USA > Illinois > Illinois, historical and statistical, comprising the essential facts of its planting and growth as a province, county, territory, and state, Vol. I > Part 28
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51
3II
SLAVERY IN ILLINOIS.
Illinois was a part, was regulated by ordinance of the King of France. When Louisiana was transferred to Great Britain in 1763, that government by proclamation of Gen. Gage, declared that the late subjects of France should enjoy the same rights and privileges, "the same security for their persons and effects," as the old subjects of the king. As slavery was at that time recognized in her colonies by Great Britain, there was no inter- ference in Illinois with slave-property. Negroes were continued in servitude as before. It was also expressly stipulated in the Virginia deed of cession to the United States "that the French and Canadian inhabitants, and other settlers of the Kaskaskias, St. Vincents, and the neighboring villages who have professed themselves citizens of the State of Virginia, shall have their possessions and titles confirmed to them, and be protected in their rights and liberties,"-which was understood and inter- preted at the time to mean that the right of property in slaves should be recognized and protected. And in pursuance of this stipulation, while slavery was prohibited in all that territory by the Ordinance of 1787, that instrument contained a clause as follows: "saving however to the French and Canadian inhabi- tants and other settlers of the Kaskaskias, St. Vincents, and the neighboring villages, who have heretofore professed themselves citizens of Virginia, their laws and customs now in force among them relative to the descent and conveyance of property." The effect of these provisions was considered by the inhabit- ants, and construed by Gov. St. Clair to mean that while the extension of slavery was prohibited, existing property rela- tions, including slavery, were recognized and upheld-that is that the slaves in the Territory, and their descendants, should remain in their previous condition, but that no more slaves should be imported into the Territory. This was the conserva- tive view; others, and among them Gov. Edwards, went still farther, and contended that the Ordinance of 1787 was uncon- stitutional, congress having exceeded its power in adopting the sixth article. Others again claimed that the children of all slaves born after 1787 became free by virtue of the ordinance.
Slaveholders began to exhibit uneasiness on the subject of their tenure, and as early as 1794 the question was raised of repealing or superseding the prohibitory clause of the ordi-
312
ILLINOIS-HISTORICAL AND STATISTICAL.
nance, and a number of persons petitioned congress at least to suspend its operation. So widespread had this feeling become by 1802, that Gen. Harrison was induced to call a delegate convention, which assembled at Vincennes, December 20, to consider the question. The members from Illinois were Shadrach Bond, John Moredoch, and Jean F. Perry, from St. Clair County ; and Robert Morrison, Pierre Menard, and Robert Reynolds, from Randolph. A memorial to congress was adopted, setting forth the great benefits which would flow to the people from slaveholding, and praying for the repeal or modification of the sixth article of the Ordinance of 1787. This document was transmitted to congress, and was referred to a committee of which John Randolph was chairman, who in March, 1803, presented a report in which were set forth with great clearness the following advanced views: "that the labor of slaves is not necessary to promote the growth and settlement of colonies in that region. That this labor, demonstrably the dearest of any, can only be employed to advantage in the culti- vation of products more valuable that any known to that quarter of the United States; that the committee deem it highly dangerous and inexpedient to impair a provision wisely calculated to promote the happiness and prosperity of the northwestern country, and to give strength and security to that extensive frontier. In the salutary operation of this sagacious and benevolent restraint, it is believed that the inhabitants will, at no very distant day, find ample remuneration for a temporary privation of labor and immigration."
This adverse report submitted at the close of the session was not acted upon. At the next session, the memorial was referred to a new committee of which Cæsar A. Rodney of Delaware was chairman, and a report was presented recommending the granting of the memorialists request, and the suspension of the obnoxious article for ten years, but no action was taken thereon.
In the territorial legislature of 1805 the question was again brought forward, and another memorial to congress was adopted of similar import to that already forwarded. This was also favorably reported upon in congress but no action thereon followed. But still persistent, Gen. Harrison transmitted another legislative petition to the next congress, with like result.
313
INDENTURED SLAVERY.
In 1807, a largely - attended meeting of influential citizens was held in Clark County, Indiana, at which a remonstrance against the proposed introduction and continuance of slavery was extensively signed; this also was forwarded to congress, and doubtless had its effect, as the committee to whom this subject was again referred, reported adversely to the memorial; and thus terminated the efforts in congress to abrogate the article prohibiting slavery in the Northwest Territory.
