Griswold, Howard.
  Kimball, F. W.
  Moore, Dr. L. C.
  Putnam, Rev. George.
  Rowell, Hon. A. J.

  _Rutland_

  Marsh, R. V.
  Nicholson, D. E.
  Rauney, E. S.
  Rogers, Aaron.
  Rogers, Dinah.
  Thrall, R. R.

  _Washington_

  Arms, Dr.
  Butler, Dea.
  Miller, Col. J. P.
  Parker, Dea.
  Stows, Stephen F.

  _Windham_

  Frost, Willard.
  Shafter, Oscar L.
  Shafter, Wm. R.

  _Windsor_

  Fletcher, Ryland.
  Hutchinson, Ozamel.
  Hutchinson, Hon. Titus.
  Morris, Dea. Sylvester.
  Woodward, Daniel.


  WISCONSIN

  _Racine_

  Bartlett, J. O.
  Bunce, Charles.
  Dutton, A. P.
  Fitch, "Elder."
  Peffer.
  Pick, S. B.
  Reed, Gen.
  Secor, Dr.
  Steel, Capt.
  Utley, W. L.
  Waterman, W. H.
  Wright, George S.

  _Waukesha_

  Brown, Samuel.
  Chandler, Daniel.
  Clinton, Dea. Allen.
  Dougherty.
  Goodnow, Lyman.
  Mendall, Dea.

  _Walworth_

  Thompson, Charles.


  WASHINGTON, D.C.

  Bigelow, Jacob.
  Drayton, Capt. Daniel.


MEMBERS OF THE VIGILANCE COMMITTEE OF BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS[990]

  [990] This list of names is taken from Bearse's _Reminiscences of
  Fugitive-Slave Law Days in Boston_, pp. 3, 4, 5, 6.

(Organized October 14, 1850)

  Adams, Charles B.
  Adams, George.
  Alcott, A. Bronson.
  Allen, Ephraim.
  Allyne, Joseph W.
  Andrew, John A.
  Andrews, Erastus.
  Apthorp, Robert E.
  Atkinson, Edward.
  Atkinson, William P.
  Augustus, John.
  Ayres, John.
  Barker, Rensalaer.
  Baxter, Thompson.
  Bearse, Austin.
  Bigelow, Dennis.
  Bishop, Joel P.
  Blakemore, William.
  Blanchard, Joshua P.
  Bolles, John A.
  Botume, John, Jr.
  Bouve, Thomas T.
  Bowditch, Henry I.
  Bowditch, William I.
  Bramhall, Cornelius.
  Bridge, Jonathan D.
  Brimblecom, F.
  Brimblecom, F. A.
  Browne, John W.
  Bryant, David.
  Bruce, Jeptha C.
  Burlingame, Anson.
  Burrage, Alvah A.
  Cabot, Fred. S.
  Capen, Lemuel.
  Carew, Thomas.
  Carnes, George W.
  Caswell, Lewis E.
  Channing, William F.
  Channing, William H.
  Chase, L. G.
  Cheever, George F.
  Child, Alfred A.
  Child, Daniel F.
  Colver, Nathaniel.
  Cornell, William M.
  Cowing, Cornelius.
  Crosby, Robert R.
  Curtis, John, Jr.
  Cushing, Henry D.
  Cutter, Abraham E.
  Dana, Richard H., Jr.
  Danforth, John C.
  Davie, Johnson.
  Davis, Charles G.
  Denio, Sylvanus A.
  Dodge, George.
  Dodge, Joshua G.
  Downer, Samuel, Jr.
  Edmunds, Edward.
  Eldridge, John S.
  Ellis, Charles.
  Ellis, Charles M.
  Emmons, John L.
  Fay, Emery B.
  Fillebrown, Edward.
  Fisher, George J.
  Fitch, Jonas.
  Fuller, Richard F.
  Gage, Benjamin W.
  Garrison, William Lloyd.
  Gibbs, John B.
  Gilbert, Timothy.
  Gore, John C.
  Gove, John.
  Gooch, Daniel W.
  Greene, Benjamin H.
  Hamlet, William.
  Hanscom, Simon P.
  Hanson, Moses P.
  + Hayden, Lewis.
  Hayes, Joseph K.
  Hersey, Nathan W.
  Hildreth, Richard.
  Hilton, John T.
  Holman, Joshua B.
  Holmes, Richard.
  Holmes, William H.
  Hood, Richard.
  Houghton, George W.
  Howe, Samuel G.
  Howland, David.
  Hovey, Charles F.
  Hoxie, Timothy W.
  Hunt, Ebenezer.
  Hunter, Thomas.
  Jackson, Edmund.
  Jackson, E. W.
  Jackson, Francis.
  Jameson, William H.
  Jenkins, William H.
  Jewett, John P.
  Kemp, Henry.
  Kendall, Stephen B.
  Kimball, John S.
  Kimball, Peter.
  King, John G.
  King, T. Starr.
  Knapp, Frederick N.
  Lawton, John T.
  Layton, Joseph J.
  Lewis, Enoch.
  Lewis, Joel W.
  Lincoln, Henry W.
  List, Charles.
  Lloyd, Samuel H.
  Locke, Amos W.
  Loring, Ellis Gray.
  Lowell, James Russell.
  Mackay, T. B.
  Manley, John R.
  Marjoram, William W.
  Marsh, Bela.
  Marston, Russell.
  May, Frederick W. G.
  May, Samuel, Jr.
  McCrea, J. B.
  McPhail, Andrew M., Jr.
  Merriam, E. S.
  Merrill, George.
  Minot, George.
  Mitchell, George H.
  Moody, Loring.
  Morris, Robert.
  Mussey, Benjamin B.
  Nichols, Henry P.
  Nash, Nathaniel C.
  Nell, William C.
  Orne, Otis.
  Osgood, Isaac.
  Parker, Henry T.
  Parker, Theodore.
  Parkman, John.
  Parks, Luther, Jr.
  Perkins, Thomas C.
  Phelps, Sylvester.
  Phillips, Wendell.
  Pratt, J.
  Prentiss, Henry J.
  Putnam, Joseph H.
  Quimby, J. P.
  Quincy, Edmund.
  Raymond, William T.
  Richards, James B.
  Ritchie, Uriah.
  Rogers, George M.
  Rogers, John S.
  Rogers, Robert B.
  Russell, George R.
  Russell, Thomas, Jr.
  Sargent, John T.
  Sawyer, William N.
  Sewall, Samuel E.
  Shaw, Francis G.
  Slack, Charles W.
  Smilie, J. H.
  Smith, Chauncey.
  Smith, Joshua B.
  Smith, J. W.
  Smith, Stephen.
  Snowden, Isaac H.
  Southwick, Joseph.
  Sporrell, William.
  Spear, John M.
  Spooner, Lysander.
  Spooner, William B.
  Steele, William M.
  Stone, James W.
  Stone, Milton J.
  Storrs, Amariah.
  Sullivan, John W.
  Swift, John L.
  Taft, A. C.
  Talbot, S. D.
  Tappan, Charles.
  Thayer, David.
  Thompson, John.
  Tolman, James.
  Towne, William B.
  Treanor, Barnard S.
  Trafton, Mark.
  Trask, Henry P.
  Wakefield, Enoch H.
  Wallcutt, Robert F.
  Walker, Dana D.
  Warren, Washington.
  Waters, Edwin F.
  Waterston, Robert C.
  Webb, Seth, Jr.
  Whipple, Charles K.
  White, William A.
  Whitman, William H.
  Wilson, Alexander.
  Withington, Oliver W.
  Wright, Elizur.
  Yerrington, J. M. W.
  York, Jasper H.


MEMBERS OF THE "LEAGUE OF GILEADITES" OF SPRINGFIELD,
MASSACHUSETTS[991]

  [991] Sanborn, in his _Life and Letters of John Brown_, pp. 125
  and 126, prints this roll of members.

(Organized among the <DW64>s by John Brown, January 15, 1851)

  Addams, Joseph.
  Burns, William.
  Chandler, Samuel.
  Dowling, B. C.
  Fowler, Jane.
  Gazam, C. A.
  Gordon, William.
  Green, Eliza.
  Green, William.
  Hector, Henry.
  Holmes, G. W.
  Howard, J. N.
  Johnson, Ann.
  Johnson, Henry.
  Johnson, Reverdy.
  Jones, H. J.
  Montague, William H.
  Odell, Charles.
  Robinson, Henry.
  Rollins, Charles.
  Smith, John.
  Strong, John.
  Thomas, Cyrus.
  Wallace, L.
  Webb, Scipio.
  Wicks, Jane.

And seventeen others, whose names are unknown.


MEMBERS OF THE VIGILANCE COMMITTEE OF SYRACUSE, NEW YORK[992]

  [992] This list will be found in the _Autobiography of the Rev.
  J. W. Loguen_, p. 396.

(Organized October 4, 1850)

  Agan, P. H.
  Barnes, George.
  Bates, Abner.
  Clary, Lyman.
  Levenworth, C. W.
  + Loguen, J. W.
  Putnam, H.
  Raymond, R. R.
  Sedgwick, C. B.
  Smith, V. W.
  Thomas, John.
  Wheaton, C. A.
  Wilkinson, John.


MEMBERS OF THE GENERAL VIGILANCE COMMITTEE OF PHILADELPHIA,
PENNSYLVANIA[993]

  [993] These names are given in Still's _Underground Railroad
  Records_, pp. 610, 611, 612.

(Organized December 2, 1852)

  Asher, J.
  Burr, J. P.
  Bustill, Charles H.
  Depee, Nathaniel.
  Goines, B. N.
  Gordon, Henry.
  Hall, Morris.
  M'Kim, J. M.
  Nickless, Samuel.
  Oliver, John D.
  Purvis, Robert.
  Reason, Prof. C. L.
  Riley, W. H.
  Still, William.
  Wears, Josiah C.
  White, Jacob C.
  Whitson, Cyrus.
  Wise, Charles.




INDEX


  Abbot, Major J. B., host of John Brown, 164.

  Abbot, Rev. J. S. C., on effect of Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, on
      family of fugitives, 247, 248.

  Abduction, Harriet Tubman, a practitioner in, 6;
    of slaves from Missouri by John Brown, 8, 9, 338;
    Rufus King on, 29 _n._;
    of abolitionists, rewards for, 52, 53;
    of slaves from Covington, Ky., by Fairbank, 61;
    of slaves by John Fairfield, the Virginian, 66, 67;
    methods of, employed by Dr. A. M. Ross, 104;
    Still on abductions through agency of the U. G. R. R., 118 _n._;
    sentiment of abolitionists against, 150;
    by <DW64>s, 151;
    by refugees of Canada, 152, 153;
    by Southern whites, 153, 154;
    by Northern whites, 154, 155;
    by Burr, Work and Thompson, 155, 156;
    by Joseph Sider, 157;
    by Calvin Fairbank, 157-160;
    by Seth Concklin, 160-162;
    by John Brown, 162-165;
    in Brown's plan of liberation, 166, 167;
    by Charles T. Torrey, 168-170;
    by Capt. Jonathan Walker, 170, 171;
    by Laura S. Haviland, 171, 172;
    by Capt. Daniel Drayton, 172, 173;
    by Richard Dillingham, 174, 175;
    by Wm. L. Chaplin, 175, 176;
    by Josiah Henson, 176-178;
    by Rial Cheadle, 178, 179;
    by Dr. A. M. Ross, 179-182;
    by Elijah Anderson, 183;
    by John Mason, 183, 184;
    by Harriet Tubman, 185-189;
    of friends from the South planned by Canadian exiles, 231, 232;
    of a free <DW64> from New York in 1850, 269;
    of <DW64>s from southeastern Pennsylvania, 280;
    of free <DW64>s from Northern state under law of 1793, 295;
    failure of Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 to recompense South for
        losses through, 341;
    disappearance of slavery from District of Columbia attributed to
        the U. G. R. R. and, 341, 342.

  Abolition, gradual, 17;
    boats, 148;
    in Canada, 190, 191;
    sentiment of, in Northern states prevents reclamation of
        fugitives, 241-243;
    immediate, before Garrison, advocated by Bourne in 1816, 303, 304;
    immediate, advocated by Duncan in 1824, 304-306;
    immediate, advocated by Rankin in 1824, 306-308;
    immediate, germination of idea of, 307;
    immediate, formulation of the principle of, in U. G. R. R.
        neighborhoods, 357.

  Abolitionists, hidden methods of, 2;
    recollections of, main source of history of Underground Railroad,
        11;
    characterization of, 12;
    convictions of, 17;
    Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 detested by, 24;
    in Iowa, 43;
    testimony of, regarding activity of the U. G. R. R. (1830-1840),
        44, 308;
    social disdain borne by, 48-50;
    espionage endured by, 50-54;
    rewards for abduction of, 52, 53;
    known as "conductors," 60;
    destitution of fugitives relieved by expenditures of, 76-78;
    waterway extensions of U. G. R. R. established by, 82;
    temper of, shown in rescue of fugitives under arrest, 86;
    political affiliations of, 99-101;
    United States Constitution burned at meeting of, 101;
    treated with justice in history, 101;
    penalties paid by, 102, 103;
    settlements of, in Maryland, 119;
    Brown Thurston of Portland, Me., a veteran, 133;
    on number of U. G. R. R. lines in Ohio, 135;
    devices of, to secure safety of fugitives, 141;
    sentiment of, against abduction, 150;
    dine with Fairfield the abductor, 154 _n._;
    risks taken by an, in abducting a slave, 155;
    abductions by, along the borders of slave territory, 155;
    appeals of fugitives to, for aid for friends in bondage, 168;
    arrest of Charles T. Torrey for being an, 169;
    number of fugitives early aided by, in southern Ohio, 192;
    testimony of, on the effects of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850,
        193;
    underground work in Iowa and Illinois by, 194, 195;
    Canadian refugees visited by, 199-201; refuge found by runaway
        slaves among, in Northern states, 212, 213, 275;
    visitation of communities of, by slave hunters, 239, 240;
    prevent reclamation of fugitives, 241, 242;
    irritated by mode of arrests under Slave Law of 1793, 259;
    efforts to use Northwest Ordinance in defeat of law of 1793, 262,
        263;
    law of 1850 objectionable to, 267-273;
    possibility of abduction of free <DW64>s from the North under law
        of 1850, declared by, 268, 269;
    on commissioners' fees under law of 1850, 271, 272;
    secrecy observed by, 272;
    characteristics of pre-Garrisonian, 307;
    grateful employment of, in helping slaves, 310;
    societies of, criticised by Webster, 314;
    information about, among slaves, 316;
    exultation of, over rescue of Jerry McHenry, 320;
    residence of Harriet Beecher Stowe among, in Cincinnati, O., 321;
    various activities of, 326;
    increasing number of fugitives aided by, 327;
    restiveness of, under jurisdiction of United States Courts in
        fugitive slave cases, 335;
    of Lawrence, Kan., abused by Missourians, 347;
    aid rendered fugitives by, at Lawrence, Kan., 348;
    efficiency of underground work of, compared with work of American
        Colonization Society, 350, 351;
    support of U. G. R. R. by, alleged, 351;
    multiplication of, due to the U. G. R. R., 357.

  Adams, Robert, 130.

  Agents of the U. G. R. R., significance of the name, 67;
    in Baltimore, 68;
    employment of regular, 69, 70;
    number of, 87;
    hospitality of, 87-89;
    admitted principles of, 89, 90;
    nationality of, 90-92;
    church connections of, 93-98;
    churches of Massachusetts appealed to by, 99;
    political affiliations of, 99-101;
    character of, 101;
    penalties suffered by, 102, 103;
    Defensive League of Freedom for payment of fines of, proposed in
        Boston, 103, 104;
    notable persons among, 104-112;
    limited area of operation of, 113;
    in Pennsylvania, 121;
    in New York, 122-127;
    in New Jersey, 123, 124;
    in Massachusetts, 129, 130;
    in Vermont, 130, 131;
    devices of, 137;
    work of abduction by Seth Concklin as one of the, 160;
    fearless work of, at Sandusky, O., 276, 277;
    Harriet B. Stowe and John Brown as, 290;
    Rev. John Rankin, active in ranks of, 307;
    J. R. Giddings one of the most enthusiastic of, 315;
    appealed to by Canadian refugees for abduction of friends,
        231, 232;
    among fugitive settlers in the North, 251-253.

  Alabama, purchase of slaves by, 26;
    underground line from northern, 119;
    Canadian refugees from, 195;
    attempted abduction of Peter Still's family from, 160;
    operations in, planned by Brown, 167.

  Alcott, A. B., friend of Harriet Tubman, 186;
    part of, in the Burns case, 331.

  Alleghanies, the use to be made of, in Brown's plan of liberation,
      166.

  Allen, Abram, special conveyance of, for fugitives, 59, 60;
    visit of, to Canada, 199.

  Alum Creek Quaker Settlement,
    leaf from diary of station-keeper in, 10;
    activity of station in, 76, 77;
    facsimile of record kept by Daniel Osborn of, 344, 345.

  American Baptist Free Mission Society, ministrations to refugees in
      Toronto, Canada, 3, 183.

  American Colonization Society, objects and work of, compared with
      those of U. G. R. R., 350, 351.

  _American Historical Review_, on Underground Railroad, 5.

  Amherstburg, Canada West as a receiving depot for fugitives, 194;
    visit of Levi Coffin to, 200;
    supplies for Canadian refugees in, 214;
    congregation of fugitives in, 225;
    <DW64> mechanics in, 226;
    Dr. Howe on condition of <DW52> people in, 226 n;
    Drew on condition of refugees in, 227;
    separate schools for <DW64>s in, 229;
    first "True Band" organized in, 230;
    comparison of amounts of property owned by whites and blacks in,
        and in other places, 232.

  Anderson, Elijah, abductor, 183.

  Anderson, William, extradition of the fugitive, from Canada refused,
      352, 353.

  Andrew, Bishop James O., church proceedings against, 95.

  Andrew, John A., 103;
    appreciation of Harriet Tubman, 189.

  Andrews, Ex-Pres. E. Benjamin, on route in Massachusetts, 129.

  "Anti-Slavery Days, History of," in Illinois, 6.

  _Anti-Slavery in the State and Nation_, on refugees forwarded to
      Brunswick, 219.

  Anti-slavery men, Theodore Parker on the first duty of, 109;
    meetings of, in New England, 171. _See_ Abolitionists.

  Anti-slavery movement, Chas. T. Torrey engages in, 168, 169;
    humane motives of, 286;
    U. G. R. R., a causal factor in development of, 290, 302;
    character of pre-Garrisonian, 307;
    continuity of development of, 307, 308;
    failure of _Uncle Tom's Cabin_ to produce election gains for, 323.

  Anti-slavery sentiment, among people from the Southern states, 31,
      32, 41;
    revenge on Mission Institute for, 156;
    in Congress, 173;
    settlement of fugitives in communities characterized by, 212, 242;
    proof of early, in free states, 300;
    influence of U. G. R. R. in spreading, 302;
    in the North, 309, 310.

  Anti-Slavery Society, of Philadelphia, of New York, Harriet Tubman
      a well-known visitor of the, 189;
    of Massachusetts, 193;
    of Canada, 204;
    benefactions of, for fugitive slaves, 222, 223;
    persons of respectability in societies, 308;
    encouragement given by, to bondmen to flee, 310;
    reports of Pennsylvania and Massachusetts societies on increasing
        number of fugitives after 1850, 327;
    of New England, meeting of, at time of rendition of Burns, 332.

  Appalachian route of escape for slaves, 118.

  Appleby, Capt., master of lake boat carrying fugitives, 82.

  Arkansas, abducting trip of Fairbank into, 65.

  Armstrong, abductor, 153.

  Armstrong, J. H. B., operator, 42, 43.

  Arnold, Hon. Isaac N., counsel in fugitive slave case, 284.

  Arrest, of abductor Calvin Fairbank, 158, 159;
    of abductor Charles T. Torrey, 169;
    of abductor Capt. Walker, 170;
    of abductors Drayton and Sayres, 173;
    of abductor Dillingham, 174;
    of abductor Chaplin, 176;
    of fugitive slaves in the North between 1850-1856, 240, 241;
    mode of, under law of 1793, 257-259;
    right of private, under law of 1850, 267;
    of fugitive slave, penalties for hindering, 279;
    of operators, 283;
    of <DW64>s in the South during the War, 287;
    of free <DW64> in Philadelphia, 317;
    of Jerry McHenry in Syracuse, 318;
    of rescuers in Christiana case, 319;
    of Burns in Boston, 331.

  Articles of Confederation (1643), clause for rendition of fugitives
      quoted, 19;
    absence of provision for return of fugitives in, 293.

  Ashburton Treaty, extradition of the fugitive Anderson from Canada
      sought under, 352, 353.

  Ashley, Congressman James M., operator, 92, 106.

  Association for the Education and Elevation of the <DW52> People of
      Canada, 233.

  Atchison, of Kentucky, on loss sustained by slave-owners of border
      states, 341.


