1855, a colored man in the employ of John Henderson was
seized by three men, who tied him, threw him into a wagon,
and drove off at full speed. They were seen, and quickly
followed by men on horseback. After two hours' hard riding,
the kidnappers were overtaken. A fight ensued--the black man
was released; when three pistol-shots were fired by the
kidnappers, killing a horse, and wounding one of the rescuing
party severely. A statement of the facts was published, as
an advertisement, in the _Philadelphia Ledger_, signed by
William Williams and John Henderson.
"_Two very bright mulatto girls_," says the _Staunton (Va.)
Spectator_, "one belonging to Mr. John Churchman, and the
other to the estate of Colonel Crawford, deceased, took the
cars at Staunton, on the morning of December 30, 1855, and
made their way successfully to Baltimore, en route for a free
State. At Baltimore they were detected just as they were
about to take the train for Philadelphia, and information of
their arrest was immediately forwarded to D. Churchman, of
this place." On the following Friday they were taken back to
Virginia. "They were so nearly white that their success in
imposing upon the conductors of the cars is not astonishing,
and the only wonder is that they were detected at all. Since
their return, the negro girls have been sold--Mr. Churchman's
for $1,050, and the other for $950."
FANNY, a colored child of fire years old, was taken from
Chicago, Illinois, into Tennessee, and sold for $250. A man
named F.M. Chapman, with his servant William R. Tracy, were
arrested as the kidnappers, and taken before Justice DeWolf.
Chapman claimed to have owned the child in Arkansas, and to
have brought her to Illinois [thereby making her free.] He
procured Tracy to take the child to Tennessee and sell her.
The result of the case not known. (January, 1856.)
_Two fugitives_, passing through Ohio, (January, 1856,) were
closely pursued and nearly overtaken at Columbus, Ohio. "Ten
minutes previous warning only saved the fugitives from their
pursuers." Deputy Marshal J. Underwood, being called on to
act in the case, refused, and resigned his office, saying, he
did not expect to be "called upon to help execute the odious
Fugitive Slave Law."--_Cincinnati Commercial_.
[--> The following may, not improperly, find a place here.]
The House of Delegates of Virginia, early in 1856, adopted
the following:--"_Be it resolved by the General Assembly_,
That our Representatives in Congress are requested, and our
Senators be and are hereby instructed, to secure the passage
of a law making full compensation to all owners whose slaves
have or may hereafter escape into any of the non-slaveholding
States of this Union, and there be withheld from those to
whom such service or labor may be due."
_Fourteen persons of color_, held at Los Angelos, California,
early in 1856, as the servants of one Robert Smith, were
brought before Judge Benjamin Hays, on a writ of _habeas
corpus_. Smith alleged that he formerly resided in
Mississippi, where he owned these persons; was now about to
remove to Texas, and designed to take these persons with him
as his slaves. Judge Hays decided that they were all free,
and those under twenty-one years of age were placed in the
charge of the sheriff, as their special guardian.--_Los
Angelos Star._ The opinion of Judge Hays (who was said to be
a native of South Carolina,) is a very able one, and under
the circumstances, of much interest. It may be found in the
_Standard_, of April 5, 1856.
_Two colored lads_, named RALLS and LOGAN, living in
Cincinnati, were kidnapped thence by two men, named Orr and
Simpkins, and taken to St. Louis, Missouri, where the men
tried to sell them. The men were arrested as kidnappers.
(March, 1856.)
_The Decatur (Illinois) Chronicle_ states that "a man charged
with being a fugitive slave was recently arrested at that
place and carried off, no one knows where. The sheriff of the
county was the willing instrument in the hands of the
claimants; no attempt to appeal to the law was made, the
negro being carried off as if he were a stray horse or dog."
The _Chicago Tribune_ says: "If this is a true statement of
the affair, that sheriff has laid himself liable to the
charge of kidnapping, and should at once be proceeded against
with such rigor as his offence demands." (April, 1856.)
MARGARET GARNER _and seven others_, at Cincinnati, Ohio, January,
1856. Of this recent and peculiarly painful case we give a somewhat
detailed account, mainly taken from the Cincinnati papers of the
day.