Having been unsuccessful in their appeal to congress, the advocates of slavery in the Territory determined to evade the restrictive provision of the Ordinance of 1787 and accomplish the desired result in another way. This was by the enactment of a law by the first territorial legislature, and revised in 1807, entitled "an act concerning the introduction of negroes and mulattoes into this Territory." It provided that any slave- holder might bring his chattels over fifteen years of age into the Territory and have them indentured and registered, and continued in servitude upon certain conditions. Slaves under that age might be brought in and held-the males until thirty- five years and females until thirty-two years of age if properly registered. Children born of indentured slaves must serve the master of the mother - males until thirty years and females until twenty-eight years of age-the scope of which act virtu- ally legalized slavery in the Territory to a certain extent.
In all the efforts put forth to effect the nullification of the sixth article of the Ordinance, nearly all the leading men in the counties of Randolph and St. Clair - Bond, Menard, Edgar, Fisher, Perry, and the Morrisons-heartily concurred and assisted; and the Indenture Law received their cordial support. In fact, in 1796, Edgar, Wm. Morrison, William St. Clair, and John du Moulin had forwarded the first petition to congress praying for the repeal of the anti-slavery article. And although public sentiment against slavery, under the leadership of such men as Jonathan Jennings and James Beggs, had grown so strong in the territory of Indiana as to enable the friends of freedom to repeal the obnoxious Indenture Law in 1810, there was no voice of any strength raised against it in Illinois; where among the first acts adopted by Gov. Edwards and the judges was this one, which was also reenacted by the first territorial legislature in 1812.
314
ILLINOIS-HISTORICAL AND STATISTICAL.
Under this law the number of slaves rapidly increased. In 1800, there were but 133 reported in the territory of Indiana, which then included Illinois. Ten years later there were 168 in Illinois alone, and in 1820 the number had risen to 917.
Meanwhile the constitution of 1818 had been adopted, in which it was provided that "neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall hereafter be introduced into this State." This article met with serious opposition from the slaveholding element, and as a concession to their views the section recog- nizing indentured slavery was adopted. Further than this the majority did not deem it prudent to go and run the risk of the rejection of the instrument by congress.
The opposition to the admission of Missouri as a slave-state had a quieting effect, but the introduction and advocacy by a senator from Illinois of the pro-slavery compromise, which was afterward adopted, revived the discussion and gave renewed confidence to the hope of slave-owners and other pro-slavery advocates that with proper efforts Illinois might yet be made a slave-state. To further this end, during the winter of 1819-20 the friends of slavery extension had conceived the project of establishing a party organ at Edwardsville, which failed only because the person selected as editor had previously found a more lucrative employment in another field .*
Senator Thomas, who was a candidate for reelection, and known as a pro-slavery champion, naturally interested himself to secure the election to the legislature of those who were in sympathy with him on this subject, and whenever it could be done safely, the issue was made.
Adolphus Frederick Hubbard was elected lieutenant-gover- nor; and as will be seen there was a large majority returned of those who proved to be pro-slavery or pro-convention mem- bers in both houses of the general assembly, some of them succeeding in districts where, if the question had been squarely presented, they would have been defeated. Such, briefly outlined, was the previous history of slavery agitation, and such the influences at work to make Illinois a slave-state, when the contending forces "locked horns" at the opening of the third general assembly, Dec. 2, 1822.
* Edwards' " History of Illinois, " 184-5.
315
GOV. COLES' INAUGURAL.
The house organized by the election of Wm. M. Alexander as speaker, and Charles Dunn, clerk. Thomas Lippincott was elected secretary of the senate, and Henry Dodge enrolling and engrossing clerk.
In his inaugural address, delivered in person before the joint assembly of the legislature, after alluding to the deranged financial condition of the State, and pointing out some object- ionable features of the existing banking-law, Gov. Coles urged upon the members the importance of establishing a navigable waterway between the Mississippi and the great northern lakes. Had he studied the temper of the body he was address- ing and closed his communication at this point, the antagonism of those opposed to him who were still smarting under the humiliation of unexpected defeat, would not have been so strongly aroused. But he was a man of strong convictions, and oblivious of the fact that the majority was in no humor to submit to the dictation of a minority executive, he took the risk of still further widening the breach between himself and them, by boldly entering upon a discussion of the slavery question, which he made the emphatic and prominent feature of his address. He called attention to the fact that despite the provisions of the Ordinance of 1787 slavery still existed in the State, and he earnestly recommended its extinction, declaring that "justice and humanity required a general revisal of the laws relative to negroes, in order the better to adapt them to the character of our institutions and the situation of the country." He also advised the enactment of more effective laws to prevent the kidnapping of free blacks-a crime at that time frequently committed with impunity, and which he re- garded as a disgrace not only to the State, but to christian civilization as well.