  Baine, Patrick, owner of Harriet Hayden, 158.

  Bains, Eliza, operator in Portsmouth, Va., 118.

  Baird, Thomas D., 96.

  Baltimore, fugitive shipped in a box from, 60;
    agents in, 68, 91, 117, 151;
    anti-slavery sentiment in Friends' Yearly Meeting of, 93;
    abductions of Harriet Tubman from, 186;
    petition of Quakers of, against kidnapping, 296.

  Baptist Church, appeal to societies of, in Massachusetts, 99.

  Barbour, American Minister, on negotiations with England concerning
      fugitive slaves, 300.

  Baxter and Grant, owners of Lewis Hayden, 158.

  Bayliss, James, on canal route, 142.

  _Beacon_, the, reminiscences of "Early Settlement and Growth of
      Western Iowa," in, 7.

  Beard, William, visit of, to Canadian refugees, 199.

  Bearse, Capt. Austin, doorkeeper of Boston Vigilance Committee, 73;
    rescues from vessels by, 81;
    on stowaways from the South, 144.

  Beck, Dr. Isaac M., brief mention of, 32 _n._;
    reward for abduction of, 53.

  Beecher, Henry Ward, counterpart of, in _Uncle Tom's Cabin_, 322.

  Benedict, Aaron, reminiscences of U. G. R. R., 6.

  Benedict, Aaron L., runaways entertained by, 76, 77.

  Benezet, Anthony, precepts of, 49.

  Benton, Thomas H., 159;
    on passage of Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, 311 _n._

  Berrien, Col., conductor, 144.

  Bibb, Henry,
    projector of Refugees' Home, 209;
    stock of supplies maintained by, 214;
    passenger on U. G. R. R., 340.

  Bibb, Mrs. Mary E., school-teacher among Canadian refugees, 215.

  Bigelow, Jacob, operator, 117.

  Bigelow, L. H., 130.

  Bingey, Anthony,
    on escape of his family to Canada, 76;
    on increase of fugitives arriving in Canada, 194;
    desire for freedom of, 196;
    on refugee population of Ontario, 221;
    on effects of Slave Law of 1850, 249.

  Bingham, Dr. J. A., 89.

  Blake, Capt., fugitives carried by boat of, 83.

  Blake, of Ohio, bill of, for repeal of Fugitive Slave laws, 286.

  Boat service for transportation of absconding slaves, 81-83, 118,
      145-148, 219, 252.

  Bolding, John, seizure of, under Slave Law of 1850, 241.

  Booth, Sherman M., power of commissioners questioned in case of,
      270;
    penalty imposed in case of, 279;
    case of, before the courts in Wisconsin, 329;
    limits of state authority defined in case of, 330;
    protest against Douglas legislation in case of,

  Borden, Nathaniel P., 130.

  Boston, conveyance of fugitives by William I. Bowditch of, 61;
    Vigilance Committee of, 71-73;
    escapes by vessel to, 81;
    early rescue in, 83, 84;
    rescue of Shadrach in, 86;
    appeal of Vigilance Committee of, for aid, 98, 99;
    attempted rescue of Burns in, 103, 330-332;
    aid rendered fugitives by Theodore Parker in, 109, 110;
    slaves sent to New Bedford and, from Virginia, 118;
    James Freeman Clarke on protection of fugitives in, 132;
    refugees sent from New York to, 145;
    to England from, 145;
    estimate of fugitives in, 235;
    law of 1850 denounced by meeting in, 244;
    consternation among fugitives in, 246-248;
    continued residence of refugees in, after 1850, 250, 251;
    Lewis Hayden in, 251, 252;
    early pursuit of fugitives in, 302;
    Shadrach, Sims, and Craft cases in, 317.

  Boston and Worcester Railroad, 80.

  Boston Public Library, scrap-book of Theodore Parker in, 8.

  Bourne, Rev. George, early advocate of immediate abolition, 303,
      304, 306;
    political action against slavery proposed by, 305 n.

  Bowditch, William I., 61, 132.

  Bowles, Col. J., letter of, on U. G. R. R. depot at Lawrence, Kan.,
      347-350.

  Brace, Avery, 16.

  Bragdon, George C., on stations on the St. Lawrence, 127 _n._

  Brainerd, Hon. Lawrence, 107;
    fugitives shipped by rail by, 145.

  Bramlette, Gov. Thomas E., opposed to pardon of Fairbank, 159, 160.

  Brant, Chief, fugitives received by people of, 92, 203.

  Brennan, Mr., escape of slave from, 65.

  Brisbane, W. H., hiding-places provided by, 64.

  British and American Manual Labor Institute, <DW52> children, 200;
    origin of Dawn Settlement, 205;
    work of, for Canadian refugees, 214;
    visited by Levi Coffin, 220;
    lumber industry established at, 223;
     settlers attracted by, 229, 230.

  Brooks, Prof. W. M., on stations in southwestern Iowa, 33, 98.

  Brooks family, of Concord, Mass., friends of Harriet Tubman, 186.

  Brown, David Paul, counsel for fugitive slaves, 284, 285.

  Brown, Eli F., hiding-place provided by, 64.

  Brown, Henry Box, shipment of, in a box, 60.

  Brown, John, notes of, relating to his raid, 8;
    father of, a friend of fugitives, 37;
    League of Gileadites organized by, 73, 74;
    transportation of party of, through Iowa, 79;
    entertained by J. B. Grinnell, 108;
    strategy of, 118;
    North Elba home of, a terminus of the U. G. R. R., 127;
    route followed by, with his abducted slaves, 136, 164, 165;
    Missouri raid of, 162, 163;
    effect of his raid, 165;
    plan of liberation of, 166-168, 357;
    Dr. A. M. Ross, a friend of, 183 _n._;
    on Harriet Tubman, 185;
    concern of, for fugitive settlers in Canada, 199;
    influence of U. G. R. R. upon, 290, 301, 338, 339;
    Col. J. Bowles on, 349, 350.

  Brown, Mary, owner of James Hamlet, 269.

  Brown, Owen, father of John Brown, early operations of, 37, 301.

  Brown, Wells, befriends the fugitive William Wells Brown, 77.

  Brown, William Wells, befriended, 77;
    conveyance of fugitives to Canada by, 83, 252;
    qualities of leadership in, 340.

  Buchanan, James, amendments to Constitution in regard to fugitive
      slaves recommended by, 286;
    Booth pardoned by, 331;
    appealed to in Addison White case, 334;
    on enforcement of Fugitive Slave law during his administration,
        353.

  Bucknel and Taylor, slave-owners, 196.

  Buffalo,
    boat service to, 83;
    release of alleged fugitives in, 317.

  Burns, Anthony,
    Theodore Parker's memoranda on rendition of, 8;
    Vigilance Committee fails to rescue, 73;
    attempt to rescue, 103;
    case of, 251, 271, 283;
    rendition of, 331-333.

  Burr, James E., one of abducting party of, Work and Thompson, 155,
      156.

  Burroughes, George L., agent of Underground Road, 70.

  Bushnell, Simeon, case of, 270;
    penalty paid by, 279.

  Buswell, N. C., on abduction by Canadian refugee, 152.

  Butler, of South Carolina, on loss sustained by slave-owners, 341.

  Buxton Settlement in Canada. _See_ Elgin Association.

  Buxton, Thomas Fowell, 207.


  Cabot, Samuel, Jr., 103.

  Calhoun, on Drayton's expedition with the Pearl, 173, 174;
    on an enactment making it unlawful to aid fugitives, 309;
    on the need of a new fugitive slave law, 313; championship of the
        Slave Law of 1850, 314.

  California, sanction of, to Slave Law of 1850, 246.

  Calvinists. _See_ Presbyterian Church.

  Campbell, C. B., 58.

  Campbell, Dr. Alexander, reward for abduction of, 53.

  Canada, escapes from the American colonies to, 20, 292;
    Clay's negotiations for extradition of fugitive slaves from, 22,
        299, 300;
    knowledge of, among slaves, 27-30, 180, 182, 197, 198;
    underground routes through New York to, 35;
    early arrival of fugitives in, 43, 44;
    entered from Detroit, 66;
    number of fugitives forwarded to, by one abolitionist neighborhood
        before 1817, 87;
    number sent to, by Chas. T. Torrey before 1844, 88;
    fugitives received by people of Chief Brant in, 92;
    terminals in, 127, 133, 134;
    route to, via Portland, Me., 133;
    Ontario, the goal of the great majority of runaways, 140, 148;
    extent of the region in, settled by refugees, 148, 149;
    hospitality of, 149;
    abductions by refugees of, 152;
    excursions of the abductor Fairfield to, 153, 154;
    reception given Fairfield and his protégés on their arrival in,
        154;
    enthusiasm in, over John Brown's Missouri raid, 165;
    part to be taken by refugees of, in Brown's plan of liberation,
        167;
    Dawn Institute in, 168;
    delight of fugitives on reaching, 178, 196, 197;
    ministrations of American Baptist Free Mission Society among
        refugees at Toronto, 183;
    number assisted to, by abductor John Mason, 184;
    trips of abductor Harriet Tubman to, 187, 189;
    position of Canada on slavery question, 190, 191;
    early arrival of fugitive slaves in, 192;
    increased influx of fugitives, 193, 194;
    refugees in, a representative body of the slave class, 195, 196;
    severity of conditions in, 198;
    treatment of refugee settlers in, 199, 200;
    attitude of government of, toward refugees, 201-203;
    conditions favorable to settlement of fugitives in, 203-205;
    fugitive aid societies in, 204, 205;
    Dawn Settlement, 205-207;
    Elgin Settlement, 207-209;
    Refugees' Home Settlement, 209, 210;
    objects of the colonies, 210, 211;
    Dr. Howe's criticism of the colonies, 211, 212;
    defence of the colonies, 212, 213;
    services of the colonization societies, 213-215;
    conclusions concerning the colonies, 216, 217;
    fugitive settlers in towns of, 217, 218;
    movement of fugitives to the interior of, 218, 219;
    refugees in the eastern provinces of, 219;
    refugee population in, 220-224, 313;
    occupations of refugees in, 223;
    congregation of refugees in towns of, 225, 226;
    prosperity of refugees in, 226, 227;
    their domestic life in, 227, 228;
    their school opportunities in, 228, 229;
    their societies for self-improvement in, 230, 231;
    their efforts for the rescue of friends from slavery, 231, 232;
    their taxable property in, 232;
    their political privileges in, 232;
    their value as citizens, 233, 234;
    return of many from, 235;
    increased influx of fugitives into, after passage of law of 1850,
        246-250, 316;
    escape of Shadrach and Jerry McHenry to, 317, 318;
    Glover forwarded to, 328;
    escape of Addison White to, 334;
    extradition of Anderson refused by, 352, 353.

  Canadian Anti-Slavery Society, on employment for Canadian refugees,
      204;
    on refugee population in Canada West, 221;
    on congregation of Canadian refugees in towns, 225.

  _Canadian Magazine of Politics, Science, Art, and Literature_, on
      Underground Railroad, 5.

  Canal routes, 142.

  Cape Breton Island, sea routes to, 219.

  Capron, Effingham L., operator, 131, 132.

  Capture, of fugitive slaves thwarted, 83-86;
    under Slave Law of 1850, 240-242;
    of fugitive settlers in the North, 316;
    of Sims in Boston, 317;
    of boy John near Oberlin, 335, 336.

  Carpenter, Philo, operator, 88, 147.

  Carpenter, slave-hunter, 53, 54.

  Cass, Gen., Secretary of State, appealed to in the Addison White
      case, 334.

  Caton, Judge, 283.

  Cavins, E. C. H., on route through Indiana, 142.

  _Censor_, the, containing "Sketches in the History of the
      Underground Railroad," 4.

  Census reports of Canada, on refugee population, 220.

  Census reports of United States, on fugitive slaves, 26, 44, 342,
      343.

  Chace, Mrs. Elizabeth Buffum, 49; on New Bedford route, 130.

  Chamberlain, Hon. Mellen, 36.

  Channing, Dr. Walter, 170.

  Channing, Prof. Edward, on prosecutions of anti-slavery men,
      317 _n._

  Chaplin, William L., abductor, 168, 175, 176.

  Chapman, Capt., on delight of slaves reaching Canada, 196, 197.

  Charles, John, 53.

  Chase, Salmon P., on the Ordinance of 1787, 262;
    on the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution, 263, 264;
    in the Van Zandt case, 282;
    counsel for fugitive slaves, 308, 309;
    in the Addison White case, 334, 335.

  Cheadle, Rial, abductor, 178, 179.

  Cheney, Rev. O. B., 37, 134.

  Chicago, a place of deportation, 83, 88, 147;
    terminus for line through Livingston and La Salle counties, Ill.,
        139;
    multiple routes of, 141;
    hostility of, to law of 1850, 333.

  Chicago and Rock Island Railroad, 79, 144, 165.

  Chicago, Burlington, and Quincy Railroad, 79, 144.

  Child, E., receiver of goods for Canadian refugees at Toronto, 202.

  Chittenden, subscription of, for release of W. L. Chaplin, 176.

  Christiana case, 280, 281, 317;
    Thaddeus Stevens in, 282;
    effort of the government to enforce the law of 1850 in, 319.

  Church connection of U. G. R. R. helpers or agents, 93-99;
    of Canadian refugees, 216.

  Church of fugitives, in Boston, 246;
    in Buffalo, Rochester, Detroit, and Boston, 250.

  Cincinnati _Enquirer_, the, on contention over Addison White case,
      335 _n._

  Cincinnati, supplies for fugitives provided by Woman's Anti-Slavery
      Sewing Society of, 77;
    Dr. N. S. Townshend conductor in, 104;
    home of Harriet Beecher Stowe a station in, 105;
    work of Levi Coffin in, 110-112;
    multiple routes in, 135, 141;
    appeal of <DW52> people in, to Mr. Dillingham, 174;
    seizure of McQuerry in, 241;
    counsel for fugitive slave cases in, 282;
    effect of the Margaret Garner case in, 302, 303;
    observations used in _Uncle Tom's Cabin_ made in, 321.

  Civil War. _See_ War of Rebellion.

  Claiborne, on loss sustained by slave-owners from 1810-1850, 341.

  Clark, George W., coöperation of, with Capt. Walker in anti-slavery
      work, 171;
    on the abductor Wm. L. Chaplin, 176.

  Clark, Lewis, 171.

  Clark, Milton, 171.

  Clark, Wm. Penn, friend of John Brown, 164.

  Clark, Woodson, informed against slaves, 278.

  Clarke, Rev. James Freeman, on northern opposition to rendition, 25,
      103;
    on extent of U. G. R. R. system, 113, 114;
    on protection of fugitives in Boston, 132 _n._

  Clay, Henry, negotiations of, with England for extradition of
      fugitives, 22, 44, 299;
    flight of slave of, 27;
    on the execution of the law of 1850 in Indiana, 48;
    on the escape of slaves to Canada, 192;
    on the Canadian refugees, 201;
    on the difficulty of recapturing fugitives, 242;
    championship of new Fugitive Slave Law by, 312, 314;
    compromise of, 315;
    proposition of, that the President be invested with power to
        enforce the law of 1850, 319.

  Cleveland, boat service for fugitives from, 83, 252;
    deportation station, 146;
    eminent attorneys of, in Oberlin-Wellington case, 282;
    trial of Oberlin-Wellington rescuers at, 336;
    celebration in, over victory of abolitionists in
        Oberlin-Wellington case, 337.

  Cleveland and Canton Railroad, 79.

  Cleveland and Western Railroad, 79, 143.

  Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati Railroad, 79, 183.

  _Cleveland Plain Dealer_, on results in Oberlin-Wellington case,
      337.

  Clingman, of North Carolina, on value of fugitive settlers in
      Northern states, 341.

  Coffin, Addison, early operator in North Carolina, 40, 117.

  Coffin, Levi, author of _The Reminiscences of_, 2, 4;
    early service in North Carolina and Indiana, 40, 117;
    methods of, 61, 64;
    reputed president of the U. G. R. R., 69;
    largest company of fugitives entertained by, 76;
    devotee of underground work, 78, 110-112;
    on John Fairfield the abductor, 153;
    visit of, to Canadian refugees, 199-201, 218-220;
    on acquisition of land by Canadian refugees, 201, 202;
    on the number of Canadian refugees, 221;
    association of, with R. B. Hayes, 282.

  Coffin, Vestal, organizer of U. G. R. R. near Guilford College,
      N.C., 1819, 117.

  Coleman, family of refugees near Detroit, 236.

  Collins, James H., counsel in defence of Owen Lovejoy, 283.

  Colonies, fugitive slave clause in treaties between Indian tribes
      and, 91, 92;
    of fugitive slaves in Canada, 205;
    Dawn Settlement, 205-207;
    Elgin Settlement, 207-209;
    Refugees' Home Settlement, 209, 210;
    Dr. S. G. Howe on refugee, 211, 212;
    his criticism of, answered, 213, 214, 217;
    services of, 215, 216;
    conclusions concerning, 217;
    question of extradition between American, 290.

  Commissioners, duties of, under the second Fugitive Slave Law, 265;
    creation of, due to decision in Prigg's case, 266;
    surrender of James Hamlet by one of, 269;
    power of, questioned, 269-271;
    observations of, regarding their own authority, 271;
    remuneration of, 271.

  Committees of Vigilance. _See_ Vigilance Committees.

  Communication, methods of, 56;
    facsimile and other illustrations of messages, 10, 57, 58, 59,
        79 _n._;
    use of signals across Delaware River, 125;
    ease of, contributes to swell number of fugitives, 316.

  Compromise of 1850, relation of second Fugitive Slave Law to, 265,
      311;
    repetition of, with modifications, proposed in 1860, 285, 286;
    not a finality, 320;
    how regarded by Northern people, 324;
    failure of, 357.

  Concklin, Seth, abductor, 157, 160-162.

  Conductors,
    methods of, 60, 61, 64;
    significance of the title, 67;
    regularly employed, 69, 70;
    number of, 87;
    their hospitality, 88, 89;
    their principles, 89, 90;
    their nationality, 90, 91;
    their church connections, 93-98;
    political affiliations of, 99-101;
    character of, 101;
    penalties suffered by, 102;
    proposed Defensive League of Freedom in behalf of, 103, 104;
    notable persons among, 105-112.

  Confederation, New England (1643), provision in, for delivery of
      fugitives, 19;
    Articles of, quoted, 19.

  Congregational Church, operators among members of, 96-98, 168;
    abductor Charles T. Torrey, clergyman of, 168.

  Congress, speech of J. R. Giddings in lower House on fugitive
      slaves, 105;
    speech of Owen Lovejoy in lower House on fugitive slaves, 107;
    the expedition of the _Pearl_ subject of debate in, 173, 174;
    resolution of 1838 in, providing for punishment of persons
        aiding fugitives, 193;
    petitions presented by Kentuckians in upper House declaring danger
        of slave-hunting in Ohio, 242;
    Fugitive Slave Law of 1793 in, 254;
    power of, to legislate on subject of fugitive slaves, 255, 263,
        264, 268;
    cases growing out of differences between slave laws of the state
        and of, 260, 261;
    counsel for fugitives elected to, 282;
    excitement in, caused by last case under law of 1850, 285;
    agitation in, for new slave law in 1860, memorials to, praying for
        repeal of law of 1850, attacks on slavery in, 286;
    repeal of fugitive slave legislation by, 288, 289, 358;
    Continental, incorporation of fugitive slave clause in Northwest
        Ordinance by, 293;
    attempts at amendment of law of 1793 in lower House, 295;
    in both Houses, 296;
    agitation for new slave law (1817), 296, 297, 301, 309-311;
    Kentucky resolutions against admission of fugitives to Canada,
        presented to, 299;
    Slave Law of 1850 adopted by, 311, 312, 314, 315;
    message of President Fillmore to, December, 1850, 318;
    Senate supports the President in enforcing Fugitive Slave Law,
        319;
    Gerrit Smith, member of, 320;
    Sumner in Senate, on execution of, 325;
    Racine mass-meeting declares null and void the law of, 327, 328;
    charged with improper assumption of powers by convention in
        Cleveland, 336;
    complaints of Southern members of, on account of loss of slaves,
        340-342;
    Southern members of, on existence of Underground Railroads, 351,
        352;
    argument in, to prevent secession of border states, 355;
    caution of, in dealing with fugitive slave question in crisis of
        the War, 355;
    inexpediency of return of fugitives by the army, recognized by,
        356;
    acts of, leading up to repeal of Fugitive Slave Law, 356;
    agitation in and out of, for rigorous Fugitive Slave Law, 357.

  Congressmen, operators among, 92, 105-108;
    anti-slavery champions among, 173;
    pro-slavery champions among, 173.

  Conlisk, James, 92.

  Connecticut, colony of, 19;
    underground work of Samuel J. May in, 36, 109;
    anti-slavery men from, organize Scioto Company, 38;
    reward offered Indians by, for apprehending fugitives, 92;
    personal liberty law of, 245, 246, 309;
    law of colony of, against aiding fugitives, 292;
    emancipation by, 293.

