Slavery, as well as indentured servitude, existed in Illinois as late as
1845,(491) and the “Black Laws” of the state were repealed on February 7,
1865.(492) From 1787 until years after 1830 the slavery question was an
unsettled one. In addition to the arguments for or against the institution
that were used everywhere, the pro-slavery party in Illinois asserted that
as the Ordinance of 1787 guaranteed to the French inhabitants their
property, the French could hold slaves, and that as all citizens of a
state had equal rights other persons in Illinois could hold slaves. The
reply was that the Ordinance plainly forbade slavery.(493)
Whatever the merits of the argument, slavery did exist in Illinois. The
fear of the French that they might lose their slaves, and the desire to
attract slaveholders to Illinois, led to determined and repeated efforts
to legalize slavery. Early in 1796 a petition was sent from Kaskaskia to
Congress, praying that the anti-slavery article in the Ordinance of 1787
might be either repealed or so altered as to permit the introduction of
slaves from the original states or elsewhere into the country of Illinois,
that a law might be enacted permitting the introduction of such slaves as
servants for life, and that it might be declared for what period the
children of such servants should serve the masters of their parents. This
petition was signed by four men, including some of the largest landowners
in Illinois, but as the petition, while purporting to come from Illinois
alone, concerned the entire Northwest Territory, as there was no
indication that the four petitioners represented Illinois sentiment, and
as the congressional committee was informed that many of the inhabitants
of the territory did not desire the proposed change, the prayer of the
petition was denied.(494)
In 1800, two hundred and sixty-eight inhabitants of Illinois, chiefly
French, petitioned Congress to repeal the anti-slavery provision of the
Ordinance, stating that many of the inhabitants were crossing the
Mississippi with their slaves. The petition was not considered.(495) A
similar request, presented late in 1802, was twice reported upon by
committees, one report (Randolph’s) declaring that the growth of Ohio
proved that a lack of slavery would not seriously retard settlement, while
the other was in favor of suspending the anti-slavery article for ten
years, the male descendants of immigrating slaves to be free at the age of
twenty-five years, and the females at twenty-one.(496) In 1805 a majority
of the members of the respective houses of the Indiana legislature
petitioned for the repeal of the anti-slavery article, and this petition
was closely followed by a memorial from Illinois expressing the hope that
the general government would not pass unnoticed the act of the last
legislature authorizing the importation of slaves into the territory. It
violated the Ordinance, the memorialists declared, and although they
desired slavery they professed themselves to be law-abiding.(497) A
committee report on the petition and memorial recommended that permission
to import slaves into Indiana (then including Illinois) for ten years be
granted, in order that the evil effects of slavery might be mitigated by
its dispersion, but no legislation resulted from the report,(498) and the
next year petitioning was resumed. The legislature sent resolutions asking
for the suspension of the anti-slavery article, and elaborating the
argument for such suspension. A committee of which the territorial
delegate from Indiana was chairman, presented a favorable report.(499)
In September, 1807, a petition for the suspension of the anti-slavery
article was sent to Congress from the Indiana legislature. It was signed
by Jesse B. Thomas, later author of the Missouri Compromise, but then
Speaker of the territorial House of Representatives, and resident in what
was to become the State of Indiana, and by the president _pro tem._ of the
Legislative Council. Action in committee was adverse,(500) Congress being
then busied with the question of the abolition of the slave trade.
During the territorial period in Illinois (1809-1818), the slavery
question was not much agitated. The Constitution of 1818 provided that
slaves could not be thereafter brought into the State, except such as
should be brought under contract to labor at the Saline Creek salt works,
said contract to be limited to one year, although renewable, and the
proviso to be void after 1825, but existing slavery was not abolished, and
existing indentures—and some were for ninety-nine years(501)—should be
carried out. Male children of slaves or indentured servants should be free
at the age of twenty-one and females at eighteen.(502) In Congress, as has
been seen, Tallmadge, of New York, objected to admitting Illinois before
she abolished slavery, but his objection was ineffectual.
In March, 1819, a slave code was enacted. Any black or mulatto coming into
the State was required to file with the clerk of a circuit court a
certificate of freedom. Slaves should not be brought into the state for
the purpose of emancipation. Resident negroes, other than slaves and
indentured servants, must file certificates of freedom. Slaves were to be
whipped instead of fined, thirty-nine stripes being the maximum number
that might be inflicted. Contracts with slaves were void. Not more than
two slaves should meet together without written permission from their
masters. Any master emancipating his slaves must give a bond of $1000 per
head that such emancipated slaves should not become public charges,
failure to give such a bond being punishable by a fine of $200 per head.