This was bearding the lion in his den. To say that the address evoked all the latent hostility to the governor, which needed only a breath to kindle into a flame, is to state but mildly the storm of opposition which beat around him. His course was doubtless impolitic, but subsequent events have shown that if this enthusiastic Virginia abolitionist precipi- tated a conflict which had been long delayed, perhaps no better period in the history of the State could have been
316
ILLINOIS-HISTORICAL AND STATISTICAL.
selected nor could more favorable circumstances have existed under which to bring it to a decisive issue. It formed the distinguishing feature of Gov. Coles' administration, "and in- volved consequences to the State and Union which can not be measured by human ken."
Before narrating the proceedings of the legislature following the governor's message, however, it will be proper to note the result of the animated contest for the office of United- States senator, which first engrossed attention, and for the time being subordinated all other questions. The candidates were Jesse B. Thomas to succeed himself, John Reynolds, Leonard White, then a senator, and Samuel D. Lockwood. All of these except the last named favored the calling of a con- vention. Reynolds supposed that if the election could be delayed until spring the elements opposed to Thomas would be enabled to unite and accomplish his defeat." But the effort put forth in this direction failed. Thomas had his forces so well trained that he was able to hold them together, and succeeded in fixing January 9 as the day for the election. The result was, Thomas received twenty-nine votes, Reynolds sixteen, White six, and Lockwood two, insuring the election of the former by a majority of five.
State officers were appointed or elected as follows: Samuel D. Lockwood, secretary of state; Elijah C. Berry, auditor; Abner Field, treasurer; and James Turney, attorney-general.
There being no further matters requiring preliminary action the special committee to which had been referred that portion of the governor's message relating to slavery, presented major- ity and minority reports.
Messrs. Beaird, Boon, Ladd, Kinney, and White reviewed the entire question from a pro-slavery stand-point, and after stating that "your committee are clearly of opinion that the people of Illinois have now the same right to alter their constitution as the people of Virginia or any other of the original states, and may make any disposition of negro slaves they choose without any breach of faith, or violation of compact, ordinance, or act of congress," they recommended the adoption of a resolution that the electors at the next general election vote for or against a convention to amend the constitution.
* "Edwards' Papers, " 204.
317
ACTION OF THE THIRD GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
Messrs. Moore and Emmet in their minority report, recon- mended the entire abolition of slavery; and Conrad Will made a separate report.
By the terms of the constitution that instrument could not be altered or amended unless the question of a convention for that purpose should be submitted to the people by a joint- resolution of the general assembly, adopted by a two-third vote. The advocates of a convention had the necessary two- thirds in the senate, but lacked one vote in the house. Con- fident of success at the polls, and that all that was necessary to accomplish their design was to adopt the resolution calling the convention, this one vote they were determined to secure. It soon transpired that William McFatridge, formerly identi- fied with the minority, had been induced through some occult influence to vote for the resolution.
No cause for further delay existing, the resolution was put upon its passage in the house, having previously passed the senate, February 1I, 1823. After so much labor and the employment of so much diplomacy the hopes of the convention men were about to be realized. But when the roll was called, to the surprise and dismay of the majority, Nicholas Hansen of Pike County, recorded his vote in the negative, and after all the resolution was lost.
The election of Hansen had been contested by John Shaw, but the committee on elections had reported unanimously in favor of Hansen, and he was seated by a majority of the mem- bers. His position on the absorbing question had undoubtedly been sounded and found satisfactory; and in the preliminary voting, he had ranged himself with the majority as had been expected. But it seems that there were "influences" at work on the side of freedom as well as slavery, and when the test came Hansen gave the decisive vote which defeated the resolution.