  Conservative party, affiliation of <DW64> voters in Canada with, 233.

  Constitution of United States, fugitive slave clause in, quoted, 20;
    effect of incorporation of fugitive slave clause in, 30;
    burned at meeting of abolitionists, 101;
    Giddings on relation of the law of 1850 to, 105;
    quoted in support of immediatism, 206;
    ineffectiveness of the fugitive slave clause in, 255;
    trial by jury provided for in amendments of, 257;
    amendment of, quoted against Fugitive Slave Law, 258;
    slaves not parties to, 259; slave-owner's rights under, 259, 261;
    paramount to Ordinance of 1787, 263;
    legislative warrant of Congress under, 264;
    effect on execution of, due to Prigg decision, 265;
    Prigg decision on language of, 267;
    amendments to, proposed by Buchanan in 1860, 286, 353, 354;
    adoption of Thirteenth Amendment to, 289, 356;
    fugitive slave clause embodied in, 293;
    disavowal of fugitive recovery clause of, by Liberty party, 310;
    Webster on disregard of the slave clause in, 314;
    limitations of state courts under, 330;
    Ohio urges repeal of laws injuring efficiency of, 354.

  Contemporaneous documents, rarity of, 7;
    Still's collection of, 7, 8;
    Parker's memoranda, 8;
    notes left by John Brown, 8, 9, 165;
    records of Jirch Platt, 9;
    leaf from diary of Daniel Osborn, 9, 10;
    extant letters, 10;
    letter of William Steel, 51, 52;
    memorandum of David Putnam, Jr., 55;
    facsimile of message of John Stone, other messages, 57, 58;
    letter of Thomas Lee, 58, 59;
    letters of E. F. Pennypacker, 79 _n._, 143 _n._;
    letter of Francis Jackson, 99;
    item from Theodore Parker's Journal, 109;
    letter of Parker, 110;
    letter of Rev. N. R. Johnston, 161;
    letter of McKiernon, 161, 162;
    letters relating to Harriet Tubman, 185, 186, 188, 189;
    certificate of clerk of court in Sloane's case, 277 _n._;
    advertisement of runaway slave, 287;
    facsimile of Osborn's record, 344, 345;
    letter of Col. J. Bowles, 347-350.

  Continental Congress, incorporation of slave clause in Northwest
      Ordinance by, 293.

  Contributing members, significance of name, 67.

  Conveyance of fugitive slaves, schedule of "trains," 55;
    variety of methods of, 59;
    by vehicle, 60, 61;
    as freight, 60, 155;
    by rail, 78-80, 142-145;
    by water, 81-84, 144, 145;
    methods employed by abductor Fairbank, 158, 160;
    in Brown's raid, 164, 165;
    in Drayton's expeditions, 172, 173.

  Conway, Judge, 347.

  Cook, Hon. B. C., counsel in fugitive slave cases, 283, 284.

  Cornell, Cornelius, 124.

  Corwin, R. C., 39.

  Cotton-gin, effect of invention of, 26.

  Counsel for fugitive slaves, 281-285, 308, 309, 353.

  Court, decisions terminate slavery in Canada, 191-193;
    provision in state Fugitive Slave laws for action by, 237, 238;
    Wright _vs._ Deacon in, 256, 257;
    Peter _alias_ Lewis Martin in, 257;
    Commonwealth _vs._ Griffith in, 258;
    Prigg _vs._ Pennsylvania in, 259-261, 264;
    State _vs._ Hoppess in, 262;
    Vaughan _vs._ Williams in, 262;
    Jones _vs._ Van Zandt in, 262;
    various courts on irreconcilability between law of 1793 and
        Ordinance of 1787, 262, 264;
    authority of United States commissioners, 265, 271;
    case of Sims in, 269, 270;
    Scott's case in, 269, 270;
    Miller _vs._ McQuerry, 269, 270;
    Booth's case in, 270, 279, 329, 330;
    case of _ex parte_ Robinson in, 270;
    case of _ex parte_ Simeon Bushnell in, 270;
    speech of Justice Nelson to grand jury in, 272;
    action for penalty under law of 1798 in, 273;
    prosecution in, 274;
    prosecution of John Van Zandt in, 274;
    Norris _vs._ Newton in, 276;
    Oliver _vs._ Weakley in, 276;
    case of Sloane in, 276, 277;
    case of F. D. Parish in, 277;
    Oberlin-Wellington rescue case in, 279, 336;
    arguments of Chase and Seward in, 282;
    hearing of fugitive Jim Gray in, 283, 284;
    provision for appeal to United States Circuit in proposed Fugitive
        Slave Law of 1860, 286;
    provision in House fugitive slave bill of 1817 in regard to proof
        of title before, 296, 297;
    constitutionality of law of 1850 contested in, 327;
    constitutional limitation of state, 330;
    clash between federal and state, 334, 335;
    effect of jurisdiction of United States, on abolitionists, 335;
    trial of the fugitive Anderson before the Canadian, 353.

  Covenanters, friends of fugitives, 13-15, 32, 90, 115, 235.
    _See_ Presbyterian Church.

  Cowgill, Dr. Thomas, 38.

  Craft, Ellen and William, 82, 252;
    rescue of, 317.

  Crittenden, Gov. John J., pardons abductor Fairbank, 159.

  Crocker, Mrs. Mary E., operator, 132.

  Cross, Rev. John, prosecution of, 50, 51.

  Crosswhite family, seizure of, 102.

  Crothers, Rev. Samuel, 32.

  Cruse, David, victim of Brown's raid, 163.

  Cummings, Jacob, 154.

  Curtis, George T., on the power of a commissioner, 271.

  Cushing, Deacon, arrest of, 283.


  Dalby, Mr., fugitive slave of, 33.

  Dana, Richard H., visit of, to Brown's farm at North Elba, 127;
    counsel for runaways, 283;
    counsel for Burns, 331.

  Dane, Nathan, on rendition of slaves in Northwest Territory, 293.

  Daniels, Jim, appeal of, to John Brown, 162.

  Danvers Historical Society, report of, on route of U. G. R. R., 133.

  Davis, Charles G., counsel for fugitives, 283.

  Davis, Jefferson, on escape of slaves from Mississippi, 82, 312,
      313;
    on prospects of non-execution of law of 1850, 315.

  Davis, Joel P., map by, 140.

  Dawes, Gen. R. R., on communication in underground service, 56 _n._

  Day, Dr., capture and incarceration of, 349.

  Deacon, case of Wright _vs._, 256, 257.

  Dean, John, counsel for fugitive slave, 285.

  De Baptiste, George, agent, 70.

  Declaration of Independence, quoted by abolitionists, 24;
    principles of, 30;
    as an "abolition tract," 31;
    preamble of, 89;
    quoted in support of immediatism, 306.

  Defensive League of Freedom, proposed, 103, 104.

  Delaware, reminiscences relating to, 11;
    anti-slavery Quakers in, 31;
    Joseph G. Walker of Wilmington, 67;
    Thomas Garrett, of Wilmington, 110, 111, 117, 322;
    route in, 117, 118;
    refugee from, 195;
    loss of slaves by, 312.

  Democratic party, legislative action against Oberlin College
      proposed by, 97;
    character of, 100;
    congressional vote of, on Slave Law of 1850, 315;
    Compromise of 1850 regarded as a finality by, 320;
    governors belonging to, on personal liberty laws, 354.

  Dennett, Mrs. Oliver, operator, 133.

  Deportation, places of, for fugitive slaves, 36, 66, 82, 83,
      145-148.

  Destitution, among fugitives, 76-78, 109, 222, 223.

  Detroit, crossing-place for runaways, 66, 147;
    agents in, 70;
    J. M. Howard, operator at, 106;
    secret paths leading to, 135, 138;
    arrival of John Brown and his abducted slaves in, 165;
    supplies for Canadian refugees shipped to, 203;
    fugitive settlers near, 236;
    loss of  members from church of, 250.

  Detroit River, escape of thousands across, 147.

  Devices for secrecy, 14;
    need of, 47;
    midnight service one of the, 54-56;
    guarded communications one of the, 56-59;
    hidden methods of conveyance one of the, 59-61;
    zigzag routes one of the, 61, 62, 302;
    concealment of fugitives one of the, 62-64;
    use of disguises one of the, 64-67;
    multiple routes and switch connections one of the, 70, 137, 141;
    employed by abductor Rial Cheadle, 179;
    employed by Dr. A. M. Ross, 181, 182, 187;
    employed by Harriet Tubman, 187, 188;
    often neglected during period 1840-1860, 337.

  Dewey, Rev. Dr., loyalty to Slave Law of, 238.

  Dickey, Rev. William, 32.

  Dickey family, 87.

  Dillingham, Richard, charged with belonging to organized band of
      abductors, 30;
    attempted abduction by, 174, 175.

  Disguises, used in helping fugitives, 64-67;
    employed by Fairbank, 160;
    kept by Joseph Sider for use in abductions, 157.

  Dismal Swamp, place of refuge, 25.

  District of Columbia, abduction from, 155;
    disappearance of slavery from, attributed to U. G. R. R., 341,
      342.

  Dixon, Richard, 38.

  Dobbins, Rev. Robert B., 32.

  Dodge, Hon. Simeon, on U. G. R. R. from 1840 to 1860, 36, 37;
    on route in New Hampshire, 132;
    an operator, 133.

  Dodge, of Indiana, vote on Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, 314.

  Doherty, Fisher, 65, 66.

  Dolarson, George, agent, 70.

  Donnell and Hamilton, Ray _vs._, case of, 278.

  Dorsey, Basil, rescue of, 84, 85.

  Douglas Bill, U. G. R. R. work before and after, 194.

  Douglass, Frederick, aided in New York City, 35;
    collections made for fugitives by, 78;
    refugees shipped over New York Central by, 80;
    as agent in the South before his escape, 91, 118;
    on excitement involved in his secret work, 104;
    on Albany route, 125, 126;
    on Brown's plan of liberation, 166;
    on Harriet Tubman, 185;
    many runaways assisted by, 251, 253;
    a noted passenger of the U. G. R. R., 340.

  Doyle, Dr., host of John Brown, 164.

  Drayton, Capt. Daniel, abduction of slave family by, 172;
    expedition of, with steamer _Pearl_, 172-174.

  Drayton, Hon. William, fugitive slave of, 33.

  Dred Scott decision, denounced in eastern Ohio, 336.

  Drew, Benjamin, on employments of Canadian refugees, 204;
    on Dresden and Dawn Colonies in Canada, 207;
    on effect of Slave Bill of 1850 on fugitive settlers in Northern
        states, 213;
    on morality in Dawn Settlement, 216;
    on early arrival of refugees in Canada, 218;
    list of refugee communities mentioned by, 219;
    on thrift of  settlers in Canada, 227;
    on schools for refugees, 229.

  Duncan, Rev. James, on immediate abolition, 304-306;
    political action against slavery early advocated by, 305 _n._

  Durkee, Chauncey, 278.

  Dutch, agreement of New Haven with the, for surrender of fugitive
      slaves, 19.

  Dutton, A. P., runaways sent by boat to Canada by, 82, 83.

  Dyer, Dr. C. V., conductor, 144.


  "Early Settlement and Growth of Western Iowa," chapters of, valuable
      for history of U. G. R. R., 7.

  Eastern states, hidden routes leading to, 120.

  Edgerton, Hon. Sidney, operator, 106.

  Edwards, William, cause of flight of, 27.

  Eells, Dr. Richard, case of, 278, 282.

  Elgin Association, formation and purpose of, 202, 207;
    growth of, 208;
    improvement of, 209;
    Dr. Howe on, 212;
    regulations of, 215-217;
    new settlers, of, 218;
    special schools for <DW64>s of, 229.

  Elgin, Lord, participation of, in securing lands for Canadian
      refugees, 202, 207;
    on extradition of fugitive Anderson, 353.

  Eliza, escape of, in _Uncle Tom's Cabin_, 322.

  Emancipation, celebration of West Indian, by Canadian refugees, 226,
      227;
    gradual, criticised by Rev. James Duncan, 305.

  Emancipation Proclamation, Philadelphia Vigilance Committee
      terminated by, 75;
    restricted operation of, 287, 356.

  Emerson, R. W., friend of Harriet Tubman, 186.

  England, Rev. W. M. Mitchell in, his book entitled _Underground
      Railroad_ published in, 3;
    fugitive slaves shipped to, 82, 133, 145;
    Cowper's stanza on hospitality of, to slaves, quoted, 149;
    act abolishing slavery in colonies of, 190;
    refuses extradition, 192;
    Clay on England's admission of fugitives to Canada, 201;
    money collected in, for benefit of refugees, 206;
    escape of fugitives to, after passage of law of 1850, 249;
    negotiations with, regarding extradition, 299, 300, 302;
    escape of William and Ellen Craft to, 317.

  English Colonial Church and School Society, schools for refugees
      maintained by, 215.

  English settlers, underground work of, 92.

  Episcopal Church, appeal to societies of, 99.

  Estimate of fugitives escaping into Ohio, same for Philadelphia,
      346.

  Eustace, Hon. J. V., counsel in fugitive slave case, 284.

  Evans, John, 197.

  Evans, Philip, 70.

  Everett, John, conductor, 124.

  _Experiment_, the, on number of lines of escape in Ohio, 135.


  Fairbank, Calvin, abductor, 28, 61, 150, 157-159, 251;
    devices of, 65, 160;
    on refugee settlers near Detroit, 236.

  Fairchild, James H., pamphlet on _The Underground Railroad_ by, 5;
    on Oberlin as an anti-slavery centre, 89, 97.

  Fairfield, John, the abductor, devices of, 65-67, 153, 178.

  Falley, Lewis, map of underground routes in Indiana by, 137-139.

  Federal Convention, a concession of, to slavery, 20;
    fugitive slave clause embodied in United States Constitution by,
        293;
    work of, ratified by state conventions, 294.

  Fessenden, Gen. Samuel, operator, 106, 133;
    address of, at funeral of Charles T. Torrey, 170.

  Fifteenth Amendment, adoption of, celebrated in Cincinnati, 111.

  Fillmore, Millard, pardon of Capt. Drayton by, 173;
    signed Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, 314;
    on the Fugitive Slave Law, 318;
    attempt of, to enforce the law, 319;
    connection of, with the Shadrach rescue and Christiana tragedy,
        319.

  _Firelands Pioneer_, on Underground Railroad, 5.

  Fisher, Hon. M. M., on New Bedford route, 130.

  Florida, a refuge for runaways, 25;
    escape of slave from Jacksonville, 81, 145;
    Capt. Walker's attempted abduction of slaves from, 170.

  Foote, Mr., 173.

  Forsyth, J. M., reminiscence of, 13.

  Fort Malden, C.W. _See_ Amherstburg.

  Foster, Stephen and Abby Kelley, operators, 132.

  Fountain, Capt., abduction by, from Virginia, 81.

  Fountain City, Ind., work of Levi Coffin in, 111;
    multiple routes of, 141.

  Fox, George, anti-slavery principles of, 93.

  Frances, Dr., 109, 110.

  Frazee, John H., operator, 88.

  Frazier, Wm. A., reward for abduction of, 53.

  Free Presbyterian Church, formation of, 96.

  Freedman's Bureau, establishment of, 111.

  Freedom, slaves' love of, 14, 25, 178, 195-197.

  Free Soil party, 100, 306;
    principles of, 321;
    abolitionists' share in organization of, 326;
    state convention of, at time of attempted rescue of Burns, 332.

  _From Dixie to Canada_, by H. U. Johnson, 4.

  Fry, Gen. Speed S., 159, 160.

  Fugitive slaves, memoranda of, in transit, 9, 10;
    hiding-places of, 13, 63, 64;
    routes of, in southern Illinois, 14, 15, 135, 139, 141;
    in eastern Indiana, 16, 137, 138, 141, 142;
    rendition of, in the colonies, 19, 20;
    refuges of, in the Southern states and adjoining regions, 25;
    United States census reports on, 26, 342, 343;
    by whom encouraged along the way, 32;
    rescue of, 38, 39, 83-86, 240, 273, 275, 276, 284, 336;
    earliest arrivals of, in Canada, 43;
    pursuit of, 51, 52;
    methods of conveying, 59-62;
    transportation of, over steam railroads, 59, 78-81, 122-124, 128,
        130, 132, 133, 142-145, 164, 165;
    disguises furnished, 64-67;
    destitution among, 76-78, 109;
    transportation of, by boat, 82, 83, 146-148;
    escapes of, to England, 82, 133, 145, 249, 317;
    friends of, in Iowa, 95, 98, 194, 195;
    Oberlin, a well-known refuge for, 97;
    prosecutions for aiding, 102, 103, 254, 273-281, 283-285, 317;
    notable friends of, 104-112;
    main routes of, 118, 119, 134;
    routes of,
      through Pennsylvania, 120-123,
      through New Jersey and New York, 123-128,
      through Massachusetts, 128-133,
      through Vermont, 130, 131;
    James Freeman Clarke on protection given, in Boston, 132 _n._;
    routes of, through
      New Hampshire and Maine, 133, 134,
      Ohio, 134-137, 140,
      Western states, 134-141;
    Ontario the goal of the great majority of, 140, 147;
    escapes of, by sea, 144, 145;
    journey of John Brown and party of, through Iowa, 164;
    use of, in Brown's plan of liberation, 167;
    delight of, on reaching Canada, 178, 196, 197;
    escape of, from Canada to United States, 190;
    rumors of Canada among, 192;
    numbers of, early forwarded to Canada, 192;
    resolution in Congress regarding friends of, 193;
    number of, arriving daily in Canada, 194;
    character of Canadian refugees, states whence they came, 195;
    general condition of, in Canada, 198;
    treatment of, in Canada, 199-201;
    attitude of Canadian government toward, 201-203;
    befriended by Indians in Canada, 203;
    colonies of, in Canada, 205;
    Dawn Settlement of, 205-207;
    Elgin Settlement of, 207, 209;
    occupation of, in the colonies, 207, 223, 224, 226;
    progress of, in Canada, 208, 209, 224-228;
    Refugees' Home Settlement of, 209, 210;
    purpose of the colonies, 210, 211;
    Howe's criticism of the colonies, 211, 212;
    defence of the colonies, 212-217;
    fugitive settlers in the towns of Canada, 217, 218, 225, 226;
    spread of, in Ontario, 218, 219;
    in the Eastern provinces, 219;
    number of abiding places for, in Canada, 219, 220;
    population of, in Canada, 220-222;
    destitute condition of, on arrival, 222, 223;
    domestic relations of, 227, 228;
    schools for, in Canada, 228-230;
    associations for self-improvement among, 230, 231;
    taxable property of, 232;
    political rights of, in Canada, 233;
    their value as citizens, 233, 234;
    numbers of, and risks of, settling in Northern states, 236-238;
    pursuit of, 240, 241, 317;
    seizure of, under law of 1850, 241, 242;
    increased difficulty of reclamation of, in Northern states, 242,
        243;
    mass-meetings in favor of, 244;
    enactment of personal liberty laws in defence of, 245, 246;
    consternation among, in the North, due to law of 1850, 246-248,
        316;
    Boston a favorite resort for, 246;
    exodus of, from the States, 249, 250;
    continued residence of, in the States after passage of law of
        1850, 250, 251;
    underground men among, 251-253;
    question of state's power to legislate concerning, 260, 261;
    first congressional enactment concerning, questioned, 263, 264;
    effect of Prigg decision in Northern states, 265;
    penalties under law of 1850 for aiding, 271;
    fervor in aiding, after 1850, 273, 357;
    penalties for aiding, 273-281;
    counsel for, 281-285, 308, 309;
    arrest of friends of, 283-285;
    army officers forbidden to restore, 287;
    colonial laws against, 290-293;
    question of extradition of, in 1787, 293;
    Kentucky's protest against admission of, to Canada, 299;
    significance of diplomatic negotiations regarding, 300;
    effect of appeal of, 301;
    from the border and cotton states, 312;
    non-delivery of, as a Southern grievance, 314;
    as missionaries in the cause of freedom, 323, 348, 357;
    Garrison on, as public speakers, 325 _n._;
    Sumner on the import of the appeal of, to Northern communities,
        325;
    increasing number after 1850, 338;
    computation of number aided in Ohio and Philadelphia, 346;
    letter regarding aid given to, at Lawrence, Kan., 347-350;
    significance of controversy in regard to, 356.

  Fugitive slave cases, 102, 103, 254, 273-281, 283-285, 317;
    during period 1840-1860, 337.

  Fugitive Slave Law of 1793,
    substance of, 21, 22;
    inefficiency of, 22, 31, 47;
    support of state laws given to, 22, 237, 238;
    origin of demand for, 254;
    analysis and characterization of, 254, 255;
    appeal to Ordinance of 1787 for overthrow of, 262;
    court decisions on irreconcilability between Ordinance of 1787
        and, 263;
    constitutionality of, 264, 265;
    prosecutions and penalties under, 272-281;
    Josiah Quincy counsel in one of the earliest cases under, 283;
    early resistance to, 294, 295;
    attempts at amendment of, 295-298;
    effect of Prigg decision on effectiveness of, 309.

