In 1810, a slave escaped from Virginia to Philadelphia. In a few months,
his master heard where he was, and caused him to be arrested. He was a
fine looking young man, apparently about thirty years old. When he was
brought before Alderman Shoemaker, that magistrate's sympathy was so
much excited, that he refused to try the case unless some one was
present to defend the slave. Isaac T. Hopper was accordingly sent for.
When he had heard a statement of the case, he asked the agent of the
slaveholder to let him examine the Power of Attorney by which he had
been authorized to arrest a "fugitive from labor," and carry him to
Virginia. The agent denied his right to interfere, but Alderman
Shoemaker informed him that Mr. Hopper was a member of the Emancipation
Society, and had a right to be satisfied.
The Power of Attorney was correctly drawn, and had been acknowledged in
Washington, before Bushrod Washington, one of the judges of the Supreme
Court of the United States. Friend Hopper's keen eye could detect no
available flaw in it. When the agent had been sworn to answer truly all
questions relating to the case, he inquired whether the fugitive he was
in search of had been advertised; if so, he wished to see the
advertisement. It was handed to him, and he instantly noticed that it
was headed "Sixty Dollars Reward."
"Art thou to receive sixty dollars for apprehending the man mentioned in
this advertisement?" said he.
The agent replied, "I am to receive that sum provided I take him home to
Virginia."
"How canst thou prove that the man thou hast arrested is the one here
advertised?" inquired he.
The agent answered that he could swear to the fact.
"That may be," rejoined Friend Hopper; "but in Philadelphia we do not
allow any person, especially a stranger, to swear sixty dollars into his
own pocket. Unless there is better evidence than thy oath, the man must
be set at liberty."
The agent became extremely irritated, and said indignantly, "Do you
think I would swear to a lie?"
"Thou art a stranger to me," replied Friend Hopper. "I don't know
whether thou wouldst swear falsely or not. But there is one thing I do
know; and that is, I am not willing to trust thee."
The agent reiterated, "I know the man standing there as well as I know
any man living. I am perfectly sure he is the slave described in the
advertisement. I was overseer for the gentleman who owns him. If you
examine his back, you will find scars of the whip."
"And perhaps thou art the man who made the scars, if he has any,"
rejoined the Friend.
Without replying to this suggestion, the slave-hunter ordered the
colored man to strip, that his back might be examined by the court.
Friend Hopper objected to such a proceeding. "Thou hast produced no
evidence that the man thou hast arrested is a slave," said he. "Thou and
he are on the same footing before this court. We have as good a right to
examine thy back, as are have to examine his." He added, with a very
significant tone, "In some places, they whip for kidnapping."
This remark put the slave-hunter in a violent rage. The magistrate
decided that his evidence was not admissible, on the ground that he was
interested. He then proposed to summon two witnesses from a Virginian
vessel lying at one of the wharves.
"Of course thou art at liberty to go for witnesses," replied Friend
Hopper. "But I appeal to the magistrate to discharge this man. Under
present circumstances, he ought not to be detained a single moment." The
alderman needed no urging on that point. He very promptly discharged the
prisoner. As soon as he left the office, the slave-hunter seized hold of
him, and swore he would keep him till witnesses were brought. But Friend
Hopper walked up to him, and said in his resolute way, "Let go thy hold!
or I will take such measures as will make thee repent of thy rashness.
How darest thou lay a finger upon the man after the magistrate has
discharged him?"
Thus admonished, he reluctantly relinquished his grasp, and went off
swearing vengeance against "the meddlesome Quaker."
Friend Hopper hastened home with the colored man, and wrote a brief
letter to his friend William Reeve, in New-Jersey, concluding with these
words: "Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto the
least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." This letter was
given to the fugitive with directions how to proceed. His friend
accompanied him to the ferry, saw him safely across the river, and then
returned home.
In an hour or two the slave-hunter came to the house, accompanied by a
constable and two witnesses from Virginia. "The slave I arrested was
seen to come here," said he. "Where is he? Produce him."
Friend Hopper replied very quietly, "The man has been here; but he is
gone now."
This answer made the agent perfectly furious. After discharging a volley
of oaths, he said he had a search warrant, and swore he would have the
house searched from garret to cellar. "Very well," replied Friend
Hopper, "thou art at liberty to proceed according to law; but be careful
not to overstep that boundary. If thou dost, it will be at thy peril."
After the slave-hunter had vented his rage in a torrent of abuse, the
constable proposed to speak a few words in private. With many friendly
professions, he acknowledged that they had no search-warrant. "The
gentleman was about to obtain one from the mayor," said he; "but I
wished to save your feelings. I told him you were well acquainted with
me, and I had no doubt you would permit me to search your house without
any legal process."
Friend Hopper listened patiently, perfectly well aware that the whole
statement was a sham. When the constable paused for a reply, he opened
the door, and said very concisely, "Thou art at liberty to go about thy
business."
They spent several days searching for the fugitive, but their efforts
were unavailing.