About ten o'clock on Sunday, 27th January, 1856, a
party of eight slaves--two men, two women, and four
children--belonging to Archibald K. Gaines and John Marshall,
of Richwood Station, Boone County, Kentucky, about sixteen
miles from Covington, escaped from their owners. Three of the
party are father, mother, and son, whose names are Simon,
Mary, and Simon, Jr.; the others are Margaret, wife of Simon,
Jr., and her four children. The three first are the property
of Marshall, and the others of Gaines.
They took a sleigh and two horses belonging to Mr. Marshall,
and drove to the river bank, opposite Cincinnati, and crossed
over to the city on the ice. They were missed a few hours
after their flight, and Mr. Gaines, springing on a horse,
followed in pursuit. On reaching the river shore, he learned
that a resident had found the horses standing in the road. He
then crossed over to the City, and after a few hours diligent
inquiry, he learned that his slaves were in a house about a
quarter of a mile below the Mill Creek Bridge, on the river
road, occupied by a colored man named Kite.
He proceeded to the office of United States Commissioner John
L. Pendery, and procuring the necessary warrants, with United
States Deputy Marshal Ellis, and a large body of assistants,
went on Monday to the place where his fugitives were
concealed. Arriving at the premises, word was sent to the
fugitives to surrender. A firm and decided negative was the
response. The officers, backed by a large crowd, then made a
descent. Breaking open the doors, they were assailed by the
negroes with cudgels and pistols. Several shots were fired,
but only one took effect, so far as we could ascertain. A
bullet struck a man named John Patterson, one of the
Marshal's deputies; tearing off a finger of his right hand,
and dislocating several of his teeth. No other of the
officers were injured, the negroes being rendered powerless
before they could reload their weapons.
On looking around, horrible was the sight which met the
officers' eyes. In one corner of the room was a nearly white
child, bleeding to death. Her throat was cut from ear to ear,
and the blood was spouting out profusely, showing that the
deed was but recently committed. Scarcely was this fact
noticed, when a scream issuing from an adjoining room drew
their attention thither. A glance into the apartment revealed
a negro woman holding in her hand a knife literally dripping
with gore, over the heads of two little negro children, who
were crouched to the floor, and uttering the cries whose
agonized peals had first startled them. Quickly the knife was
wrested from the hand of the excited woman, and a more close
investigation instituted as to the condition, of the infants.
They were discovered to be cut across the head and
shoulders, but not very seriously injured, although the blood
trickled down their backs and upon their clothes.
The woman avowed herself the mother of the children, and said
that she had killed one and would like to kill the three
others, rather than see them again reduced to slavery! By
this time the crowd about the premises had become prodigious,
and it was with no inconsiderable difficulty that the negroes
were secured in carriages, and brought to the United States
District Court-rooms, on Fourth Street. The populace followed
the vehicle closely, but evinced no active desire to effect a
rescue. Rumors of the story soon circulated all over the
city. Nor were they exaggerated, as is usually the case. For
once, reality surpassed the wildest thought of fiction.
The slaves, on reaching the marshal's office, seated
themselves around the stove with dejected countenances, and
preserved a moody silence, answering all questions propounded
to them in monosyllables, or refusing to answer at all. Simon
is apparently about fifty-five years of age, and Mary about
fifty. The son of Mr. Marshall, who is here, in order, if
possible, to recover the property of his father, says that
they have always been faithful servants, and have frequently
been on this side of the river. Simon, Jr., is a young man,
about twenty-two years old, of a very lithe and active form,
and rather a mild and pleasant countenance. Margaret is a
dark mulatto, twenty-three years of age; her countenance is
far from being vicious, and her senses, yesterday, appeared
partially stultified from the exciting trials she had
endured. After remaining about two hours at the marshal's
office, Commissioner Pendery announced that the slaves would
be removed to the custody of the United States Marshal until
nine o'clock Tuesday morning, when the case would come up for
examination.