  Fugitive Slave Law of 1850,
    reason for enactment of, 2;
    destruction of records of fugitives aided, due to, 7, 10, 11;
    Parker's memoranda of resistance to, in Boston, 8;
    causes which led to enactment of, 22, 44, 173, 174, 265, 290,
        309-311, 357;
    substance of, 23;
    effect of, 24, 25, 40, 44, 48, 71-76, 187, 193, 194, 213, 214,
        240, 241, 249, 250, 316, 317, 321, 323, 337, 338;
    insistence of lower Southern states on enactment of, 30;
    penalties provided by, 48, 102;
    vigilance committees a product of, 71-76;
    denunciation of, by Theodore Parker, 90;
    appeal to churches evoked by, 98, 99;
    Defensive League of Freedom for persons violating, 103, 104;
    Congressman J. R. Giddings defies, 105;
    members of Congress violating, 106-108;
    other notable persons among violators of, 109-112;
    abductions following the passage of, 153-155, 159-166, 175,
        181-183, 187-189;
    the U. G. R. R. and the, 193, 290;
    Dr. Howe on effect of, 194 _n._;
    effect of, on the arrival of slaves in Canada, 194, 213, 214;
    Benj. Drew on effect of, 213;
    Josiah Henson on effect of, 214;
    homage paid to, 238, 239;
    resistance to, condemned by newspapers, 239;
    slave-hunting after enactment of, 240, 241;
    active resistance to, in the North, 243-246;
    object of, 243;
    consternation among fugitives in the North over, 246-248;
    exodus of fugitives from, and continued residence in Northern
        states after passage of, 249-251;
    grounds of attack upon legality of, 255;
    Prof. Eugene Wambaugh on the dilemma involved in, 256 _n._;
    question of trial by jury under, 256, 257;
    Prigg decision leads to, 265;
    supplementary to law of 1793, 265;
    objectionable features of, 266-273;
    old and new arguments brought against, 268;
    remuneration of commissioners under, 271;
    prosecutions and penalties under, 272-281;
    public denunciation of, 272, 318, 327-329, 333, 336;
    failure of penalties under, to deter resistance to, 272, 273;
    arguments against, by Chase and Seward, 282;
    last case under, 285;
    amendment proposed in 1860 recognizing validity of, 286;
    after 1861, 287;
    repeal of, 288;
    efforts which led up to, 297, 298, 301;
    Webster's, Clay's, and Calhoun's support of, 314;
    enactment of, 314;
    by whom passed, 315;
    enforcement of, 316-318;
    open resistance to, 318-320;
    the law of 1850 and _Uncle Tom's Cabin_, 321;
    Sumner's efforts in Senate to secure repeal of, 324-326;
    open defiance of, during decade 1850-1860, 326 _et seq._;
    penetrating criticism of, by able counsel, 327;
    pronounced unconstitutional by Wisconsin convention, 329;
    hostility to, in Illinois, 333;
    open violation of, in Oberlin-Wellington rescue case, 335;
    repeal of, demanded by Republican party, 337;
    Claiborne on the failure of, to make compensation to the South
        for abducted slaves, 341;
    violation of, charged against the North by Southern congressmen
        during sessions of 1860-1861, 351, 352;
    Buchanan on enforcement of, during his administration, 353;
    purpose of Lincoln to execute, 355;
    question of obligation to restore fugitives, 356.

  Fuller, James C., 206.

  Fullerton, Rev. Hugh S., 32.

  Furber, James, operator, 133.

  Fyffe, W. B., reminiscences of, entitled "_History of Anti-Slavery
      Days_," 6;
    map of route in Illinois, by, 139.


  Galesburg, Ill., old First Church of, as U. G. R. R. station, 64;
    anti-slavery Presbyterians in, 96;
    importance of, as a centre, 97.

  Gallatin, on negotiations with England regarding extradition of
      fugitives, 299, 300.

  Gannett, Dr. E. S., loyalty of, to Slave Law, 238.

  Gardner, Ozem, 89.

  Garland, B. W., claimant of Joshua Glover, 327.

  Garner, Margaret, case of, 302;
    effect upon public opinion of case of, 302, 303.

  Garretson, Joseph, 57.

  Garrett, Thomas, reward for abduction of, 53;
    disguises provided by, 64;
    ships fugitives by boat, 82;
    a devotee of U. G. R. R., 110, 111;
    on Harriet Tubman, 188;
    aid given to Harriet Tubman by, 189;
    Mrs. H. B. Stowe on, 322.

  Garrison, William Lloyd, abstinence from voting of, 100, 101;
    predecessors of, in advocacy of immediate abolition, 303-308;
    acquaintance of, with Rankin's _Letters on Slavery_, 308;
    address to Southern bondmen by, 310;
    on fugitives as public speakers, 325 _n._;
    preparation of the way for, 357.

  Garrisonian abolitionists, principles of, 100, 101.

  Gay, Sydney Howard, an efficient agent, 108.

  Geneva College, influence of, 115.

  Geography of U. G. R. R., feasibility of representing the, 113;
    extent of, 113, 114;
    number and distribution of stations, 114, 115;
    Southern routes, 116-118;
    main channels of flight of slaves, 118, 119;
    lines of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, 119, 120;
    routes of eastern Pennsylvania, 120-122;
    routes of western Pennsylvania, 122, 123;
    outlets through New Jersey, 123-125;
    routes of New York, 125-128;
    routes of New England states, 128, 129;
    lines of Massachusetts, 129, 130, 132;
    routes of Vermont, 130, 131;
    branches of Rhode Island and Connecticut, 131;
    routes of New Hampshire, 132, 133;
    routes of Maine, 133, 134;
    secret paths in the Western states, 134;
    lines in Ohio, 135;
    routes of Illinois, Michigan, and Iowa, 135, 136;
    examination of map of Morgan County, O., 136, 137;
    study of Falley's map of Indiana and Michigan routes, 137-139;
    map of simple route in Illinois, noteworthy features of general
        map, 139;
    trend of lines, 139-141;
    multiple and intricate trails, 141;
    broken lines and isolated place names, 141, 142;
    river routes, 142;
    routes by rail, 142-144;
    routes by sea, 144, 145;
    terminal stations, 145-147;
    lines of lake travel, 147, 148;
    Canadian ports, 148, 149.

  Georgia, route from northern, 119;
    in Brown's plan of liberation, 167;
    Canadian refugees from, 195;
    William and Ellen Craft from, 317;
    convention on execution of Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, 318, 319;
    charges of bad faith preferred against the North by Jones of, 351.

  Germans, attitude of, toward fugitive slaves, 92, 93, 355, 356.

  Gibbons, Daniel, number of fugitives aided by, 10, 87, 88.

  Gibbs, Mr., agent, 126.

  Gibbs, Jacob, assistant of Rev. Charles T. Torrey, 169.

  Giddings, Joshua R., friend of bondmen, 7;
    source of abolition ideas of, 31;
    hiding-place in house of, 63;
    on attitude of North toward enforcement of law of 1850, 105, 106,
        315, 316;
    champion of anti-slavery party in Congress, 173.

  Gilliland, Rev. James, 32, 41, 95.

  Giltner vs. Gorham, case of, 275.

  Glover, Joshua, arrest of, as fugitive, 327;
    rescue of, 328, 329.

  Glover, J. O., counsel for runaways, 284.

  Goens, Reuben, visit to Canada by, 199.

  Goodnow, Lyman, 92.

  Gorham, Giltner _vs._, case of, 275.

  Gorsuch, in Christiana case, 280, 319.

  Grand Trunk Railroad, 80, 81, 133.

  Grant, of firm of Baxter and, owners of Lewis Hayden, 158.

  "Grape-vine telegraph," used by abolitionists, 56.

  Gray, Jim, fugitive from Missouri, 283.

  Gray, Jonathan H., 88.

  Gray, O. C., counsel for runaways, 284.

  Gray, Thomas L., reminiscences of, 6;
    number of slaves aided by, 89;
    on abductor Rial Cheadle, 178, 179.

  Grier, Justice, charge of, to jury in the Mitchell case, 279;
    charge of, to jury in the Christiana case, 281.

  Griffith, Commonwealth _vs._, case of, 258.

  Grimes, Rev. Leonard B., organizer of Church of the Fugitive Slaves,
      246, 250, 251.

  Grinnell, Hon. J. B., receiver of fugitives, 58;
    "liberty room" in house of, 108;
    host of John Brown, 164.

  Guilford College, N.C., organization of U. G. R. R. near, 40, 117.

  Gunn, Erastus F., on route in Massachusetts.


  Hale, John P., a champion of anti-slavery party in Congress, 173.

  Halliday, Simeon, counterpart of, in real life known by Mrs. Stowe,
     322.

  Hamilton, Ray _vs._ Donnell and, case of, 278.

  Hamlet, James, case of, first under Slave Law of 1850, 269.

  Hanway, Castner, part of, in Christiana case, 280, 281.

  Harper, Jean, one of party abducted by John Brown, 163.

  Harper's Ferry, prelude to, 162;
    plan of attack upon, reported by Hinton, 167;
    effect of attack upon, on value of slave property, 339.

  Harrod, Leonard, on slave's desire for freedom, 195.

  Harvard University, scholarship in, founded by escaped slave,
      Harriet Hayden, 158;
    action of overseers of, against Loring, 333.

  Harwood, Edward, 64.

  Haviland, Mrs. Laura S., on labors of abductor Fairfield, 153, 154;
    attempted abduction by, 171, 172;
    work of, in Refugees' Home, 210;
    Sunday-school of, for fugitives, 230;
    intercession of, for the runaway Anderson, 353.

  Hayden, Harriet, bequest of, to Harvard University, 158.

  Hayden, Lewis, abduction of, 158;
    operator, 251, 252.

  Hayes family, 15.

  Hayes, Rutherford B., counsel in fugitive slave cases, 282;
    on effect of Margaret Garner case, 303.

  Haywood, William, on underground route in Indiana, 16.

  Henson, Josiah, knowledge of Canada carried among slaves by, 28;
    as abductor, 176-178;
    on condition of Canadian refugees, 198;
    founder of school in Canada, 205;
    on work of British and American Institute, 214;
    on morality of Dawn Settlement, 216;
    on refugee population, 220, 221;
    lumber industry established by, 223;
    lectures on farming by, 224;
    list of towns where refugees settled according to, 225;
    on number of fugitive settlers in Northern states, 237;
    on effects of Slave Law of 1850, 249;
    a notable passenger of U. G. R. R., 340.

  Hiding-places, for fugitive slaves, 12, 13, 14, 25, 40, 62-65, 131,
      248, 251, 252, 276, 280, 302.

  Higginson, Col. T. W., indictment of, 103;
    connection with U. G. R. R., 105, 132;
    on continued residence of fugitives in Massachusetts after passage
        of law of 1850, 250;
    part of, in attempted rescue of Burns, 331, 332.

  Hill _vs._ Low, case of, 273.

  Hill, Leverett B., 88.

  Hill, Milton, 88.

  Hinton, Richard J., on escapes through Kansas, 114;
    on John Brown's plan of liberation, 166, 167;
    on Dr. A. M. Ross, 183 _n._;
    on refugee population in Canada West, 221, 222.

  _History of Anti-Slavery Days_, reminiscences by W. B. Fyffe
      entitled, 6.

  _History of Springfield, Mass._, account of Connecticut River route
      in, 127.

  Hodge, D. B., on abduction by Canadian refugee, 152.

  Holmes, of Massachusetts, objections of, to bill of 1817 as basis of
    new Slave Law, 297.

  Holt, Horace, special conveyance of, for fugitives, 60.

  Hood family, 15.

  Hood, John, 14.

  Hooper, John H., agent, 253.

  Hope, A. R., author of _Heroes in Homespun_, 2, 5.

  Hopkins family, 87.

  Hopkins, Capt. Amos, stowaway on brig of, 81.

  Hopper, Isaac T., methods of secret emancipation early practised by,
      34, 35, 346,   347;
    fugitives sent by sea by, 145.

  Hoppess, State _vs._, case of, 256, 257, 259, 262, 263.

  Hossack, John, indicted for helping fugitives, 284.

  Howard, Col. D. W. H., 37.

  Howard, Edward, early operator, 37.

  Howard, Senator Jacob M., 106.

  Howe, Senator, of Wisconsin, bill for repeal of Fugitive Slave Law
      introduced by, 286.

  Howe, Dr. S. G., on escape of slaves, 43, 44;
    on abductions by Canadian refugees, 152;
    on origin of U. G. R. R., 192;
    on effect of Slave Law of 1850, 194;
    on reception of fugitives in Canada, 201;
    on Elgin Settlement, 208, 209;
    criticism of refugee colonies by, 212-214;
    on organizations for relief of fugitives, 217;
    on number of colonies in Canada, 219;
    on refugee population of Canada, 220-222;
    on condition of farmers among Canadian refugees, 224, 225;
    on their thrift, 226 _n._, 227;
    on their morality, 228;
    on their ability to read and write, 230;
    on their taxable property, 232;
    on their value as citizens, 234.

  Hubbard, of Connecticut, on enlistment of  soldiers, 288.

  Hubbard and Company, fugitives shipped from warehouse of, 148.

  Hudson, David, early operator, 37.

  Hughes, Thomas, 49.

  Hunn, Ezekiel, operator in Delaware, 117.

  Hunn, John, operator in Delaware, 117.

  Hunt, N. A., on abducting methods of Mission Institute, 155, 156.

  Hurlburt, Chauncey, 16.

  Hyde, Udney, agent of U. G. R. R., 69;
    defender of fugitive Addison White, 334.


  Illinois,
    U. G. R. R. in southern, 14, 15;
    prospect of organization of, as a slaveholding state, 18;
    anti-slavery sentiment in, 31;
    anti-slavery Southerners in, 32, 41, 91;
    rise of U. G. R. R. in, 41, 42;
    secret operations at Dwight, 61;
    reputed president of U. G. R. R. in, 69;
    underground helpers in, 70, 88, 92;
    transportation for fugitives by rail in, 79;
    emancipated slaves in, 93;
    Owen Lovejoy of, declares in Congress his right to aid slaves,
        107;
    Rev. Asa Turner on hidden thoroughfares in, 114;
    population of various parts of, 115;
    favorable situation of, 134;
    distribution of lines in, 135;
    chart of route in, 139;
    trend of lines in, broken lines and isolated place-names in,
        141;
    deportation of fugitives from Chicago, 147;
    abductors at southern extremity of, 151;
    abducting enterprises at Quincy, 155;
    vigorous work by abolitionists of, 194, 195;
    failure of, to pass full personal liberty law, 246;
    arrest of Owen Lovejoy and others, for aiding fugitives, 283;
    spirit of nullification in, 333.

  Illinois Central Railroad, 79, 144.

  Illinois River, a thoroughfare for fugitives, 82.

  Immediate abolition,
    early advocates of, 303-306;
    Garrisonian movement, 307;
    early formulation of principle of, in underground neighborhoods,
        357.

  _Independent_, the, on escape of slaves from Missouri after 1850,
      194;
    on "Ohio Underground Line," 195.

  Indiana, Levi Coffin in, 4, 40, 41;
    newspaper contributions on routes of southern, 7;
    Grant County route in, 15, 16;
    prospect of organization of, as a slaveholding state, 18;
    anti-slavery Quakers in, 31;
    beginnings of the U. G. R. R. in, 40, 41, 117;
    Clay on enforcement of law of 1850 in, 48;
    slave-hunters in, 53, 54, 65;
    aid rendered by Female Anti-Slavery Association in, 77;
    transportation by rail in, 79, 144;
    emancipated slaves in, important underground centres in, 93;
    secret work of Quakers in eastern, 94;
    favorable situation of, 134;
    distribution of routes in, 135;
    Falley's map of lines in, 137-139;
    direction of routes in, 140;
    Fountain City route in, broken lines and isolated place-names in,
        141;
    abductors along southern boundary of, 151;
    capture of abductor Concklin in, 161, 162;
    personal liberty law of, 245, 246;
    rescue in, 275, 276;
    principles of Rev. James Duncan, of southeastern, 304-306;
    vote of United States senators from, on law of 1850, 314.

  Indians, effect of removal from Gulf states, 26, 308;
    aid given fugitives by, 37, 38, 91, 92;
    hospitality of, in Canada, 203;
    Dawn Institute attended by, 207.

  Indian Territory, fugitives from, 284.

  Insurrection of slaves, Brown's plan to arouse, 166-168;
    danger of, lessened by the U. G. R. R., 340.

  _Intelligencer_, the, on "evil" of running off slaves, 194.

  Iowa, reminiscences of the "Early Settlement and Growth of
      Western," 7;
    John Brown's journey through, 8, 9, 164;
    organized as free state, 18;
    anti-slavery Quakers in, 31, 33;
    rise of U. G. R. R. in, 42, 43;
    escape of Nuckolls' slaves through, 52;
    transportation by rail in, 79;
    Methodist operators in, 95;
    underground lines in, 98, 114, 135, 136;
    direction of routes in, broken lines and isolated place-names in,
        141;
    abductors along frontier of, 151;
    underground activity of abolitionists of, 194, 195;
    failure of, to pass full personal liberty law, 246;
    capture of operators in, 284.

  Irdell, on fugitive slave clause in Constitution, 294.

  Irish settlers, underground work among, 92.


  Jack _vs._ Martin, case of, 256, 257, 260.

  Jackson, Andrew, supported by Illinois on nullification question,
      333.

  Jackson, Francis, letter of, regarding church contributions for
      fugitives, 99.

  Jackson, William, 132;
    on settlement of Queen's Bush, Canada, 204, 205.

  Jacksonville, escape from, 81, 145.

  Jacob, Gov. Richard T., pardons abductor Fairbank, 159, 160.

  Jefferson, Thomas, "abolition tract" by, 31.

  Jerry rescue. _See_ Rescue of Jerry McHenry.

  Johnson, attorney-general of Pennsylvania, on unconstitutionality
      of Fugitive Slave Law, 264.

  Johnson family, fugitive settlers near Detroit, 236.

  Johnson, Gabe N., operator, 64.

  Johnson, H. U., author of _From Dixie to Canada_, 2;
    characterization of his book, 4.

  Johnson _vs._ Tompkins, case of, 273, 274.

  Johnson, William, incident given by, showing misinformation about
      Canada among slaves, 197.

  Johnston, Rev. N. R., letter of, on capture of abductor Concklin,
      161.

  Johnston, William, cause of flight of, 27.

  Johnston, William A., on beginnings of U. G. R. R. in Ohio, 39.

  Jolliffe, Amos A., on routes in western Pennsylvania, 123.

  Jolliffe, John, counsel for fugitives, 282.

  Jones, John W.,  agent, 128, 143, 252, 253.

  Jones, of Georgia, brings charges against the North on account of
      U. G. R. R., 351.

  Jones, of Indiana, vote of, on the Fugitive Slave Law, 314.

  Jones, Thomas, on dissatisfaction in Refugees' Home Settlement, 216.

  Jones _vs._ Van Zandt, case of, 262, 274, 275.

  Jones, William Box P., transportation of, as freight, 60.

  Jury trial, denial of, to fugitives, 256, 257.


  Kagi and Stephens, responsible for shooting of David Cruse on
      Brown's raid, 163;
    arranges for eastern trip of Brown, 164, 165;
    Brown's plan of liberation related by, 166,167.

  Kanawha River, a thoroughfare for fugitives, 82.

  Kansas, Brown's journey through, 8, 9, 136, 162-164;
    R. J. Hinton on escape of slaves through, 114, 119;
    personal liberty law of, 246;
    Bowles' letter on work of underground station of Lawrence,
        347-350.

  Kansas-Nebraska Act, appeal to the churches evoked by, 99;
    mass-meetings in opposition to, 328;
    relation of Glover and Burns cases to, 331.

  Kauffman, Daniel, prosecution of, 102.

  Kelly, Abby, disowned by Uxbridge monthly meeting, 49.

  Kelsey, Capt., master of an "abolitionist" boat, 82.

  Kenderdine, John, 274.