Colored people must present passes when traveling.(503)
Stringent as was the code of 1819, it was of a type that was common in the
slave states. Its passage may have kept some negroes, both free and slave,
from coming into the state upon their own initiative without certificates
of freedom. From 1810 to 1820 the number of slaves in Illinois increased
from 168 to 917, Illinois being the only state north of Mason and Dixon’s
line having an increase in the number of slaves during the decade,
although in the Territory of Missouri, during this time, the number
increased from about 3000 to over 10,200. At the same time the number of
free blacks in Illinois decreased from about 600 to some 450, while they
increased in Indiana from nearly 400 to over 1200. Of the slaves in
Illinois in 1820 precisely 500 were in the counties of Gallatin and
Randolph, the former being the center of the salt-making industry, and the
latter the seat of the early French settlement at Kaskaskia.(504)
Whether the anti-slavery clause of the Ordinance of 1787 freed the slaves
of the old French settlers was long a disputed question, and it is certain
that a strict construction of the Illinois Constitution of 1818 made
further importation of slaves illegal. Many slave-owners passed through
southern Illinois to Missouri, because the main road for emigration by
land to that territory crossed the Ohio River at Shawneetown. Many of the
slaves who produced the large increase in the number of slaves in Missouri
from 1810 to 1820 must have gone over this route. In 1820 more than
one-seventh of the population of Missouri was slave.(505) The people of
Illinois could not fail to see that they were losing a certain class of
emigrants—the prosperous slaveholders. The loss became greater as the
likelihood of Missouri’s admittance as a slave state increased. As early
as 1820 there was a rumor of the formation of a party in Illinois to
introduce slavery into the state in a legal manner.(506) The next year an
editorial in a leading newspaper of Illinois said: “Will the admission of
slavery in a new state tend to increase its population?—is a question
which has been of late much discussed both within and without this state.
It has been contended that its admission would induce the emigration of
citizens of states as well where slavery was, as where it was not
tolerated—that while it would attract the attention of the wealthy
southern planter, it would not deter the industrious northern farmer.” The
editor cites Ohio and Kentucky as proof against the above argument. In
1810 Ohio had a population, in round numbers, of 230,700 and Kentucky one
of 406,500; in 1820 Ohio had 581,400, while Kentucky had 563,300, giving a
difference in favor of Ohio of over 18,000; and an excess of gain during
the decade, in favor of Ohio, of 93,847. “We are willing to take into
consideration the unsettled titles of land in the last-mentioned state
[Kentucky], and admit that in this respect Ohio had a decided advantage—we
will therefore deduct the fraction of 93,847, believing it equivalent to
the loss of population from this cause—there is still a difference of
100,000.”(507) The editor’s figures for 1810 were correct and those for
1820 were approximately so. It is also true, and in line with his
argument, that during the same decade Indiana showed an increase from
24,500 to 147,200, while Missouri’s increase was from 20,800 to 66,500;
the increase in Illinois being between the two in proportion of
increase—from 12,282 to 55,162.(508) The passing of the slaveholders to
Missouri continued and the discussion of the slavery question became
animated.
In the gubernatorial election of 1822 there were four candidates for
governor, two being anti-slavery and two pro-slavery in belief. Edward
Coles, from Virginia, an anti-slavery man, was elected by a plurality of
but a few votes. His election was due to a division in the ranks of the
opposite party, as is shown by the fact that the pro-slavery party polled
over 5300 votes, while the anti-slavery party polled only some 3300.(509)
In his message of December 5, 1822, Governor Coles strongly urged the
passage of a law to prevent kidnapping(510)—then a regular trade. This was
referred to a select committee which reported as follows: “Your committee
have carefully examined the laws upon the subject, and with deep regret
announce their incapability of devising a more effectual plan than the one
already prescribed by law for the suppression of such infamous crimes. It
is believed that the benevolent views of the executive and the benign
purposes of the statutes can only be realized by the redoubled diligence
of our grand juries and our magistrates, aided by the well-directed
support of all just and good men.”(511) The legislature was politically
opposed to the governor, and the committee’s report sounds like the
baldest irony. With the report was presented a scheme for introducing
slavery into the state,(512) a scheme which eventually led to the vote of
1824.(513)
The Constitution of Illinois provided that upon the vote of two-thirds of
the members of each house of the legislature, the question of calling a
convention for the revision of the Constitution should be submitted to the
people. For calling a convention only a majority vote from the people was
necessary. This method of procedure the pro-slavery party determined upon.
The two-thirds in favor of the project could be secured without difficulty
in the senate, but in the house the desperate expedient of reconsidering
the right of a member to a contested seat and seating his opponent was
resorted to.(514) This being done the resolution to submit the question of
a constitutional convention to the people was passed by a bare two-thirds
vote in each house.(515) Of the eighteen men who voted against the
resolution, eleven were natives of southern states, two of New York, two
of Connecticut, one of Massachusetts, one of Vermont, and one of Sweden.