The slaves were then taken down stairs to the street-door,
when a wild and exciting scene presented itself; the
sidewalks and the middle of the street were thronged with
people, and a couple of coaches were at the door in order to
convey the captives to the station-house. The slaves were
guarded by a strong posse of officers, and as they made their
appearance on the street, it was evident that there was a
strong sympathy in their favor. When they were led to the
carriage-doors, there were loud cries of "Drive on!" "Don't
take them!" The coachmen, either from alarm or from a
sympathetic feeling, put the whip to their horses, and drove
rapidly off, leaving the officers with their fugitives on the
sidewalk. They started on foot with their charge to the
Hammond Street station-house, where they secured their
prisoners for the night.
The slaves claimed that they had been on this side of the
river frequently, by consent of their masters.
About three o'clock application was made to Judge Burgoyne
for a writ of _habeas corpus_, to bring the slaves before
him. This was put in the hands of Deputy Sheriff Buckingham
to serve, who, accompanied by several assistants, proceeded
to Hammond Street station-house, where the slaves were
lodged. Mr. Bennett, Deputy United States Marshal, was
unwilling to give them up, and a long time was spent
parleying between the marshal and the sheriff's officers. The
sheriff being determined that the writ should be executed,
Mr. Bennett went out to take counsel with his friends.
Finally, through the advice of Mayor Faran, Mr. Bennett
agreed to lodge the slaves in the jail, ready to be taken out
at the order of Judge Burgoyne. Mr. Buckingham obtained the
complete control of the slaves.
On the morning of the 29th, Sheriff Brashears, being advised
by lawyers that Judge Burgoyne had no right to issue his writ
for the slaves, and remembering Judge McLean's decision in
the Rosetta case, made a return on the writ of _habeas
corpus_, that the slaves were in the custody of the United
States Marshal, and, therefore, without his jurisdiction.
This returned the slaves to the custody of the Marshal. By
agreement, the parties permitted the slaves to remain in the
county jail during that day, with the understanding that
their examination should commence the next morning, before
Commissioner Pendery. An inquest had been held on the body of
the child which was killed, and a verdict was found by the
jury charging the death of the child upon the mother, who it
was said would be held under the laws of Ohio to answer the
charge of murder. An examination took place on Wednesday,
before the United States Commissioner. Time was allowed their
counsel to obtain evidence to show that they had been brought
into the State at former times by their masters. A meeting of
citizens was held on Thursday evening, to express sympathy
with the alleged fugitives.
The _Cincinnati Commercial_ of January 30, said:--The mother
is of an interesting appearance, a mulatto of considerable
intelligence of manner, and with a good address. In reply to
a gentleman who yesterday complimented her upon the looks of
her little boy, she said, "You should have seen my little
girl that--that--[she did not like to say, was killed]--that
died, that was the bird."
The _Cincinnati Gazette_, of January 30, said:--We learn that
the mother of the dead child acknowledges that she had killed
it, and that her determination was to have killed all the
children, and then destroy herself, rather than return to
slavery. She and the others complain of cruel treatment on
the part of their master, and allege that as the cause of
their attempted escape.
The coroner's jury, after examining the citizens present at
the time of the arrest, went to the jail last evening, and
examined the grandmother of the child--one of the slaves. She
testified that the mother, when she saw they would be
captured, caught a butcher knife and ran to the children,
saying she would kill them rather than to have them return to
slavery, and cut the throat of the child, calling on the
grandmother to help her kill them. The grandmother said she
would not do it, and hid under a bed.
The jury gave a verdict as follows:--That said child was
killed by its mother, Margaret Garner, with a butcher knife,
with which she cut its throat.
Two of the jurors also find that the two men arrested as
fugitives were accessories to the murder.
"The murdered child was almost white, and was a little girl
of rare beauty."
The examination of witnesses was continued until Monday,
February 4, when the commissioner listened to the arguments
of counsel until February 7th. Messrs. Jolliffe and Gitchell
appeared for the fugitives, and Colonel Chambers, of
Cincinnati, and Mr. Finnell, of Covington, Kentucky, for the
claimants of the slaves. A great number of assistants,
(amounting very nearly to five hundred,) were employed by the
United States Marshal, H.H. Robinson, from the first, making
the expenses to the United States Government very large; for
their twenty-eight days' service alone, at $2.00 per day,
amounting to over $22,000. February 8th, the case was closed,
so far as related to the three slaves of Mr. Marshall, but
the decision was postponed. The examination in regard to
MARGARET and her children was farther continued. It was
publicly stated that Commissioner Pendery had declared that
he "would not send the woman back into slavery while a charge
or indictment for murder lay against her." Colonel Chambers,
counsel for the slave-claimants, in his argument, "read
long extracts from a pamphlet entitled, 'A Northern
Presbyter's Second Letter to Ministers of the Gospel of all
Denominations, on Slavery, by Nathan Lord, of Dartmouth
College,' approving and recommending Dr. Lord's views."