  Kentucky, news of Canada early brought into, 27;
    abducting trip of Dr. A. M. Ross into, 28;
    knowledge of Canada among slaves in, 28, 29, 37;
    negotiations of, with adjoining free states for extradition of
        fugitives, 47;
    slave-hunters from, 53, 54;
    abduction of slaves from Covington, 61;
    fugitives from, 85, 109;
    Rev. John Rankin in, 109, 306;
    underground routes from, 119;
    incident of rescue from plantation of, 153;
    abduction of the Hayden family from Lexington, 158;
    visit of Mrs. Haviland to, for purpose of abducting slaves, 171,
        172;
    Henson's abduction of slaves from, 177, 178;
    Elijah Anderson, abductor, imprisoned in, 183;
    abductions from, by John Mason, 184;
    Canadian refugees from, 195;
    effect of slave-breeding in, 228;
    John Van Zandt, anti-slavery man from, 274, 275;
    rescue of fugitives escaped from, 275, 276;
    Mallory of, on repeal of law of 1850, 288;
    resolution of, against admission of slaves to Canada, desirous of
        extradition of fugitives from, 299;
    Margaret Garner, a fugitive from, 302;
    petitions Congress for protection for slaveholder, 311;
    complaint of, against the free states, 312;
    residence of Harriet Beecher Stowe on borders of, 321;
    Senator Atchison of, on loss sustained by slave-owners of border
        states, 341;
    fugitives from, recorded by Osborn, 344, 345;
    Senator Polk on losses of, through underground channels, 352;
    reasons of, for remaining in the Union, 354, 356;
    insistence of, on retention of Fugitive Slave Law by the
        government, 356.

  Kidnapping, of free persons in the North between 1850 and 1856,
      240;
    along southern border of free states, 295;
    petition of Baltimore Quakers for protection of free <DW64>s
        against, 296, 318;
    case of, 318.

  Kightlinger, Jacob, informer, 50, 51.

  Kilbourne, Col. James, aids in rescue of a fugitive, 38, 84.

  King, on the proposition to prohibit slavery in the Northwest
      Territory, 293.

  King, Rev. William, 207-209, 212;
    projector of Elgin Settlement, 202, 207;
    testimony of, concerning the settlement, 208, 209;
    on morality of Elgin Settlement, 216;
    on the civil offices held by Canadian refugee settlers, 233.

  Kinjeino, Chief, friend of fugitives, 37, 38, 92.

  Kirkpatrick family, operators, 87.

  Kirtland, Dr. Jared P., station-keeper, 104.

  Knox College. _See_ Galesburg, Ill.

  Knox, Hon. Joseph, counsel in fugitive slave case, 284.

  Knoxville, Ill., multiple routes of, 141.


  _Lake Shore Home Magazine_, chapters of "Romances and Realities of
      the Underground Railroad" in, 4.

  Lane Seminary, secession of students from, 97.

  Langdon, Jervis, agent, 128, 252;
    forwards fugitives by rail, 143.

  Langston, fined for aiding fugitives, 279.

  Larnard, Hon. E. C., counsel in fugitive slave case, 284.

  Latimer case, 337.

  Lawrence, James, 162.

  Lee, Judge Thomas, letter of, concerning family of fugitives, 58,
      59.

  Leeper, H. B., on beginnings of U. G. R. R. in Illinois, 41, 42;
    on number of <DW64>s aided, 88.

  Leeper, John, early operator, 41.

  Leland, Judge E. S., counsel in fugitive slave cases, 283, 284.

  Leonard, Mr., slave aided by, 154.

  Letters of underground men, 10, 11. _See_ Correspondence.

  _Letters on Slavery_, by Rev. John Rankin, 308.

  Lewis, Elijah, part in Christiana case, 280, 281.

  _Liberator_, the, hiding-place over office of, 63;
    on flight of slaves after enactment of law of 1850, 249, 250.

  Liberty party,
    in national politics, 100;
    Gen. Samuel Fessenden, nominee of, for governorship of Maine and
        for Congress, 106;
    part of Gerrit Smith in organization of, in New York, 107;
    motives of abolitionists for joining, 306;
    disavowal of fugitive recovery clause in Constitution by, 310;
    convention of, in Syracuse during Jerry rescue, 318, 320;
    abolitionists' share in organization of, 326.

  Lightfoot, James, befriended by Josiah Henson, 177, 178.

  Lincoln, Abraham, intervention of, in behalf of the abductor C.
      Fairbank, 159, 160;
    Proclamation of Emancipation by, 287;
    signs bill repealing Fugitive Slave Law, 288;
    mentioned, 330;
    election of, signal for secession, 352;
    efforts of, to preserve the Union, 355.

  Linton, Seth, on an abduction by Canadian refugee, 152.

  Livingston and La Salle counties, Ill., chart of simple line
      through, 139.

  Lockhart, Rev. Jesse, 32.

  Loguen, Rev. J. W., agent, 126, 251;
    first experience in Canada, 198;
    passenger on U. G. R. R., 340.

  Loring, Edward G., on the power of a commissioner, 271;
    Burns remanded to slavery by, 332;
    removed from the office of judge of probate, 333.

  Loring, Ellis Gray, 133;
    counsel for fugitive slaves, 283.

  Louis, escape of, from court-room in Cincinnati, 85.

  Louisiana, effect of purchase of, 26;
    abducting trip of A. M. Ross into, 28;
    fugitives from, 109;
    escape of abductor John Mason from New Orleans, 185;
    Canadian refugees from, 195;
    Elgin Settlement projected by Wm. King, former slaveholder of,
        202, 207.

  Louisville, Ky., agent in, 151.

  Louisville, New Albany and Chicago Railroad, 79, 144.

  Lovejoy, Elijah P., 107, 171.

  Lovejoy, Hon. Owen, defies Fugitive Slave Law in Congress, 107;
    arrested for aiding fugitives, 283.

  Low, case of Hill _vs._, 273.

  Lowell, poem of, read at the funeral of Charles T. Torrey, 170.

  Lower Canada, underground route via Portland, Me., to, 133.

  Lucas, Geo. W. S.,  agent of U. G. R. R., 70.

  Lundy, Benjamin, 308.


  McClurkin, Jas. B. and Thomas, 14, 15.

  McCoy, William, reward for abduction of, 53.

  McCrory, Robert, 38.

  McHenry, Jerry, rescue of, 72, 86, 239, 318, 320, 326;
    place of embarkation of, for Canada, 127.

  McIntire, Gen., a Virginian operator, 88.

  McKiernon, on fate of abductor Miller, 161, 162.

  McKim, J. Miller, on organization of Philadelphia Vigilance
      Committee, 75.

  McLean, Judge, on the power of a commissioner, 270-272.

  McQuerry, case of Miller _vs._, 269, 271.

  McQuerry, George Washington, seizure of, 241.

  Madison, on the fugitive slave clause in the Constitution, 294.

  Mad River Railroad, 78, 143.

  _Magazine of Western History_, on U. G. R. R., 5.

  Magill, Dr. Edward H., on lines of travel in eastern Pennsylvania,
      122.

  Mahan, Rev. John B., reward for abduction of, 53;
    on abduction of slaves from the South, 150.

  Maine, rise of U. G. R. R, in, 37;
    steam railroad transportation for fugitives in, 80, 81;
    stowaways on vessels from Southern ports arrive in, 81;
    Gen. Samuel Fessenden, an operator in, 106;
    routes of, 133, 134;
    personal liberty law of, 246.

  Mallory, of Kentucky, on repeal of Fugitive Slave Law, 288.

  Mann, Mrs. Horace, friend of Harriet Tubman, 186.

  Maps of U. G. R. R., method of preparation of, 113;
    general map, facing 113;
    map of lines of Chester and neighboring counties of Pennsylvania,
        facing 113;
    lines in Morgan County, O., 136;
    map of lines of Indiana and Michigan in 1848, 138;
    map of simple route through Livingston and La Salle counties,
        Ill., 139;
    map of network of routes through Greene, Warren and Clinton
        counties, O., 140.

  Marsh, Gravner and Hannah, subjected to espionage, 50;
    conveyance of fugitives in market wagon by the latter, 60, 61.

  Martin, case of Jack _vs._, 256, 257, 260.

  Martin, Lewis, case of, 256, 257, 259, 260, 263.

  Maryland, abducting trip of A. M. Ross into, 28;
    knowledge of Canada among slaves in, 28, 29;
    fugitive shipped in a box from Baltimore, 60;
    number of slaves abducted from, by Charles T. Torrey, 88;
    reward offered to Indians for apprehending fugitives by, 91, 92;
    underground routes in, 117;
    steady loss from counties of, 119;
    movement of fugitives to Wilmington, 121;
    agents of U. G. R. R. in Baltimore, 151;
    escape of, and abductions by Harriet Tubman from, 186-189;
    Canadian refugees from, 195;
    fugitives from, in western Pennsylvania, 276;
    law against hospitality to fugitive slaves in, 291;
    resolution of legislature of, against harboring fugitives, 298;
    Rev. Geo. Bourne, a resident of, 303;
    Pratt of, on loss sustained by slave-owners of his state, 341.

  Mason, John, abductor, 178, 183-185.

  Mason, Lewis, counsel in fugitive slave case, 284.

  Mason, of Massachusetts, on trial by jury for fugitives, 297.

  Mason, of Virginia, on difficulty of recapturing fugitives, 243;
    on the Fugitive Slave Law, 311, 312;
    on loss sustained by slave-owners of his state, 341.

  Massachusetts, extinction of slavery in, 17;
    anti-slavery Quakers in, 31;
    rise of U. G. R. R. in, 36, 37;
    steam railroad transportation for fugitives in, 80;
    refusal of German companies from, to aid in restoration of
        runaways, 92;
    underground centres in, 94;
    Constitution burned at Framingham, 101;
    Defensive League of Freedom proposed in, 103, 104;
    Theodore Parker, spiritual counsellor for fugitives in, 110;
    routes through, 128-130, 132;
    escape of slaves from Virginia to, 144;
    estimates of fugitive settlers in Boston and New Bedford, 235;
    indignation meetings in, against Slave Law of 1850, 244;
    personal liberty law of, 245, 246, 309;
    consternation among fugitive settlers in Boston caused by law of
        1850, 246-248;
    continued residence of fugitives in, after enactment of law of
        1850, 250;
    removal of fugitives from Pennsylvania to, after passage of law
        of 1850, 250;
    underground men among fugitives in, 251, 252;
    case of Commonwealth _vs._ Griffith tried in, 258, 259;
    emancipation by, 293;
    Holmes of, on House Fugitive Slave Bill of 1817, 297;
    Mason of, on House bill, 297;
    early pursuit in Boston and New Bedford, 302;
    anti-slavery societies of, 327;
    spirit of resistance to law of 1850 in, 327;
    public opinion in, after rendition of Burns, 333;
    amendment of personal liberty law of, 354.

  Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society, report of, on evasion of slaves,
      193.

  Massachusetts Bay, law of, against aiding fugitives, 292.

  Matchett, Dr., 16.

  May, Rev. S. J., connection with U. G. R. R., 105, 109, 131, 132;
    on Southern helpers of U. G. R. R., 116;
    friend of Harriet Tubman, 186;
    visits of, to Canadian refugees, 199;
    on number of fugitive settlers in Northern states, 237;
    on instances of regard paid to Fugitive Slave Law, 238;
    on Rev. J. W. Loguen, 251;
    one of leaders in the Jerry rescue case, 326.

  Mechanicsburg, O., importance of stations at, 69, 70;
    attempted seizure of Addison White in, 241.

  Merritt, Wm. H.,  operator, 92.

  Messages, underground, 56-58.

  Methodist Church, schism in, 40, 49;
    action against slavery taken by, 94;
    secession of the Church South, 95.

  Methodists, Wesleyan, friends of fugitives, 32, 235;
    separation of, from M. E. Church, 50.

  Methods, employed by some abductors, 151, 171, 179, 181, 182, 187.

  Mexico, a refuge for fugitive slaves, 25;
    fugitive clause in treaty with United States of, 299.

  Michigan, station in, 16;
    organized as free state, 18;
    anti-slavery Quakers in, 31;
    steam railroad transportation in, 79;
    number of fugitives forwarded through Schoolcraft, 88;
    Senator J. M. Howard an operator at Detroit, 106;
    stations in, 116;
    number of routes in, 135;
    Falley's map of lines in Indiana and, 137, 138, 139;
    direction of routes in, 141;
    steam railway branches of U. G. R. R. in, 144;
    supplies for fugitives sent to Detroit, 203;
    settlement of fugitives at Detroit, 236;
    personal liberty law of, 246;
    flight of slaves from Detroit, after enactment of law of 1850,
        250.

  Michigan Central Railroad, 79, 144.

  _Midland Monthly_, the, on U. G. R. R., 5.

  Miller, 318.

  Miller, a depot agent for "fugitive goods," near Detroit, 203.

  Miller, alias Seth Concklin, 161.

  Miller, Col. Jonathan P., operator, 107.

  Miller, Mrs. Elizabeth Smith, on use of a station on the St.
      Lawrence, 127 _n._

  Milligan, Rev. J. S. T., letter of, 13, 14.

  Milligans, the, in southern Illinois, 15.

  Miller _vs._ McQuerry, case of, 269.

  Minnesota, failure to pass full liberty law in, 246.

  Minnis, Wm., 65.

  Mission for refugees in Canada, 194.

  Mission Institute at Quincy, Ill., 155;
    anti-slavery spirit of, 155, 156.

  Mississippi, abducting trip of A. M. Ross into, 29, 30;
    escape of slaves by boat from, 82;
    involved in Brown's scheme of liberation, 167;
    Jefferson Davis of, on escape of fugitives from cotton states,
        312, 313;
    fugitive from Vicksburg, recorded by Osborn, 344.

  Mississippi River, a thoroughfare for fugitives, 82, 312, 313;
    routes traced from, 134;
    terminals along, 136.

  Missouri, Brown's raid into, 8, 108, 162-166;
    knowledge of Canada among slaves in, 29;
    Galesburg, Ill., a refuge for runaways from, 97;
    Grinnell, Ia., a refuge for runaways from, 98;
    egress of slaves from, 136;
    Chicago, the deportation point for fugitives from, 147;
    abductions from, 152;
    abduction from, by Burr, Work and Thompson, 156;
    effects of John Brown's raid in, 165;
    number of slaves escaping from, 194;
    escape of Wm. Wells Brown from, 252;
    grievance of, on account of loss of slaves, 312;
    Lawrence, Kan., as known in, 347;
    Senator Polk of, on the U. G. R. R., 351, 352.

  Missouri Compromise (1820), 100;
    fugitive slave clause in, 298;
    set aside by Kansas-Nebraska Act, 331;
    together with law of 1850 produces crop of personal liberty bills,
        245, 246, 338.

  Mitchell, fined for aiding fugitives, 279.

  Mitchell, Daniel, operator, 131.

  Mitchell, Gethro and Anne, operators, 131.

  Mitchell, Hon. Thomas, message sent by, 58.

  Mitchell, Rev. W. M., author of _The Underground Railroad_, 2, 3;
    account of naming of the U. G. R. R. given by, 45, 46;
    on abductor John Mason, 183, 184;
    on number of Canadian refugees, 222;
    opinion of Canadian government on fugitives as settlers reported
        by, 233;
    on slave-hunting in Northern states, 239.

  Monroe, Prof. James, on effect on public sentiment of Margaret
      Garner case, 303.

  Montreal, objective point of fugitives, 140.

  Moore, Dr. J. Wilson, on progress made by refugee settlers in
      Canada, 226, 227;
    on civil offices held by refugees, 233.

  Moore, Eliakim H., on early assistance of fugitives, 38.

  Moore, of Virginia, on loss sustained by slave-owners of his
      district, 341.

  Moores, the, station-keepers, 15.

  Morgan County, lines through portion of, 136, 137.

  "Moses," name given to Harriet Tubman, 186.

  Mott, Richard, M.C., operator, 92, 106.

  Mullin, Job, on early operations, 38.

  Multiple and intricate trails, 61, 62, 70, 121, 130, 141-146.

  Myers, Stephen,  agent of U. G. R. R., 70, 126.


  Nalle, Charles, forcible rescue of, 85.

  _Nashville Daily Gazette_, on trial of Richard Dillingham, 174, 175.

  Nationality of underground helpers, 91, 92.

  Neall, Daniel, 68.

  Nebraska, escape of Nuckolls' slaves from, 52;
    egress of slaves from, 136.

  <DW64>s, proposition to enslave free, 26;
    settlements of, resorted to by fugitives, 32;
    settlements of, in southern Ohio, 115;
    in New Jersey, 125;
    relative progress of <DW52> people of Canada and free, of United
        States, 227;
    affiliations of voters among Canadian, 233;
    rights of, violated by Fugitive Slave Law, 261;
    participation of, in rescue of fugitives, 276, 332;
    petition against kidnapping of, 296;
    increase in number of fleeing, after passage of law of 1850, 316;
    arrest of free, 317, 318.

  Nelson, Dr. David, 96; abducting enterprises of, 155.

  Nelson, Judge, in decision in case of Jack _vs._ Martin, 257;
    on the Fugitive Slave Law, 272.

  New Bedford, Mass., estimate of fugitive settlers in, 235, 236;
    Frederick Douglass in, 251.

  Newberne, N.C., agent in, 68, 81, 117;
    escape of slaves from, 144.

  New Brunswick, Canada, routes to, 133, 219.

  New England, information secured concerning underground lines in,
      11;
    slavery extinguished in, 17;
    anti-slavery settlement in, 31, 93, 171;
    rise of U. G. R. R. in, 36, 37;
    fugitives from the South landed on coast of, 81, 144;
    extent of underground system in, 113;
    settlers in Ohio from, 115;
    fugitives sent to, 121, 125;
    routes of, 128-134, 219;
    direction of routes in, 140, 195, 219;
    terminal stations in, 145;
    career of Lewis Hayden in, 158;
    stipulation for return of fugitives in agreement of Confederation
        of 1643, 292;
    memorial asking repeal of Fugitive Slave Law, from Quakers in, 324;
    sentiment in, adverse to the South's treatment of the compromises,
        331.

  New England Anti-Slavery Society, annual meeting of, at time of
      attempted rescue of Burns, 382.

  _New England Magazine_, on Underground Railroad, 5, 6.

  New Garden, Ind. See Fountain City, Ind.

  New Hampshire, rise of Underground Railroad in, 36, 37;
    routes of, 132, 133;
    failure to pass full personal liberty law in, 246;
    early opposition to Fugitive Slave Law of 1793, 295.

  New Haven, agreement of colony of, with New Netherlands for
      surrender of fugitives, 19.

  New Jersey, slavery extinguished in, 17;
    anti-slavery Quakers in, 31;
    rise of Underground Railroad in, 34;
    routes of, 120, 121, 123-125;
    abductors along southern boundaries of, 151;
    settlement of fugitive slaves among Quakers at Greenwich, 236;
    sanction to Fugitive Slave Law, 246;
    slave-owner from, prosecuted, 274;
    penalties in, for transporting fugitives, 291, 292.

  New Netherlands,
    agreement of colony of, with New Haven for surrender of fugitives,
        19;
    aid prohibited to fugitives in, 290, 291.

  New Orleans, escape of abductor John Mason from, to Canada, 185.

  Newspapers, accounts of Underground Railroad in, 6, 7;
    anti-slavery, 168.

  Newton, case of Norris _vs._, 275, 276.

  New York, E. M. Pettit, conductor in southwestern, 4;
    slavery extinguished in, 31;
    rise of U. G. R. R. in, 34, 35;
    special agent in Albany, 70;
    effect of rescue of Jerry McHenry in central, 72;
    supplies for fugitives provided by Women's Anti-Slavery Society of
        Ellington, 77;
    steam railroad transportation in, 80;
    anti-slavery sentiment among Friends in, 93;
    favorable conditions for U. G. R. R. in western, 115;
    character of population in, 115;
    routes of, 120-128;
    direction of lines in, 140;
    broken lines and isolated place-names in, 141;
    terminal stations in, 145, 146;
    in the Patriot War, 193;
    settlement of fugitives in, 236;
    condemnation of Jerry rescue by many newspapers, 239;
    seizure of alleged fugitive in Poughkeepsie, 241;
    indignation meetings at Syracuse against law of 1850, 244, 320;
    personal liberty law of, 245, 246;
    flight of slaves from, 250;
    agents in, 251-253;
    abduction of free <DW64>s from, 269;
    colonial law of, to prevent escape of fugitives to Canada, 292;
    address to slaves by liberty party convention in, 310;
    address of Seward of, in behalf of fugitives, 313;
    Jerry rescue in Syracuse, 318;
    convention at Syracuse, sends congratulatory message to Wisconsin,
        328, 329.

  New York City, U. G. R. R. in, 35;
    Vigilance Committee of, 71;
    indignation meeting at Syracuse against Fugitive Slave Law, 244.

  New York Central Railroad, 80.

  _New York Tribune_, letter from John Brown to, 8, 9, 165, 166.

  Niagara River, important crossing-places to Canada along, 146.

  Nicholson, Valentine, method of disguise of fugitive employed by,
      64, 65.

  Nomenclature of stations in New Jersey, 124.

  Norfolk, Va., escape by boat from, 81, 144, 145;
    natural route for escape of slave from, 118.

  Norris _vs._ Newton, case of, 275, 276.

  _North American Review_, on reclamation of fugitives in the North,
      243.

  North Carolina, Levi Coffin in, 4, 111;
    reminiscences relating to, 11;
    organization of U. G. R. R. in, (1819,) by Vestal and Levi Coffin,
        40;
    escape of slaves from, 81, 144, 145;
    anti-slavery sentiment among Quakers in, 93;
    involved in Brown's plan of liberation, 167;
    Canadian refugees from, 195;
    law against aiding fugitives in colonial times, 292;
    Iredell on slave clause in Constitution before state convention
        of, 294;
    Clingman of, on value of fugitive settlers in Northern states,
        341.