There were some northern men who voted in favor of the resolution.(516)
The campaign resulting from the passage of the convention resolution was
waged for eighteen months with great vigor. Press and pulpit were actively
employed.(517) A large anti-slavery society was formed in Morgan
county,(518) and it was in all probability one of many such organizations.
In August, 1824, came the final vote, and the official count of the votes
showed a majority of 1668 against calling a constitutional
convention.(519)
It is noteworthy that in this struggle the governor of the state was an
anti-slavery southerner; eleven of the eighteen anti-slavery men in the
legislature were southern; the pro-slavery party, which polled 1971 more
votes than its opponents in 1822, was defeated by 1668 votes in 1824. It
is also true that of the leaders in the campaign some of the most noted
were southern anti-slavery or northern pro-slavery men.
[Illustration: Election Results.]
The history of settlement suggests several explanations for the votes of
1822 and 1824. The legislature which passed the convention resolution had
not been chosen with the avowed purpose of doing so. Some designing
politicians had such an object in view and secured the election of
pro-slavery men by anti-slavery constituents. The number of such cases was
not large, but as the resolution passed by the minimum vote they are
important.(520) In 1822, however, there was almost without doubt a
pro-slavery majority in the state, but it is improbable that there was a
two-thirds majority. In the election of 1822, there were 8635 votes cast,
while in that of 1824 there were 11,612 votes cast. This great increase
indicates a large immigration. Immigration at this time was largely to the
northern counties of the state, and it is a point of prime significance
that each of the seven northern counties gave large majorities against the
calling of the convention, and that without the vote of these seven
counties the vote would have been 4523 for a convention and 4408 against a
convention, thus changing the decision of the state. This vote of the
northern counties can not be explained by an increased immigration from
the north, because no such increase to any significant degree is
discoverable. The admission of Missouri as a slave state would naturally
lead pro-slavery emigrants to go to that state instead of to Illinois.
Another event which tended to influence the vote in Illinois was the
decision of Indiana against slavery, in the summer of 1823, in the midst
of the campaign in Illinois.(521) The unjust action of the Illinois House
of Representatives in unseating an anti-convention member was a powerful
argument against the pro-slavery party.
In his message to the legislature, on November 16, 1824, Governor Coles
said: “In the observations I had the honor to make to the last
Legislature, I recommended that provision should be made for the abolition
of the remnant of African slavery which still existed in this state. The
full discussion of the principles and policy of personal slavery, which
has taken place since that period, resulting in its rejection by the
decided voice of the people, still more imperiously makes it my duty to
call your attention in an especial manner to this subject, and earnestly
to entreat you to make just and equitable provision for as speedy an
abolition of this remnant of slavery, as may be deemed consistent with the
rights and claims of the parties concerned.
“In close connection with this subject, is my former recommendation, to
which I again solicit your attention, that the law as it respects those
held in service should be rendered less severe, and more accordant with
our political institutions and local situation; and that more severe
penalties should be enacted against the unnatural crime of kidnapping,
which then prevailed to a great extent and has since considerably
increased, in consequence of the defects of the present law. Regarding the
former, our laws in general are a mere transcript of those of the more
southern states, where the great number of slaves makes it necessary for
the safety of the whites, that the laws for their government, and
concerning free blacks, should be very strict.—But, there being no such
motive here, the necessity of such laws ceases, and consequently their
injustice and cruelty are the more apparent. The latter are found every
day more and more defective and inefficient; and kidnapping has now become
a regular trade, which is carried on to a vast extent to the country
bordering on the lower Mississippi, up the Red River, and to the West
Indies. To put an immediate and effectual stop to this nefarious traffic,
is the imperious duty of the Legislature.”(522)
The house of representatives referred the governor’s remarks concerning
kidnapping to a select committee. A bill was reported, but after being
weakened by amendments it was tabled.(523) In his message in 1826 the
governor renewed his recommendations,(524) and a section of the criminal
code of January, 1827, provided that kidnapping should be punishable by
confinement in the penitentiary for not less than one nor more than seven
years.(525) An act of January, 1825, provided that anyone who had failed
to give the bond required by the black code of 1819 from those who
emancipated slaves, should be released from any verdict or judgment
arising from such failure, upon indemnifying the county for any money
expended for the relief of the freedmen.(526) By an act of 1829 relating
to slaves, whites were not to marry blacks, slaves were not to come to the
state in order to be free, and runaway slaves should be advertised in the
newspapers of the state.(527) The number of slaves in Illinois decreased
after 1820. In 1820 there were 917 slaves in the state; in 1830, 747; in
1840, 331,(528) and before the next census slavery in the state was
abolished.