Colonel Chambers having alluded, in his remarks, to Mrs. Lucy
Stone Blackwell, and said that she had sought to give a knife
to Margaret Garner, the Court gave permission to Mrs.
Blackwell to reply to Colonel C. Mrs. B. preferred not to
speak at the bar, but addressed the crowded court-room
directly after the adjournment. Her eloquent remarks will be
found in the papers of the day. At the close of the hearing,
February 14th, the commissioner adjourned his court to the
21st, afterwards to the 26th, when, he said, he would give
his decision.
Meantime the case was making some progress in the State
courts. Sheriff Brashears having made return to the Common
Pleas Court that the fugitives were in the custody of the
United States Marshal, Judge Carter said this could not be
received as a true return, as they were in the County jail,
under the sheriff's control. The sheriff then amended his
return, so as to state that the prisoners were in his
custody, as required in the writ, and this was received by
the Court. The fugitives now came fully into the charge of
the State authorities. The sheriff held them "by virtue of a
_capias_ issued on an indictment by the grand jury for
murder."
The slaves declared they would go dancing to the gallows
rather than to be sent back into slavery.
On the 26th February, Commissioner Pendery gave his decision.
First, he refused to discharge Margaret and three others from
the custody of the United States Marshal and deliver them to
the Sheriff of Hamilton County, although held to answer,
under the laws of Ohio, to the charge of murder. He then
proceeded to consider the claim of Marshall to three of the
slaves, decided it to be valid, and ordered them into
Marshall's custody. He then considered Gaines's claim to
Margaret and her three surviving children, decided that also
to be good and valid, and ordered them to be delivered into
the possession of said Gaines.
The case of the rightful custody, as between the United
States Marshal and the Ohio Sheriff also came on, February
26th before Judge Leavitt, of the United States District
Court, and was argued by counsel on both sides. On the 28th,
Judge Leavitt decided that the custody was with the United
States Marshal. The substance of Judge L.'s argument and
decision is found in the following extract.
"Judge McLean says: 'Neither this nor any other Court of the
United States, nor Judge thereof, can issue a _habeas corpus_
to bring up a prisoner who is in custody under the sentence
or execution of a State Court, for any other purpose than to
be used as a witness. And it is immaterial whether the
imprisonment be under _civil or criminal process_.' If it be
true, as there asserted, that no Federal Court can interfere
with the exercise of the proper jurisdiction of a State
Court, either in a civil or criminal case, the converse of
the proposition is equally true. And it results that a State
Court cannot take from an officer of the United States, even
on a criminal charge, the custody of a person in execution on
a civil case.
"It is said in argument that if these persons cannot be held
by the arrest of the Sheriff under the State process, the
rights and dignity of Ohio are invaded without the
possibility of redress. I cannot concur in this view. The
Constitution and laws of the United States provide for a
reclamation of these persons, by a demand on the Executive of
Kentucky. It is true, if now remanded to the claimant and
taken back to Kentucky as slaves, they cannot be said to have
fled from justice in Ohio; but it would clearly be a case
within the spirit and intention of the Constitution and the
Act of Congress, and I trust nothing would be hazarded by the
prediction that upon demand properly made upon the Governor
of Kentucky, he would order them to be surrendered to the
authorities of Ohio to answer to its violated law. I am sure
it is not going too far to say that if the strictness of the
law did not require this, an appeal to comity would not be in
vain."
Mr. Chambers said his client, Mr. Gaines, authorized him to
say that he would hold the woman Margaret, who had killed her
child, subject to the requisition of the Governor of Ohio, to
answer for any crime she might have committed in Ohio.