  Northern Central Railroad, 80, 122, 128, 143, 252, 253.

  Northern states, lack of formal organization in underground centres
      of, 69;
    steam railroad transportation for fugitive slaves in, 78-81;
    denunciation of law of 1850 in, 90, 243, 244, 318;
    list of, through which the underground system extended, 113, 114;
    most used underground routes in, 119;
    congested district in, 120, 121;
    favorable situation of Ohio, Indiana and Illinois for underground
        work, 134;
    sea routes to, 144;
    reception of abductor Capt. Walker in, 170, 171;
    effect of recital of Capt. Walker's experience upon, 171;
    appeal of fugitives to anti-slavery people in, 191;
    formation of lines of Underground Road in, during decade
        1828-1838, 193;
    Canadian refugees visited by abolitionists from, 199-201;
    effect of apprenticeship of  refugees in, 204, 212, 213;
    settlement of fugitives in, 235;
    number of and risks of fugitive settlers in, 237-240;
    slave-hunting in, 240, 241;
    effect of Fugitive Slave Law on fugitive slaves in, 241, 242,
        246-248;
    increased difficulty of reclamation in, 242, 243;
    personal liberty laws enacted by, 245, 246;
    exodus of fugitives from, 249, 250;
    continued residence of fugitive slaves in, after law of 1850,
        250, 251;
    underground men among fugitives in, 251-253;
    first Fugitive Slave Law stirs popular sense of justice in, 255;
    antagonism between state and federal Fugitive Slave laws,
        259-260;
    non-interference of law of 1793 with laws of, 263;
    laws of, dealing with subject of fugitive slaves, 264;
    disinclination of, to restore fugitives after Prigg decision,
        265;
    possibility of abduction of free <DW64>s from, under law of 1850,
        268, 269;
    counsel for fugitives in, 281-285;
    attitude of people toward proposed Fugitive Slave Bill of 1860,
        286;
    object lessons in horrors of slavery in, 290;
    abduction of free <DW64>s from, under law of 1793, 295;
    vote of members of Congress of, on proposed amendment to slave law
        of 1793, 296;
    proof of early anti-slavery sentiment in, 300;
    effect of fugitive slaves' appeal in, 300-303;
    effect of Garrisonian movement on resistance to Fugitive Slave Law
        in, 308, 309;
    attitude of population toward fugitives, 313;
    significance of vote on law of 1850, 314;
    era of slave-hunting in, 316;
    Webster's advocacy of obedience to law of 1850 throughout, 320;
    brought face to face with slavery bylaw of 1850, 321;
    effect of _Uncle Tom's Cabin_ on people of, 323, 324;
    Mrs. H. B. Stowe, champion of victims of slavery in, 323;
    acceptance of Compromise of 1850 as a substantial political
        settlement in, 324;
    Sumner on import of the appeal of fugitive slaves to communities
        in, 325;
    open defiance to Fugitive Slave Law in, (1850-1860,) 326 _et
        seq._;
    confederacy among cities of, proposed to defend fugitives from
        rendition, 328, 329;
    effect of Kansas-Nebraska Act on public feeling in, 331;
    double effect of law of 1850 in, 337, 338;
    charge of bad faith on part of, unsustained by statistics on
        fugitive slaves, 342, 343;
    underground operations the basis of important charges against,
        in crisis of 1850, 351, 352;
    efforts of Congress to appease spirit of secession, 354;
    protest against employment of troops from, as slave catchers, 355;
    effect of Underground Road in creating anti-slavery sentiment in,
        357.

  Northwest Ordinance,
    slavery excluded by, 17, 18;
    organization of states under, 18;
    fugitive slave clause in, quoted, 20, 293;
    alleged repugnancy of law of 1793 to, 255, 262, 263;
    alleged hostility between law of 1850 and, 268;
    protection afforded slave-owners by, 298.

  Northwest Territory,
    slavery excluded from, 17;
    study of map of underground lines in, 120;
    multitude of lines within, 134, 135;
    appeal to Ordinance of, in effort to overthrow law of 1793, 262,
        263;
    obligations of a state carved from, 263.

  Norton, Mr., 258.

  Notable persons among underground helpers, 104-112, 163-189.

  Nova Scotia, disappearance of slavery from, 191;
    sea routes to, 219;
    fugitives sent from Boston to Halifax in, 248.

  Nuckolls, escape of slaves of, 52.

  Nullification, spirit of, in the North, 326-338.

  Number, of underground helpers discovered, 87;
    of fugitives befriended by various operators, 87-89, 111;
    of fugitives using the valley of the Alleghanies, 118 _n._;
    of fugitives sent over lines of southeastern Pennsylvania, 121;
    of fugitives aided by E. F. Pennypacker in two months, 143 _n._;
    of terminal stations along northeastern boundary of Northern
        states, 145;
    impossibility of estimating, of fugitives emigrating from any one
        port, 146;
    of fugitives crossing Detroit River, 147;
    of fugitives helped by one man to Canada-bound vessels, 147;
    of deportation places along southwestern shore of Lake Michigan,
        147;
    of resorts for refugees in Canada, 148, 149;
    of refugee abductors visiting the South annually, 152;
    abducted by Fairfield on one trip, 154;
    of slaves abducted by Fairbank, 160;
    of slaves abducted by Charles T. Torrey, 169;
    abducted by Drayton on the _Pearl_ expedition, 172;
    of a party rescued by Josiah Henson, 177;
    total, abducted by Josiah Henson, 178;
    freed by Elijah Anderson, 183;
    freed by John Mason, 184;
    freed by Harriet Tubman, 186;
    forwarded by abolitionists in southern Ohio before the year 1817,
        192;
    of slaves arriving daily at Amherstburg, Ontario, both before
        and after enactment of Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, 194;
    flocking into Canada, 200;
    of <DW64> communities in Canada, 219, 220;
    of refugee population in Canada, 220-222, 313;
    estimated, of refugee settlers in Boston and New Bedford, 235,
        236;
    of fugitive settlers in Northern states, 235-237;
    of arrests of fugitives between 1850 and 1856 recorded, 240, 241;
    of fugitives taking flight from Northern states after law of 1850,
        249, 250;
    in companies transported by boat across Lake Erie by W. W. Brown,
        252;
    increase in, of fugitives after passage of the law of 1850, 316;
    of slaves lost by the South through flight and abduction
        estimated, 341, 342;
    of fugitives given in census reports for 1850 and 1860, 342;
    aided by Osborn, as seen in record kept during five months,
        344-346;
    of fugitives aided in Lawrence, Kan., during 1855-1859, 348;
    of <DW64>s transported by American Colonization Society, 350;
    of underground operators in Ohio and other states, 351.


  Oberlin, a station, 89, 97, 98, 150;
    multiple routes of, 141;
    sentiment against abductions in, 150.

  Oberlin College, 5;
    anti-slavery influence of, 33, 115;
    denomination and work of, 97, 98;
    C. Fairbank, abductor, student of, 157;
    interest of, in Oberlin-Wellington rescue, 336, 337;
    celebration at, over victory of abolitionists in
        Oberlin-Wellington case, 337.

  Oberlin-Wellington rescue case, before United States District
      Court, 279;
    penalties levied in, 279;
    eminent attorneys in, 282;
    account of, 335-337.

  Officers of the U. G. R. R., 67;
    title of "President" borne by Peter Stewart, 69;
    title of "President" bestowed upon Levi Coffin, 111, 112;
    Jacob Bigelow called "general manager" of a route, 117;
    a "general superintendent" mentioned, 125;
    Elijah Anderson designated "general superintendent" of U. G. R. R.
        in northwestern Ohio, 183.

  Ohio, computation of number of slaves escaping into, 10, 346;
    special agents or conductors in, 13, 69, 70, 88, 89;
    organized as free state, 18;
    Fugitive Slave Law of, 22, 47, 48, 237, 238;
    underground stations on Western Reserve in, 1815, 28;
    anti-slavery sentiment in, 31, 32, 95, 96;
    rise of the U. G. R. R. in, 37-40;
    Clay declares law of 1850 is enforced in, 48;
    night service at stations in, 55, 56;
    steam railroad transportation in, 78, 79;
    underground operations in southern, 87, 184, 301;
    underground helpers of Scotch and Scotch-Irish descent in, 92;
    underground centres in, 93;
    denominational relations of operators in, 93, 95-98;
    Van Zandt case in, 102;
    prosecution of Rush R. Sloane of Sandusky, 102;
    notable operators in, 104-112;
    U. G. R. R. routes through, 113, 119;
    distribution of stations in, 114, 115;
    favorable situation of, 134;
    number of underground paths in, 135;
    lines through Morgan County, 136, 137;
    direction of routes in, 140, 141;
    terminal stations in, 146, 252;
    Detroit a receiving station for western routes of, 147;
    abductors along the southern boundaries of, 151;
    _Independent_, the, on increase in number of passengers of, 195;
    seizure of McQuerry in, 241;
    danger of slave-hunting in, 242;
    Slave Law denounced by meeting of Ashtabula County, 244;
    personal liberty law of, 246;
    dismissal of fugitives from custody at Sandusky, 276;
    Blake of, introduces bill praying for repeal of law of 1850, 286;
    Seward's address in, advising hospitality to fugitives, 313;
    Giddings on impossibility of enforcement of law of 1850 in, 315;
    contests between state and federal authorities in, 334;
    illustrated in Ad. White rescue case, 334, 335, and in
        Oberlin-Wellington case, 335-337;
    Oberlin-Wellington rescue commended by mass-meetings in eastern,
        336;
    number of underground operators in, 351;
    states urged to repeal personal liberty laws by, 354.

  Ohio River, a thoroughfare for fugitives, 82;
    routes traced northward from, 134;
    crossing-place on, 137;
    initial stations along the, 139;
    escape of Eliza across, at Ripley, 322.

  Oliver, Rev. Thos. Clement, on routes of New Jersey, 123-125;
    on fugitive settlers in New Jersey, 236.

  Oliver _vs._ Weakley, case of, 276.

  Ontario,
    surviving fugitives in, 11;
    testimony of fugitives in, 27, 29, 76;
    fugitives conveyed by boat to Collingwood, 83;
    fugitives received by people of Chief Brant in, 92;
    goal of the great majority of runaways, 140;
    Clay on the admission of the refugee class by, 201;
    unsettled condition of, at time of beginning of immigration of
        fugitives into, 203;
    separate schools for <DW64>s in, 229;
    action of Parliament of, in encouragement of fugitives, 233.

  Ordinance of 1787. _See_ Northwest Ordinance.

  Organization, of the U. G. R. R., 67-70;
    U. G. R. R. work by an alleged regular, 279;
    league for self-protection among <DW64>s in southeastern
        Pennsylvania, 280;
    formal organization of U. G. R. R. in Philadelphia, 309.

  Orton, Prof. Edward, 35.

  Osborn, Daniel, record kept by, as operator at Alum Creek
      Settlement, O., 345, 346.

  Ottawa, Ill., multiple routes of, 141.


  Paine, Byron, political reward of, for defence of Booth, 330.

  Parish, F. D., fined for assisting runaways, 277, 278.

  Parker, Asbury, fugitive, 76.

  Parker, Chief Justice, on searching a citizen's house without
      warrant for a slave, 258.

  Parker, Prof. L. F., on underground work in Iowa, 33, 42, 43, 98.

  Parker, Theodore, scrap-book of, relating to renditions of Burns
      and Sims, 8;
    explanation of origin of vigilance committees given by, 71;
    public denunciation of Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 by, 90;
    indictment of, for attempted rescue of Burns, 103;
    journal and letter of, quoted, 109, 110;
    supporter of Dr. A. M. Ross, 180;
    on number of fugitives in Boston, 235;
    aid given by, to William and Ellen Craft, 317;
    part in the Burns rendition case, Boston, 331, 332.

  Parker, William, leader in Christiana rescue case, 10;
    leader in league among fugitives for self-protection, 280.

  Parliament, action by Ontario, in encouragement of fugitives, 233.

  _Patriot_, the, Charles T. Torrey, editor of, 169.

  Patriot War, part taken by fugitive slaves in, 193.

  Patterson, Isaac, operator, 13.

  Payne, George J., operator, 89.

  _Pearl_, the schooner, capture of, 172,173.

  Peirce, I. Newton, message sent by, 57;
    connection with the U. G. R. R., 105, 143.

  Penalties, levied for breaking the Fugitive Slave laws, 102, 103,
      110;
    suffered by Burr, Work and Thompson, 156;
    paid by Calvin Fairbank and Miss Delia Webster for abducting
        Hayden family, 158, 159;
    suffered by Charles T. Torrey for abducting slaves, 169;
    suffered by Capt. Jonathan Walker for abduction of slaves, 170;
    fine and imprisonment of Capt. Drayton, 173;
    suffered by Richard Dillingham, 174, 175;
    imposed upon W. L. Chaplin for abduction of slaves, 176;
    suffered by Elijah Anderson, 183;
    created by Slave Law of 1850, 265, 266;
    failure of, under law of 1850 to deter resistance to the law,
        272, 273;
    double penalty under law of 1793, 274, 275;
    for hindering arrest of fugitive slaves, 279;
    imposed on Booth for aiding in the Glover rescue, 329, 330.

  Pennsylvania, slavery extinguished in, 17;
    anti-slavery sentiment in, 31, 33;
    rise of U. G. R. R. in, 37;
    steam railroad transportation in, 79, 80;
    operations in Lancaster County, 87;
    in Chester County, 88;
    protest of German Friends in, against slave-dealing, 93;
    numerous underground centres among Quakers of southeastern, 94;
    Presbytery of Mahoning, helps form a new church, 96;
    Presbyterian operators in western, 97;
    Unitarian centre at Meadville, 98;
    prosecution of Daniel Kauffman of Cumberland County, 102;
    Thomas Garrett, native of, 110;
    extent of U. G. R. R. system through, 113;
    favorable condition for U. G. R. R. in western, 115;
    study of map of U. G. R. R. lines in New Jersey, New York and,
        120;
    routes of eastern, 121, 122;
    routes of western, 123;
    direction of lines in, 140;
    multiple and intricate routes in southeastern, 141;
    broken lines and isolated place-names in, 141;
    terminal stations in, 144, 145;
    abductors along southern boundaries of, 151;
    fugitive settlers in northwestern, 236;
    Fugitive Slave Law of, 237, 238, 260;
    seizure of family of <DW64>s at Uniontown in, 241;
    liberty law of, 246, 309;
    exodus of fugitives from, after enactment of law of 1850, 250;
    Prigg case in, 260, 261;
    law of, against aiding fugitives in colonial times, 292;
    emancipation by, 293;
    petition of Abolition Society of, for milder slave law, 296;
    Sergeant of, on House Fugitive Slave Bill of 1817, 297;
    complaints against people of, for harboring fugitives, 298;
    early pursuit in eastern, 302;
    Christiana case in, 317-319;
    kidnapping of free <DW64> in, 318.

  Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society, Wm. Still, clerk of, 3, 75;
    Harriet Tubman, a visitor at office of, 187.

  Pennsylvania Railroad, 30.

  Pennypacker, Elijah F., letter of, relating to fugitives, 79 _n._,
      143 _n._;
    station-keeper, 121.

  Personal liberty laws, object of, 245, 357;
    Buchanan's recommendations regarding, 286, 353, 354;
    of Massachusetts and other states, 309;
    enacted by Wisconsin, 330;
    slave-catchers indicted under, 336;
    characteristic of period 1840-1860, 337;
    induced by Missouri Compromise and law of 1850, 338;
    referred to as a grievance by Jones of Georgia, 351.

  Peterboro, N.Y., station of Gerrit Smith in, 127, 128;
    visited by abductor A. M. Ross, 180;
    address to slaves issued from, 310.

  Petersburg, Va., agent in, 118.

  Pettijohn, Amos, reward for abduction of, 53.

  Pettit, Eber M., author of _Sketches in the History of the
      Underground Railroad_, 2;
    characterization of his book, 4;
    on number of main routes in New York, 125.

  Philadelphia, Vigilance Committee of, 3, 71, 75, 76, 80-82, 121,
      145, 232;
    fugitives aided in, 10;
    continuous record of, as an underground centre, 34;
    anti-slavery sentiment among Friends in, 93;
    outlet from, 122;
    receives absconding chattels from Newberne, 144,
      from Baltimore, 151;
    trial of Christiana case in, 281, 319;
    counsel for fugitives in, 317;
    computation of fugitives aided in, 346, 347.

  Philadelphia and Reading Railroad, 79, 143.

  Phillips, Wendell, indictment of, 103;
    address in Faneuil Hall on the occasion of the Burns case, 332.

  Piatt, slaves lost by family of, 283.

  Pickard, S. T., on U. G. R. R. work in Portland, Me., 133.

  Pickrell, Mahlon, on period of operations in Ohio, 39.

  Pierce, Franklin, meaning of election of, 321.

  Pierce, William S., counsel for fugitive slaves, 284.

  Pinckney, on fugitive slave clause in the Constitution, 21, 294.

  Pindall, of Virginia, on a bill for increased security of slave
      property, 296.

  Pinkerton, Allen, friend of John Brown, 165.

  Place, Maurice, 15, 16.

  Platt, Jirch, diary of, 9;
    hiding-place on farm of, 63.

  Poindexter, James, 253.

  Poindexter, a  abductor of Jackson, O., 151.

  Poland, Hon. Joseph, operator, 107, 130.

  Politics, of underground workers, 99-101;
    Canadian refugees in, 232, 233.

  Polk, of Missouri, accusations against the North on account of
      U. G. R. R., 351, 352.

  Porter, Rev. J., hiding-place in church of, 63.

  Portsmouth, Va., escape of slaves from, 81, 144; agent in, 118.

  Pratt, of Maryland, on Seward's speech advising hospitality to
      fugitives, 313;
    on loss sustained by slave-owners of his state, 341.

  Prentiss, Henry J., 103.

  Presbyterian Church, anti-slavery sentiment in, 31, 32, 95-97;
    J. J. Rice, missionary among Canadian refugees, minister of, 200;
    Rev. William King, minister of, 207;
    support of Elgin Settlement in Canada by, 208;
    Rev. John Rankin, pastor of a, 306.

  Prigg _vs._ Pennsylvania, case of, 259, 260, 264-267, 289, 297, 309;
    new class of personal liberty laws following, 245, 246;
    effect of decision of, 309.

  Prosecutions, for aiding fugitives, 102, 103, 254;
    cases of, under laws of 1793 and 1850, 273-281;
    for aiding fugitive slaves, 283-285;
    effect of prosecutions, 317;
    Prof. Edward Channing on importance of, 317 _n._;
    of Booth for aiding in Glover rescue, 329, 330.

  Pro-slavery sentiment in Congress, 173.

  Providence and Worcester Railroad, 80, 130, 143.

  Pursuit of fugitive slaves, 51, 52, 59, 65, 164, 302;
    increase in frequency of, 308;
    effect of Prigg decision on, 309;
    after passage of law of 1850, 316;
    instances of, 317.

  Purvis, Robert, record of number of fugitives helped by, 10, 346;
    president of organized society of the U. G. R. R., 68, 309;
    account of the organization by, 68;
    chairman of the General Vigilance Committee of Philadelphia, 75;
    in rescue of Basil Dorsey, 85;
    New Jersey route described by, 125;
    on abduction by son of a planter, 153.

  Putnam, David, underground letters of, 10;
    record of night service at station of, 55, 56;
    secret signal used by, 56;
    facsimile of message received by, 57.

  Putnam, George W., on route in New Hampshire, 133.


  Quakers, Levi Coffin one of the, 4;
    underground centres in communities of, 6, 90, 115-120, 125;
    Alum Creek Settlement of, 10;
    agents and operators among the, 31, 38, 39, 53, 92, 94, 98, 124,
        131;
    pro-slavery sentiment among, 49;
    costume of, used as a disguise, 67;
    Washington's comment on a society of Philadelphia, 68;
    as conservators of abolition ideas, 93;
    result of appeal to societies of, in Massachusetts, 99;
    political affiliations of, 100;
    devotees of U. G. R. R. work among, 110-112;
    John Brown's party entertained by, in Iowa, 164;
    words of the Quaker poet, Whittier, quoted, 171;
    Quaker abductor Richard Dillingham, 174;
    at Richmond, Ind., befriend Josiah Henson, 177;
    at Fountain City, Ind., 199;
    visits of several, to Canadian refugees, 199;
    safety sought by fugitive settlers among, 235, 236;
    protection afforded fugitives by Quakers of New Bedford, Mass.,
        258;
    defendants in case of rescue, 274;
    in Christiana case, 280, 281;
    petition of Baltimore, against kidnapping, 296;
    memorial of, for repeal of Fugitive Slave Law, 324;
    record of fugitives in Alum Creek Settlement of, 344-346.