The vote of 1824 against calling a constitutional convention marked the
end of the slavery question as an obstacle to the immigration of an
anti-slavery population. Slaveholders, never a large proportion of the
immigrants, practically ceased to come to the state, while the immigration
of anti-slavery southerners continued, and the aggregate immigration
greatly increased. The population of the state was 55,162 in 1820; 72,817,
in 1825; and 157,445 in 1830. Missouri, more populous than Illinois by
more than 11,000 in 1820, was less so by 17,000 in 1830.(529) Governor
Coles, in his message of January 3, 1826, said: “The tide of emigration,
which had been for several years checked by various causes, both general
and local, has again set in, and has afforded a greater accession of
population during the past, than it had for the three preceding years.
This addition to our population and wealth has given a new impulse to the
industry and enterprise of our citizens, and has sensibly animated the
face of our country. And as the causes which have impeded the prosperity
of the state are daily diminishing, and the inducements to emigration are
increasing, we may confidently anticipate a more steady and rapid
augmentation of its population and resources.”(530)
From 1820 to 1825 the increase of population in Illinois was 17,655, while
from 1825 to 1830 it was 84,628. Contemporaries have left some interesting
records of immigration during the latter five years—a period in which the
population of the state increased more than 116 per cent. Immigration had
begun to be brisk by the fall of 1824. At the general election in August,
1820, there were 1132 votes cast in Madison county, while at a similar
election in August, 1824, there were 3223 votes cast in the same
territory, Madison county having been divided into Madison, Pike, Fulton,
Sangamon, Morgan and Greene counties. A Madison county newspaper said:
“That country bordering on the Illinois River is populating at this time
more rapidly than at any former period. Family wagons with emigrants are
daily passing this place [Edwardsville], on their way thither.”(531)
During the five weeks ending October 28, 1825, about two hundred and fifty
wagons, with an average of five persons to each, passed through Vandalia,
bound chiefly for the Sangamo country.(532) The unsettled condition of the
slavery question from 1820 to August, 1824, is given as the cause of the
slight increase in population during that period, and the settlement of
the question is thought to have been a chief cause for the increase after
1824.(533) It must not be supposed, however, that any one cause excludes
all others. The country as a whole had scarcely recovered from the great
financial depression of 1819; Kentucky was in turmoil over her bank, land
titles and old and new courts;(534) early in 1825 over 65,000 acres in a
single county in Tennessee were advertised for sale for the delinquent
taxes of 1824;(535) and in 1826 a great drought in North Carolina caused a
marked emigration from that state.(536)
In 1829 emigration was great. Some forty English families from Yorkshire
came by way of Canada and settled near Jacksonville, Illinois. They
brought agricultural implements and some money.(537) The _Kentucky
Gazette_ lamented the fact that a large number of the best families of
Lexington were removing to Illinois.(538) An Illinois newspaper reported:
“The number of emigrants passing through our Town [Vandalia] this fall, is
unusually great. During the last week the waggons and teams going to the
north amounted to several hundred. At no previous period has our State
encreased so rapidly, as it is now encreasing.”(539) Another editor
estimated the annual increase in population from 1826 to 1829 at not less
than 12,000(540)—a figure which was almost certainly too low. In 1830 a
meeting of gentlemen from the counties of Hampshire and Hampden
(Massachusetts) was held at Northampton to consider the expediency of
forming a colony to remove to Illinois. After a discussion it was voted to
adjourn to meet on the 10th of October at Warner’s Coffee House in
Southampton. Similar meetings were held at Pawtucket and Worcester.(541)
The immigration to Illinois was but part of a general westward movement.
From Charleston, Virginia, we hear: “The tide of emigration through this
place is rapid, and we believe, unprecedented. It is believed that not
less than eight thousand individuals, since the 1st September last
[written on November 6, 1829], have passed on this route. They are
principally from the lower part of this state and South Carolina, bound
for Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan.—They jog on, careless of the varying
climate, and apparently without regret for the friends and the country
they leave behind, seeking forests to fell, and a new country to settle.”
The editor attributes this movement to the fact that slavery had rendered
white labor disreputable.(542) Three thousand persons bound for the West
arrived at Buffalo in one week and six thousand per week were reported as
passing through Indianapolis, bound for the Wabash country alone.(543) The
great northern tide was chiefly bound to Ohio and Michigan,(544) northern
Illinois not being open to settlement. Five years after Detroit received
three hundred arrivals per week, Chicago had about a dozen houses, besides
Fort Dearborn. This was the Chicago of 1830.(545)