Judge Leavitt's decision covered the cases of the four adult
fugitives. Another legal process was going on, at the same
time, before Judge Burgoyne, of the Probate Court, viz.--a
hearing under a writ of _habeas corpus_ allowed by Judge
Burgoyne, alleging the illegal detention, by the United
States Marshal, of the three negro children, Samuel, Thomas,
and Silla Garner, which took place in the Probate Court,
before Judge B., on the afternoon of February 27.
Mr. Jolliffe said he represented the infants at the request
of their father and mother, who had solicited him to save the
children, if possible.
Messrs. Headington and Ketchum appeared for the United States
Marshal.
Judge Burgoyne intimated that, in view of the serious and
important questions involved, he should require some time to
render a decision. He intimated, however, that a majority of
the Judges of the Supreme Court having passed on the
constitutionality of the Fugitive Slave Law was no reason why
he should not take up the Constitution and read it for
himself, being sworn to support the Constitution of the
United States and the Constitution of the State of Ohio.
Mr. Ketchum suggested that his Honor was as much bound in
conscience to regard the decision of the majority of the
Judges of the United States Courts as the express provisions
of the Constitution itself.
Judge Burgoyne said, that however the decisions of the Judges
of the United States Courts might aid him in coming to a
conclusion, where the obligations of his conscience were
involved, he could not screen himself behind a decision made
by somebody else.
Judge Burgoyne subsequently decided that, in as far as the
Fugitive Slave Law was intended to suspend the writ of
_habeas corpus_--and he believed that it was so intended--it
clearly transcended the limits prescribed by the
Constitution, and is "utterly void." Judge B. required the
United States Marshal to answer to the writ on the following
Friday; and on his neglect to do so, fined and imprisoned
him. Judge Leavitt, of the United States Court, soon released
the Marshal from prison.
The _Cincinnati Columbian_, of February 29, gave the
following account:--The last act of the drama of the
fugitives was yesterday performed by the rendition of the
seven persons whose advent into the city, under the bloody
auspices of murder, caused such a sensation in the community.
After the decision of Judge Leavitt, Sheriff Brashears
surrendered the four fugitives in his custody, under a
_capias_ from an Ohio court, to United States Marshal
Robinson. An omnibus was brought to the jail, and the
fugitives were led into it--a crowd of spectators looking on.
Margaret was in custody of Deputy-Marshal Brown. She appeared
greatly depressed and dispirited. The little infant, Silla,
was carried by Pfc. Russell, the door-keeper of the United
States Court, and was crying violently. Pollock, the reporter
of the proceedings in the United States Court, conducted
another of the fugitives, and all were safely lodged in the
omnibus, which drove down to the Covington ferry-boat; but,
although a large crowd followed it, no hootings or other
signs of excitement or disapprobation were shown.
On arriving at the Kentucky shore, a large crowd was in
attendance, which expressed its pleasure at the termination
of the long proceedings in this city by triumphant shouts.
The fugitives were escorted to the jail, where they were
safely incarcerated, and the crowd moved off to the Magnolia
Hotel, where several toasts were given and drank. The crowd
outside were addressed from the balcony by H.H. Robinson,
Esq., United States Marshal for the Southern District of
Ohio, who declared that he had done his duty and no more, and
that it was a pleasure to him to perform an act that added
another link to the glorious chain that bound the Union.
[What a _Union_! For what "glorious" purposes!]
Mr. Finnell, attorney for the claimants, said he never loved
the Union so dearly as now. It was proved to be a substantial
reality.
Judge Flinn also addressed to the crowd one of his peculiar
orations; and was followed by Mr. Gaines, owner of Margaret
and the children. After hearty cheering the crowd dispersed.
Further to signalize their triumph, the slaveholders set on
the Covington mob to attack Mr. Babb, reporter for one of the
Cincinnati papers, on the charge of being an abolitionist,
and that gentleman was knocked down, kicked, trampled on,
and would undoubtedly have been murdered, but for the
interference of some of the United States Deputy Marshals.
A legal irregularity on the part of the Sheriff was brought
to the notice of Judge Carter on the morning of February 29.
It was passed over lightly.