  Quebec, early emigration of fugitive slaves to, 218.

  Queen's Bush, early settlement of, by refugees, 204, 218.

  Quincy, Ill., multiple routes of, 141.

  Quincy, Josiah, his account of first known rescue of fugitive under
      arrest quoted, 83, 84;
    opponent of fugitive slave legislation, 283.

  Quitman, Gen. John A., 341.

  Quixot, Stephen, fugitive from Virginia, 51.


  Racine, Wis., Glover rescue in, 327.

  Railroads, steam, use of, for transportation of fugitives, 35, 59,
      78-81, 122-124, 128, 130, 132, 133, 142-145, 164, 165, 183;
    terminology of U. G. R. R. borrowed from vocabulary of, 67.

  Railroad, Underground. _See_ Underground Railroad.

  Ramsey, Rev. R. G., on route in southern Illinois, 14.

  Randolph, the slave, in case of Commonwealth _vs._ Griffith, 258.

  Rankin, Rev. John, reward for abduction of, 53;
    secret cellar in barn of, 63;
    anti-slavery preaching and practice of, 96;
    station of, at Ripley, O., 109;
    on immediate abolition, 306, 307;
    _Letters on Slavery_ by, 308.

  Rantoul, Robert, Jr., counsel for fugitive slaves, 283.

  Rathbun, Levi, station-keeper, 69, 70.

  Ratliff, Hon. John, 15, 16.

  Ray, Rev. Chas. B., on New York routes, 126.

  Ray _vs._ Donnell and Hamilton, case of, 278.

  Reading Railroad, 122.

  Rebellion, Lincoln's proclamation regarding states continuing in,
      287.

  _Recollections of an Abolitionist_, by Dr. A. M. Ross, 179-183.

  Redpath, James, on effects of John Brown's raid, 165.

  Reed, Fitch, on arrival of abductor Fairfield and company of
      slaves in Canada, 154 _n._

  Reed, Gen., fugitives carried by boats of, 82.

  Reed, John, on misinformation about Canada among slaves, 198.

  Reform party, political affiliations of <DW64> voters in Canada with,
      233.

  Refugees' Home Settlement, of Canadian refugees, 205, 209, 210;
    regulations of, 215-217;
    dissatisfaction in, 216, 217.

  Reminiscences, collection of, 11;
    value of, 12-16.

  Rendition of escaped slaves, early Northern sentiment on, Southern
      sentiment regarding, 21;
    question of, in crisis of 1851, 285;
    of Sims in Boston, 317;
    of Burns, 331-333.

  _Republican Leader_, the, articles on the U. G. R. R. in, 6.

  Republican party, effect of _Uncle Tom's Cabin_ on young voters in,
      324;
    forerunner of, in Wisconsin, 329;
    chief reliance of freedom declared to be in, repeal of Fugitive
        Slave Law demanded by, 337;
    organized U. G. R. R. said to be maintained by, 351;
    four governors belonging to, advise repeal of personal liberty
        bills, 354.

  Rescue, of fugitives, 38, 39, 83-86, 240, 275, 276, 284, 336;
    attempts at, after 1850, 240, 273;
    provisions of law of 1850 to prevent, 266;
    of slaves, an expensive undertaking, 277;
    increase in frequency of, 308;
    during era of slave-hunting in the North, 316;
    of Shadrach, 317, 319;
    of Jerry McHenry, 318, 320;
    of Glover, 327-330;
    of Burns, attempted, 331-333.

  Reynolds, Hon. John, on spirit of nullification in Illinois, 333,
      334.

  Rhode Island, anti-slavery Quakers in, 31;
    rise of U. G. R. R. in, 36;
    steam railroad transportation for fugitives in, 80;
    underground centres in, 94;
    routes of, 131;
    station at Valley Falls, 144;
    reception to Capt. Walker at Providence, 171;
    personal liberty law of, 245, 246, 309;
    colonial law against aiding fugitives in, 292;
    emancipation by, 293;
    repeal of personal liberty law by, 354.

  Rhodes, James Ford, on the U. G. R. R., 1;
    on remote political effect of _Uncle Tom's Cabin_, 324;
    on spirit of the personal liberty laws, 338 _n._

  Rice, Rev. Isaac J., mission in Canada kept by, 194, 200;
    supplies kept for refugees by, 214.

  Richardson, Lewis, cause of flight of, 27.

  Richmond, Va., fugitive shipped from, in a box, 60;
    fugitives escape by boat from, 145.

  Riddle, Albert G., counsel in Oberlin-Wellington case, 282.

  Ripley, O., John Rankin in, 109, 306;
    abductor at, 153;
    escape of Eliza across Ohio River at, 322.

  River routes of U. G. R. R., 81, 82, 118, 123, 129, 134, 138, 142;
    crossings on Detroit River, 147;
    Jefferson Davis on escape of slaves by Mississippi River, 312,
        313.

  Robin case, slavery terminated in Lower Canada by decision in,
      191.

  Robinson, case of _ex parte_, 270, 282.

  Robinson, Rowland E., on routes in Vermont, 130.

  Ross, Dr. A. M., abductor, 28-30, 178-182;
    as a naturalist, 183.

  Ruggles, David, agent in New York City, 35, 126;
    Frederick Douglass befriended by, 71 _n._

  Russell, Hon. A. J., operator, 107.

  Rycraft, colleague of Booth in the Glover rescue case, 329.


  Sabin, Hon. Alvah, operator, 107.

  Salsburg family, 87.

  Sanborn, F. B., on Harriet Tubman, 186;
    on number of fugitive settlers in Northern states, 237;
    letter to, on the U. G. R. R. depot at Lawrence, Kan., 347-350.

  San Domingo, servile insurrection in, 340.

  Sandusky, Dayton and Cincinnati Railroad, 78.

  Sandusky, Mansfield and Newark Railroad, 78.

  Sandusky, O., first fugitive at, (1820,) 39;
    arrival of company of fugitives at, 76;
    boat service from, 83;
    prosecution of Rush R. Sloane of, 210, 276;
    as a terminal, 183, 185;
    trial of F. D. Parish of, 277.

  Saxton, Gen. Rufus, on work of Harriet Tubman, 189.

  Sayres, indictment of, for attempted abduction, 173.

  Schooley, W. D., operator, 88.

  Schools, for refugees in Canada, 199, 200, 205-208, 210, 214, 215,
      228, 229;
    Sunday-schools, 330.

  Scioto Company, organized by anti-slavery men, 38.

  Scotch-Irish, the, in underground service, 92.

  Scotch, the, in underground service, 92.

  Scott, Gen. Winfield, presidential candidate of Whigs, 321.

  Scott, James, tried for aiding in rescue of Shadrach, 269, 270.

  Scripture, quoted by the abolitionists, 150, 306, 307.

  Sea routes of the U. G. R. R., 81, 82, 118, 129, 133, 144, 145,
      148, 219.

  Seceders, friends of runaways, 13.

  Secession, begun, 352, 353;
    efforts of the legislatures of the Northern states to appease
        the spirit of, 354;
    North's refusal to surrender fugitives one of the chief reasons
        for, 357.

  _Sentinel_, the, articles in, on the Underground Railroad, 6.

  _Sentinel_, the, chapters of "A History of Anti-Slavery Days"
      in, 6.

  Sergeant, of Pennsylvania, on new Fugitive Slave Bill, 297.

  Seward, F. W., on places of deportation of fugitive slaves, 145 _n._

  Seward, Wm. H., gives bail for Gen. Chaplin, 176;
    on Harriet Tubman, 185;
    aid given to Harriet Tubman by, 189;
    in the Van Zandt case, 282;
    speech advising hospitality to fugitive slaves, 313;
    signs the bond of rescuers of Jerry McHenry, 320.

  Sewell, Samuel E., counsel for fugitive slaves, 283.

  Shadrach, route taken by, after his rescue in Boston, 132;
    counsel in case of, 283;
    seizure of, 247;
    rescue of, 317, 319.

  Shaw, Chief Justice, on Slave Law of 1793, 270.

  Sheldon, Edward, indicted for helping fugitives, 284.

  Shotwell, A. L., claimant of slave Tamar, 159.

  Sider, Joseph, abductor, 60, 157.

  Sidney, Allen, on misinformation about Canada among slaves, 197.

  Signals, employed in the U. G. R. R service, 125, 156.

  Sims, Theodore Parker's memoranda on rendition of, 8;
    case of, in court, 269-271, 283;
    returned to slavery, 317.

  _Sketches in the History of the Underground Railroad_, by E. M.
      Pettit, 2, 4.

  Skillgess, Joseph, on fugitives passing through Ross County, O., 39.

  Slave-hunters, authors of Levi Coffin's title "President of the
      U. G. R. R.," 111;
    at Detroit, 147;
    difficulties met by, 242, 243;
    imprisonment of, 273, 274;
    number of, increased after passage of the Fugitive Slave Law, 316;
    in the Oberlin-Wellington case, 335, 336;
    protest against the employment of Northern troops as, 355.

  Slave-hunting, engagement of shiftless class in, 239;
    by Southern planters and their aids, 240;
    uncertainty of, in anti-slavery communities, 242, 243;
    Mr. Mason, of Virginia, on, 243;
    agents of slave-owners employed in, 316.

  Slavery, character of, at beginning of nineteenth century, 25;
    changed character of later, 26;
    John Brown's plan of abolition of, 168;
    in Canada, 190, 191;
    attacks on, in Congress, 286;
    abolished in District of Columbia, 287;
    King's proposition to prohibit, in Northwest Territory, 293;
    conviction of sin of, in Northern states, 300, 301;
    pursuit of fugitives creates opposition to, in the North, 302;
    early advocacy of political action against, by Bourne and Duncan,
        Rev. John Rankin's hatred of, 306;
    address of Liberty party convention touching on, 310;
    effect of prosecution of U. G. R. R. workers on question of, 317;
    nationalized by law of 1850, 321;
    effects of, studied by Harriet Beecher Stowe, 321;
    renewal of consideration of question of, caused by _Uncle Tom's
        Cabin_, 324;
    U. G. R. R., the safety-valve of, 340;
    disappearance of, in District of Columbia attributed to the
        U. G. R. R. by Claiborne, 341, 342;
    extinction of, in the United States, 356, 358.

  Slaves, desire for freedom among, 25, 195-197;
    purchase of, by Alabama, 26;
    incentives to flight of, 26, 27, 296;
    knowledge of Canada among, 28-30, 197;
    arrive as stowaways on the Maine coast, 133;
    steady increase in the number of, fleeing into Ohio, 135;
    from Virginia, 144;
    movement of, to inter-lake portion of Ontario, 147;
    abduction of, opposed by majority of abolitionists, 150;
    abduction of, by <DW64>s, 151;
    abductions of, by Canadian refugees, 152;
    abductions of, by Southern whites, 153;
    abduction of, by Northern whites, 154, 155;
    abduction of, in District of Columbia, 155;
    abduction of, by Burr, Work and Thompson, 155, 156;
    abduction of, by Joseph Sider and Calvin Fairbank, 157-160;
    abduction of, by Seth Concklin, 160-162;
    abduction of, by John Brown, 162-165;
    effect of John Brown's raid upon Missouri, 165;
    Brown's plan for liberation of, 166-168;
    abductions of, in answer to appeal, 168,
      by Charles T. Torrey, 168-170,
      by Capt. Jonathan Walker, 170, 171,
      by Mrs. Laura S. Haviland, 171, 172;
    capture and incarceration of the, escaping on the steamer _Pearl_,
        172, 173;
    abductions of, by Capt. Daniel Drayton, 172-174,
      by Richard Dillingham, 174, 175,
      by Wm. L. Chaplin, 175, 176,
      by Josiah Henson, 176-178,
      by Rial Cheadle, 178, 179,
      by Dr. A. M. Ross, 179-183,
      by the fugitive Elijah Anderson, 183,
      by the fugitive John Mason, 183-185,
      by the fugitive Harriet Tubman, 185-189;
    importation of, into Canada, 190, 191;
    Elgin Settlement in Canada started by a band of manumitted, 202,
        207;
    Wilberforce Colony originally settled by group of emancipated,
        218;
    domestic relations of, in Southern states, 227, 228;
    agents of U. G. R. R. appealed to for abduction of, 231, 232;
    Northern states an unsafe refuge for, 238, 239;
    purchase of, from their claimants, 241, 242;
    causes of flight of, 308;
    conditions favorable to escape of, 1840-1850, 309;
    effect of flight of, on Northern sentiment, 310;
    addresses to Southern, 310;
    address of Cazenovia convention to, 313;
    information about abolitionists among, 316;
    danger of uprising of, lessened by the U. G. R. R., 340;
    prospect of stampede of, from the border slave states, in case
        of secession, 355;
    chances for escape of, multiplied during War, 355.

  Slave trade, effect of prohibition of, (1807,) 301.

  Sloane, Hon. Rush R.,
    on the U. G. R. R. in northwestern Ohio, 39;
    account given by, of the naming of the Road, 45;
    prosecution of, 102;
    incident of embarkation of company of refugees given by, 148 _n._;
    on Elijah Anderson, abductor, 183;
    fined for assisting runaways, 276, 277.

  Sloane, John, early operator, 37.

  Sloane, J. R. W., 13.

  Sloane, Prof. Wm. M., 13 n.

  Sloane, Rev. William, 14, 15.

  Smedley, R. C.,
    author of _The Underground Railroad in Chester and Neighboring
        Counties of Pennsylvania_, 2, 4;
    account of naming of the U. G. R. R. by, 44, 45;
    on loss of bondmen by Maryland counties, 119;
    on numbers of fugitives sent to New England, 128, 129;
    on transportation of fugitives by rail, 143.

  Smith, Gerrit,
    operator, 22, 27, 107;
    generosity of, 176;
    on Harriet Tubman, 185;
    defiant speech of, after Jerry rescue, 320;
    one of the leaders in the Jerry rescue, 326;
    counsel for the fugitive Wm. Anderson in Canada, 353.

  Smith, James, 154.

  Smith, William R., work of, in behalf of Gen. Chaplin, 176.

  Snediger family, operators, 87.

  Society of Friends. _See_ Quakers.

  Sorrick, Rev. R. S. W.,
    on the condition of refugees in Oro, Ontario, 218;
    on the teachableness of the Canadian refugees, 224.

  South Carolina,
    abducting trip of A. M. Ross into, 29;
    agent of U. G. R. R. in Newberne, 68;
    involved in Brown's plan of liberation, 167;
    Canadian refugees from, 195;
    Pinckney on slave clause in United States Constitution before
        state convention of, 294;
    doctrine of state sovereignty of, resisted by Wisconsin, 330;
    servile insurrections in, 340;
    Butler of, on loss sustained by slave-owners of Southern section,
        341;
    withdrawal from the Union, 352.

  Southern branches of the U. G. R. R., 116-119.

  Southern states, satisfaction with the fugitive slave clause in
      the Constitution in the, 21;
    complaints of, on account of losses of slave property, 22;
    refuges of runaways in the, 25;
    spread of the U. G. R. R. in, 28;
    knowledge about Canada among slaves in, 28, 29, 180-182, 192;
    self-interest of, manifest in the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, 33;
    escapes by vessel from, 81, 133, 144;
    anti-slavery sentiment among white emigrants from, 90, 91;
    emigration of Quakers from, on account of slavery, 93;
    anti-slavery advocates among Presbyterian clergy in, 95;
    settlement of anti-slavery people from, in Ohio, 115;
    friends of fugitives in, 116;
    main channels of escape from, 119;
    abductions by whites from, 153, 154;
    Northern men in, encourage flight of slaves, 154, 155;
    expected effect of news of Brown's Missouri raid in, 165;
    Brown's plan for organizing insurrection in, 167, 168;
    Calhoun on expedition of the _Pearl_ speaks for, 173, 174;
    expeditions for abduction of slaves to, 177, 178;
    operations of the abductor A. M. Ross in, 180-183;
    early emigration of <DW64>s from, to Quebec, 219;
    domestic relations of slaves in, 227, 228;
    abductions of friends from, planned by the Canadian exiles, 231,
        232;
    abducting trips of Canadian refugees to, 232;
    rights of recovery in the North claimed by people of, 237;
    slave-hunting by people from, before and after law of 1850, 240,
        241;
    effect of law of 1850 upon, 243;
    Lincoln's proclamation of warning to, 287;
    the Underground Railroad as a grievance of, 290;
    sentiment in, concerning slave clause in Constitution, 294;
    complaints of members of Congress from, on score of treatment
        accorded runaways in the North, 295, 296;
    negotiations for return of fugitives to, 302;
    people of, aroused by addresses to slaves, 310;
    Calhoun on discontent in, 313;
    Webster on complaint of, in regard to non-rendition of fugitives,
        314;
    Pres. Fillmore gives assurances to, regarding Fugitive Slave
        Law, 318;
    doctrine of state sovereignty of, resisted by Wisconsin, 330;
    work of the U. G. R. R. a real relief to, 340;
    estimates of loss sustained by slave-owners in various, 341, 342;
    decline of slave population in border states, shown in United
        States census reports, 343;
    comparison of numbers of <DW64>s transported from, by U. G. R. R.
      and American Colonization Society, 350, 351;
    members of Congress from, on work of U. G. R. R., 351, 352;
    attempted conciliation of, 354;
    chances for escape of slaves multiplied throughout, 355;
    agitation by people of, for vigorous Fugitive Slave Law, 357.

  Sowles, Hon. William, operator, 107.

  Spalding, Rufus P., counsel in the Oberlin-Wellington case, 282.

  Speed, John, 65.

  Speed, Sidney, incident of unsuccessful pursuit narrated by, 65, 66.

  Spradley, Wash, a  abductor of Louisville, Ky., 151.

  Sprague, Judge, on legal force of a commissioner's certificate, 270.

  Springfield, Mass., "League of Gileadites" in, 71-75.

  Stanton, Henry B., 169, 170.

  State sovereignty, doctrine of, in the Northern states, 326-330.

  Stations, in New Hampshire, 132;
    in Maine, 134;
    initial, in Ohio, 135;
    initial, in Iowa, 136;
    number and distribution of, in portion of Morgan County, O., 137;
    stations in Michigan, 138;
    corresponding stations in Falley's and the author's maps, 138,
        139;
    initial, along the Ohio River, 139, 346;
    limited activity of, in eastern and western extremities of the
        free region, 141;
    isolated, in New York, Pennsylvania, Indiana and Illinois, 142;
    terminal, 145-148;
    cause of formation of initial, 295;
    Harriet B. Stowe's house one of the, 321.

  Station-keepers of the U. G. R. R., significance of the name, 67;
    character of work of, 69;
    explanation of division of labor between special agents and, 70,
        71;
    expense to, 76-78. _See_ also Agents and Conductors.

  Steele, Capt., master of a lake boat carrying fugitives, 82.

  Steele, William, letter of, on escape of slave family, 51, 52.

  Stephens, Alexander H., abduction of slave of, 176.

  Stephens, Charles,
    in Brown's raid, 163-165;
    arranges for trip east of Brown and party, 164, 165.

  Stevens, Thaddeus, operator, 106; in the Christiana case, 282.

  Stevenson, Henry, on slaves' desire for freedom, 196.

  Stewart, family of, fugitive settlers near Detroit, 236.

  Stewart, John H.,  operator, 89.

  Stewart, Peter, reputed President of the U. G. R. R., 69.

  Still, Peter, a fugitive from Alabama, 160.

  Still, William,
    author of _Underground Railroad Records_, 2, 3, 5, 8, 75;
    chairman of Vigilance Committee of Philadelphia, 8, 232;
    on instances of fugitives shipped as freight, 60;
    on stowaways from the South, 145;
    on value of Canadian refugees as citizens, 234 _n._;
    coöperation of, with station at Elmira, 253.

  Stone, Col. John,
    secret signal used by, 56;
    facsimile of message sent by, 57.

  Story, Justice,
    on the Fugitive Slave Law, 245;
    on power of Congress to legislate on subject of fugitive slaves,
        261.

  Stout, Dr. Joseph, indicted for helping fugitive, 284.

  Stow, L. S., on transportation of fugitives across Lake Erie, 146.

  Stowe, Harriet Beecher,
    correctness of her representation in _Uncle Tom's Cabin_, 25,
        322;
    material for _Uncle Tom's Cabin_ gathered by, while living at
        Cincinnati, O., 105, 321;
    connection of, with the U. G. R. R., 105;
    influence of the slave controversy upon, 290;
    champion of fugitive slaves, 323.

  Stowe, Prof. Calvin, model for a character in _Uncle Tom's Cabin_,
      322.

  Stowell, Martin, one of leaders in attempted rescue of Burns, 332.

  Sturgeon, of Pennsylvania, supports the Fugitive Slave Law, 314.

  Subterranean Pass Way of John Brown, 339, 357.

  Sumner, Charles,
    efforts of, in behalf of Capt. Drayton, 173;
    on number of fugitives fleeing from Northern states after
        enactment of law of 1850, 249;
    efforts of, in Senate to secure repeal of Fugitive Slave
        Law, 324;
    champion in Senate of the fugitive slave and his friends, 325;
    reads a letter in the Senate on employment of Northern troops as
        slave-catchers, 355.

  Supplies,
    for U. G. R. R. passengers, 76-78;
    furnished by Fred. Douglass, 78 _n._;
    for Canadian refugees, 202, 214;
    gathered for fugitives in Lawrence, Kan., 348, 349.

  Syracuse,
    Vigilance Committee of, 71, 72;
    rescue of Jerry McHenry in, 72, 86, 318, 326;
    passes distributed to runaways in, 80;
    underground work of Rev. S. J. May in, 109;
    fugitives sent by train to, 124;
    indignation meeting at, held after passage of law of 1850, 244;
    public action against Fugitive Slave Law in, 320;
    congratulatory message on Glover rescue from convention in, 328,
        329.


  Tabor College, U. G. R. R. work of, 98.

  Tamar, slave recovered by Fairbank, 159.

  Taney, Judge, prosecution of Thomas Garrett before, 110.

  Tappan, Lewis, supporter of Dr. A. M. Ross, 180.

  Tennessee,
    abducting trip of Dr. A. M. Ross into, 28;
    John Rankin, a native of, 109;
    fugitives from, 109;
    underground route through eastern, 119;
    involved in Brown's plan of liberation, 167;
    Dillingham's attempted abduction of slaves from, 174, 175;
    Canadian refugees from, 195;
    fables about Canada circulated in, 198.

  Terminal stations of U. G. R. R., 70, 76, 82, 83, 123, 126-128,
      131, 133, 136, 138, 139, 145-149;
    in Canada, 148, 149.

  Terminology of U. G. R. R., 67, 124.

  Territories, slavery prohibited in the, 287.

  Texas,
    question of annexation before Congress, 310;
    escape of slaves from western, 348.

  Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, 356.

  Thomas, Dr. Nathan M., operator, 88.

  Thompson, George, a party in the case of Burr, Work and, 155,156.

  Thurston, Brown, operator, 37, 133.

  Ticknor, George, on political effect of _Uncle Tom's Cabin_, 323.

  Todd, Rev. John,
    author of reminiscences of "The Early Settlement and Growth of
        Western Iowa," 7;
    quoted, 43.

  Todds, the, station-keepers, 15.

  Toledo, O.,
    boat service for runaways from, 83;
    U. G. R. R. helpers in, 92.

  Tompkins, case of Johnson _vs._, 259, 273, 274.

  Toombs, Robert, 173;
    abduction of slaves of, 176.

  Toronto, Canada,
    mission work of Rev. W. M. Mitchell in, 3;
    goods received for Canadian refugees at, 202, 203;
    number of refugee settlers in, 220, 221;
    condition of fugitive settlers in, 226;
    Drew on condition of <DW52> people in, 227;
    equal school privileges for whites and blacks in, 229;
    evening school for adult <DW64>s in, 230.

  Torrence, James W., method of, in conveying fugitives, 61.

  Torrey, Rev. Charles T.,
    abductor, 28, 168, 169;
    number of slaves abducted from Maryland by, 88;
    succeeded by Mr. Chaplin as editor of the Albany _Patriot_, 175.

  Townsend, Martin I., on routes in New York, 126.

  Townshend, Prof. Norton S., operator in Cincinnati, 104.

  Treason,
    charged in Christiana case, 319;
    charged by Webster against transgressors of the law of 1850, 320.

  _Treatise on Slavery, in which is shown forth the evil of
      Slaveholding, both from the Light of Nature and Divine
      Revelation_, immediate abolition advocated in, (1824,)
      304-306.

  _Tribune_, of New Lexington, O., on U. G. R. R., 6.

  Troy, N.Y., rescue of fugitive Chas. Nalle in, 85.

  "True Bands," societies for self-improvement among Canadian
      refugees, 230, 231.

  Trueblood, E. Hicks, author of articles on U. G. R. R. in
      _Republican Leader_, 6.

  Tubman, Harriet,
    mentioned, 6, 28, 178, 183;
    line of travel of, in Delaware, 118;
    character of, 185;
    work as an abductor, 186, 187;
    faith of, 188;
    most venturesome journey of, 188, 189;
    service of, as scout in the Civil War, 189;
    passenger on U. G. R. R., 340.

  Turner, Rev. Asa, on U. G. R. R. lines in Iowa and Illinois, 114.


  _Uncle Tom's Cabin_,
    correctness of representations in, 25, 322;
    sources of the knowledge of underground methods displayed in,
        105, 321;
    political significance of, 321-324;
    Sumner on reception given to, 325;
    object of, 357.

  Underground Railroad,
    as a subject for research, 1, 2;
    works on, 2, 3;
    articles on, 5-7;
    lack of contemporaneous documents relating to, 7;
    conditions of development of, 17, 18;
    numerous lines of, in Northern states, 22;
    early stations of, on Western Reserve, extended into Southern
        states, 28;
    effect of local conditions on growth of, 30;
    church connections of operators of, 32, 93-99;
    origin of, 33, 34, 191, 192;
    development of, 35-43,
      in New Jersey, 34,
      in New York, 34, 35,
      in New England, 36,
      in Ohio, 37-40,
      in North Carolina, 40,
      in Indiana, 40, 41,
      in Illinois, 41, 42,
      in Iowa, 42, 98,
      in Kansas, 43;
    activity of (1830-1840), 44, 308;
    activity of (1850-1860), 44, 71, 316, 317, 357;
    naming of, 44-46;
    midnight service on, 54-56;
    communications in work of, 56-59;
    methods of conveyance on, 59-61;
    nature of routes of, 61, 62, 70, 130, 141-146;
    variety of stations on, 62-64;
    use of disguises in work of, 64-67;
    lack of formal organization in, terminology of, 67;
    spontaneous character of, 69;
    places of deportation, 70, 145-147;
    terminal stations of, 70, 145-148;
    routes by rail, 78-81, 142-145;
    connection of Fred. Douglass with, 80, 91, 118, 251, 340;
    river routes, 81, 82, 142;
    traffic by water, 81-83, 142, 144-148, 219;
    routes by sea, 81, 129, 144, 145, 219;
    church connections of operators of, 94-97;
    notable operators of, 104-112, 155-189, 251-253;
    rise of, in Connecticut, 109;
    study of general map of, 113 _et seq._;
    extent of system, 114;
    broken lines and isolated place-names, 115, 116, 123, 141, 142;
    lines of New York and New England states, of
    Wisconsin and Michigan, 116;
    organized in North Carolina, 117;
    Southern branches, 117-119;
    signals used on Delaware River, 125;
    relative number of routes in Western states, 134;
    local map of Morgan Co., O., 136, 137;
    map of Indiana and Michigan routes of, 137-139;
    map of line of, in Livingston and La Salle counties, Ill., 139;
    trend of routes of, 139-141;
    lines of lake travel, 147, 148;
    Canadian termini of, 148, 149, 200, 219, 220, 225;
    operations of, through Clinton, O., in year 1842, 153;
    route followed by Brown from Missouri to Canada, 163-166;
    Brown's proposed use of, 166;
    route through Morgan Co., O., 178, 179;
    through Pennsylvania to Erie, 181;
    made use of by abductor A. M. Ross, 181;
    "general superintendent" of, in northwestern Ohio, 183;
    Canada, the refuge of passengers of, 190;
    Dr. S. G. Howe, on the origin of, 192;
    development of, during decade 1828-1838, 193;
    increased efficiency of, due to law of 1850, 193, 338;
    ease of escape over, in later years of, 213;
    lines through New England to Quebec, 219;
    capacity of, for transportation of fugitives, 222;
    agents of, appealed to, for abduction of friends, 231;
    agents of, among fugitive settlers in Northern states, 251-253;
    explanation of secrecy of, 255;
    escapes from Indian Territory over, 284;
    political aspect of, 290;
    explanation of development of initial stations of, 295;
    early branches in Pennsylvania, 298;
    influence in spreading anti-slavery sentiment, 302;
    organization of, in Philadelphia, 309;
    grievance of border states due to, 312, 341, 342;
    most flourishing period of, 316;
    Harriet Beecher Stowe's house a station on, 321;
    rapid expansion of, during period 1840-1860, 337;
    the work of, a real relief to masters, 340;
    Osborn's record of fugitives aided during five months, 344, 345;
    computation of fugitives aided in Ohio and Philadelphia during
        1830-1860, 346, 347;
    work of Lawrence station, in Kansas, described, 347-350;
    work of, compared with that of Colonization Society, 350, 351;
    organized societies of, said to be maintained by the Republican
        party, 351;
    relation of, to the Civil War, 357, 358.

  _Underground Railroad_, the Rev. W. M. Mitchell, author of, 2, 3.

  _Underground Railroad in Chester and the Neighboring Counties of
      Pennsylvania_, the, R. C. Smedley, author of, 2, 4.

  _Underground Railroad Records_, by Wm. Still, 2, 3, 4;
    work of the Philadelphia Vigilance Committee revealed in, 75, 76;
    story of the abducting trip of Seth Concklin as given by, 160-162.

  Unitarian Church, Rev. Theodore Parker a minister of, 8;
    underground work of Meadville Seminary of, 98;
    Rev. Samuel J. May, a clergyman of, 109.

  United States, census reports of, on fugitive slaves, 26, 342;
    escape of fugitives from Canada to, 190;
    school-teachers for Canadian refugees supported by religious
        societies of, 215;
    relative progress of Canadian <DW64>s and free <DW64>s in, 227;
    ministers of Canadian refugees canvass for money in, 231;
    fugitive slave cases before courts of, 257, 259-264, 269, 270,
        272-282, 286;
    necessity of a uniform system of regulation regarding fugitive
        slaves throughout, 261;
    treason against, charged in Christiana case, 280;
    participation by President of, in Christiana case, 280, 281;
    fugitive slave clause embodied in Constitution of, 293;
    negotiations of, with England for extradition of fugitives, 299,
        300;
    Senator Yulee on danger to the perpetuity of, 314;
    effect of Gerrit Smith's speech in the Anderson case in, 353;
    extinction of slavery in, 356.

  United States Freedman's Inquiry Commission, Dr. S. G. Howe's
      report for, on Canadian refugees, 211.

  Universalist Church, result of appeal to societies of, in
      Massachusetts, 99.


  Van Dorn, Mr., operator, 88.

  Van Zandt, case of Jones vs., 262, 278, 282;
    S. P. Chase and W. H. Seward in case of, 282;
    original of Van Tromp in _Uncle Tom's Cabin_, 322.

  Vaughan _vs._ Williams, case of, 262.

  Vermont,
    emancipation in, 17;
    rise of U. G. R. R. in, 36;
    steam railroad transportation for fugitives through, 81;
    public men, operators in, 106, 107;
    routes of, 126, 130;
    terminal stations in, 145;
    personal liberty law of, 245, 246, 309;
    emancipation by, 293;
    amendment of personal liberty law by, 354.

  Vermont Central Railroad, 80, 130, 143, 145.

  Vigilance Committee,
    of Philadelphia, 3, 4, 8;
    of Boston, 8;
    explanation of the origin of such bodies given by Theodore Parker,
        71;
    organization and work of Syracuse, 71, 72;
    account of Boston, 72, 73;
    account of the formation and rules of the Springfield (Mass.)
        "League of Gileadites," 73-75;
    of Philadelphia, 75, 76;
    Female Anti-Slavery Association organizes a, 77;
    fugitives forwarded to New York City, by Philadelphia, 80;
    agents of, in Baltimore, 91, 117;
    appeal to churches of Massachusetts, by Boston, 98, 99;
    Theodore Parker appointed counsellor of fugitives in Massachusetts
        by, 110;
    fugitives sent by sea to Philadelphia, 145;
    of Cincinnati, consulted by Mrs. Haviland, 171;
    entreaties for aid to chairman of Philadelphia, 232;
    Philadelphia committee in Christiana case, 280;
    rescue of Jerry McHenry by Syracuse, 320;
    work of, in Milwaukee in Glover case, 328;
    work of Boston, in Burns case, 331;
    Purvis' record of fugitives aided by Philadelphia, 346, 347.

  Vincent, James, counsel in fugitive slave case, 284.

  Virginia,
    proposition to enslave free <DW64>s in, 26;
    knowledge of Canada among slaves in, 26, 28, 29, 37;
    abducting trip of Dr. A. M. Ross into, 28;
    fugitives shipped in a box from, 61;
    fugitives escaping by vessel from, 81;
    runaways from, 85, 109, 252, 253, 258;
    reward offered to Indians in, for apprehending fugitives, 92;
    anti-slavery sentiment in Quaker meetings of, 93;
    agent in Petersburg, 118;
    natural route from Norfolk, 118;
    slaves escaping from, 144, 145;
    visitation of, by abductor, 151;
    abductor John Fairfield, of, 153;
    involved in Brown's plan of liberation, 167;
    Torrey's abduction of slaves from, 169;
    abductions by Rial Cheadle from, 179;
    knowledge of Canada spread by slaves from, 182;
    Rev. George Bourne, a resident of, 203;
    effect of slave-breeding in, 228;
    Mason of, on difficulty of recapturing fugitives, 243;
    prohibition of aid to fugitives in colonial, 291;
    Madison, on slave clause in the Constitution before state
        convention of, 294;
    desirous for extradition of fugitives from Canada, 299;
    Mason of, author of Slave Law of 1850, 311;
    Burns carried back to, 333;
    Richmond _Enquirer_ on rendition of Burns, 333;
    Brown's method to weaken slavery in, 339;
    servile insurrection in, 340;
    Moore on loss borne by slave-owners of his district in, 341;
    Mason on loss sustained by slave-owners of, 341;
    decline in slave population of panhandle counties of, 343;
    fugitives from, recorded by Osborn, 345;
    reasons for loyalty of western, 354, 355.

  Virginia and Kentucky resolutions,
    quoted by Wisconsin convention, 328, 329;
    quoted by mass convention at Cleveland, O., 336.

  Von Hoist, on the U. G. R. R., 1.


  Wabash and Erie Canal, thoroughfare for fugitives, 142.

  Walker, Capt. Jonathan, work of, as an abductor, 168, 170, 171.

  Walker, Edward, on the slave's desire for freedom, 196.

  Walker, James, rescue of Piatt slaves by, 282, 283.

  Walker, Joseph G., disguise provided for fugitive by, 67.

  Wambaugh, Prof. Eugene, on the dilemma involved in the Fugitive
      Slave laws, 256 _n._

  War of 1812, knowledge of Canada spread by, 27, 28, 301.

  War of Rebellion,
    Still's U. G. R. R. records concealed during, 8;
    underground work terminated by, 11;
    services of Harriet Tubman during, 186, 189;
    assaults on slavery justified by exigencies of, 286, 287;
    underground operations as a cause of, 290, 351, 352, 358;
    chances for escape of slaves multiplied during, 355;
    resort of slaves to Union forces at the outbreak of, 357.

  Ware, J. R., station-keeper, 69, 70.

  Washington, D.C., route from, 117, 125;
    abduction of slaves from, by Capt. Drayton, 172, 173;
    abduction of slaves from, by Wm. L. Chaplin, 175, 176;
    occurrence of last fugitive slave case under law of 1850 in, 285.

  Washington, George, letters of, (1786,) relating to fugitives, 33,
      68;
    Fugitive Slave Law of 1793 signed by, 254;
    escaped slave of, 295, 324, 325.

  Washington, Horace, 27.

  Washington, Judge, in the case of Hill _vs._ Low, 273.

  Washington, Lewis, agent, 253.

  Weakley, case of Oliver vs., 276.

  Webster, Daniel, supports Fugitive Slave Bill, 314, 315;
    on the necessity of the enforcement of Fugitive Slave Law of 1850,
        320.

  Webster, Miss Delia A., assistant of Fairbank in abduction of Hayden
      and family, 158, 159.

  Weed, Thurlow, underground work of, 108.

  Weeks, Dr. Stephen B., on underground work of the Coffins in North
      Carolina, 117.

  Weiblen, John G., conveys fugitives by boat to Canada, 83.

  Weimer, L. F., suit of, against Sloane, 276, 277.

  Weldon, John, method of, in transporting fugitives, 61.

  Wesley, John and Charles, views of, on slavery question, 94.

  Wesleyan Methodists, friends of fugitives, 32;
    secession of, from M. E. Church, 94;
    operators among, 95, 168.

  West, David, on the slave's desire for freedom, 196.

  West, Hon. John, operator, 107.

  West, Wm. H., counsel for Piatt slaves, 282, 283.

  Western Reserve, early escapes across, 28, 301;
    anti-slavery sentiment in, 31,
    fugitive passengers from, 35;
    routes across, 123.

  Western Reserve College, anti-slavery influence of, 115.

  Western Reserve Historical Society publishes pamphlet on
      "U. G. R. R.," by Prof. J. H. Fairchild, 5.

  Western states, routes of, 134-144.

  West Indian Emancipation, celebration of, by Canadian refugees,
      226, 227.

  Weston, G. W., message of, 58.

  Westwater, James M., hiding-place provided by, 63.

  Wheaton, Chas. A., a leader in the Jerry rescue, 326.

  Whig party, character of, 100;
    vote of, on the Fugitive Slave Law, 315;
    considers Compromise of 1850 a finality, 320;
    disinclination to vote for Gen. Winfield Scott, 321.

  Whipper, Alfred, school-teacher among the refugees, 215.

  Whipple. _See_ Chas. Stephens.

  White, Addison, attempted seizure of, 241;
    escape of, to Canada, 234.

  White, Hon. Andrew D., letter of, on underground work of his father,
      80.

  White, Horace, railroad passes supplied to fugitives by, 80.

  White, Isaac, 29.

  White, John, slave befriended by Mrs. Haviland, 171, 172.

  White, Joseph, operator, 97.

  Whitfield, views on the slavery question, 94.

  Whitman, of Massachusetts, on the bill securing to claimant of
      runaway right to prove title in courts of his own state,
      etc., 297.

  Whitneys, of Concord, Mass., friends of Harriet Tubman, 186.

  Whittier, John G., supporter of Liberty party, 100;
    on work of Rev. Charles T. Torrey, 170;
    stanza of "The Branded Hand," by, quoted, 171.

  Wilberforce Colony in Canada, visited by Levi Coffin, 200, 220;
    origin of, 218;
    Dr. J. W. Moore on progress of fugitives in, 226, 227.

  Willes, Rev. Dr., on refugee population in Canada, 222.

  Willey, Rev. Austin, on escape of fugitives to New Brunswick, 219.

  Williams, George W., the <DW64> historian on U. G. R. R., 340.

  Williams, case of Vaughan _vs._, 262.

  Williams, John F., agent, 41.

  Williams, Thomas, map of lines in Morgan County, O., by, 136.

  Williams, W. B., on route from Washington, D.C., 117.

  Wilmington, Del., underground work of Thomas Garrett in, 110, 111;
    station for Harriet Tubman, 118;
    movement of fugitives to, 121.

  Wilmington, N.C., escape of slaves from, 81, 144, 145.

  Wilson, Henry, on U. G. R. R., 1, 37, 114;
    on abductions by Rev. Charles T. Torrey, 169;
    on number of fugitive settlers in Northern states, 237.

  Wilson, John W., counsel in fugitive slave cases, 283.

  Wilson, Rev. Hiram, receiving agent in Canada, 126;
    mission kept by, 194;
    schools supervised by, 199, 200;
    arranges with Canadian government for admission of supplies, 202;
    founder of school for refugees, 205;
    service of, in British and American Institute for refugees, 206,
        207, 220;
    on number of Canadian refugees, 221.

  Windsor, Ontario, visited by Fairfield, the abductor, 153, 154;
    arrival of Brown and his abducted slaves in, 165;
    private schools for <DW64>s in, 229.

  Winslow, Nathan, operator, 133.

  Wisconsin, organized as free state, 17, 18;
    places of deportation in, 82, 116, 147;
    personal liberty law of, 246;
    Howe of, on law of 1850, 286;
    Glover rescue in, 327-330;
    determination of people of, shown in Booth case, 330.

  Women's Anti-Slavery societies, supplies for passengers provided by,
      77.

  Woodford, Newton, indicted for helping fugitives, 284.

  Woolman, John, precepts of, 49.

  Work, Alanson, a party in the case of Burr, Work and Thompson, 155,
      156.

  Worthington, O., early rescue of a fugitive in, 38, 84.

  Wright _vs._ Deacon, case of, 256, 257.

  Wright, Judge Jabez, early operator, 39.

  Wright, Peter, on the work of Canadian refugees, 205.

  Wright, William and Phœbe, station-keepers, 118 _n._


  Yokum, William, watchwords used by, 57.

  Young, Rev. Joshua, operator. 130.

  Yulee, of Florida, informs Senate of convention of runaway slaves in
      New York, 313.


  Zigzag routes, 62, 131, 141.





End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Underground Railroad from Slavery
to Freedom, by Wilbur H. Siebert

*** 