The conventionists were furious, and their indignation against Hansen was both deep and loud. Their watchword, however, had been "convention or death"; and they were ready for the adoption of any means, however desperate, to bring about the desired result. How was the situation to be changed-could another member be won over? It did not take long for unscrup-
318
ILLINOIS-HISTORICAL AND STATISTICAL.
ulous and determined managers to solve the problem. There was one palpable way to secure the much-needed vote. John Shaw, who had failed in his contest for Hansen's seat and gone home, although claiming to be anti-slavery in principle, was known to be in favor of a convention. What if the house had already decided the case against him ? That one vote must be obtained. Accordingly when the body met the next morning, Alexander P. Field, afterward secretary of state for fourteen years, moved a reconsideration of the vote declar- ing Hansen entitled to his seat, and made a long speech in its favor, covering the ground already gone over, no new facts whatever being introduced. A strong effort was made by the minority to defeat the motion, but the edict had gone forth, and the subservient members dare not refuse to obey the man- dates of their leaders. The vote was reconsidered, and the name of John Shaw having been inserted in place of that of Nicholas Hansen-eleven members having changed sides on the question -the resolution as amended was carried. A messenger was despatched in hot haste to Pike County, a distance of over a hundred miles, to inform Shaw of the unexpected honor which awaited him, and he responded to the call with equal alacrity.
There was still a hitch in the proceedings after Shaw's arrival. The speaker had previously decided that a member of a constitutional minority could not move a reconsideration. Now this action was reversed, and a motion by a member who voted on the losing side to reconsider the last convention reso- lution, was carried, the resolution again put on its passage and, receiving the requisite twenty-four votes, was finally passed .*
* Nicholas Hansen, whose name became so noted in connection with this contro- versy, was a graduate of Union College, and a member of the bar formerly of Albany, New York. He was probate-judge of Pike County in 1821-2, was elected to the legislature in 1822, and again in 1824. He was colonel of the Seventeenth Regiment Illinois Militia in 1821, and commissioned as brigadier-general in 1824; was judge of probate in 1826. He returned to New York in 1829, where he resided until his death in 1872 at the age of ninety-one years. He was a man of ability and superior education, but intemperate habits.
John Shaw was also an early settler in Pike County from which he afterward removed to Wisconsin. He was engaged in various kinds of business and had a fondness for politics. He had the reputation of being ambitious, restless, and enter- prising. He died Aug. 31, 1871, aged 89.
Those who voted for the resolution were Messrs. Theophilus W. Smith, John Grammar, Thomas Sloo, jr., Martin Jones, William Boon, Samuel Crozier, Leonard
319
CONVENTION RESOLUTION ADOPTED.
The triumph of the convention men was celebrated by a wild and drunken carouse. Forming themselves into a noisy and. disorderly procession, headed by Judges Phillips, Smith, and Thomas Reynolds, and senator, afterward lieutenant-governor, William Kinney, followed by the pro-slavery members of the legislature and the sympathetic lobby, they marched to the music of horns and the beating of drums and tin-pans to the residence of the governor, and those of their more prominent opponents, whom they greeted with a contemptuous med- ley of cat-calls, groans, wailings, and derisive cheers; intend- ing thus not only to humiliate the anti-convention men but to intimidate them, and crush out all opposition." The little town of Vandalia indeed was practically handed over to the mercy of a howling mob-as Gov. John Reynolds characterizes it "a wild and indecorous procession by torch-light and liquor."+
The success of the pro - convention party though resisted heroically at every point, imparted to the situation an aspect of gravity which was fully recognized by the friends of freedom. But while discouraged, they were not disheartened, and deter- mined to meet the issue thus tendered with all the means and resources at their command. No time was lost by either side in getting ready for the conflict. Addresses were issued to the people, private conferences and public meetings were held, organization perfected, money raised, and leaders selected. The high-handed and revolutionary proceeding of unseating a legally-elected member to obtain the lacking vote, and the subsequent riotous conduct of the pro-slavery leaders, which as Gov. Reynolds, himself a conventionist, says "was con-
White, Milton Ladd, William Kinney, Joseph A. Beaird, Michael Jones, and Lewis Barker, of the senate; and Messrs. Wm. M. Alexander, Wm. Alexander, Samuel Alexander, James A. Whitside, Emanuel J. West, Wm. Berry, Zadoc Casey, Thos. Dorris, J. G. Daimwood, James S. Davenport, John Emmett, G. R. Logan, R. C. Ford, Alex. P. Field, John McIntosh, William McFatridge, Alex. Phillips, John Shaw, Joseph Trottier, John McFerron, Thomas Rattan, James Turney, Conrad Will, and James Campbell, of the house. Those who voted against the resolution were Messrs, Stephen Stillman, Andrew Bankson, David Parker, William Kinkead, George Caldwell, and Robert Frazier, of the senate; and Curtis Blakeman, George Churchill, Abraham Cairnes, David McGahey, Wm. Lowrey, Risdon Moore, Jacob Ogle, Thomas Mather, Raphael Widen, Jonathan H. Pugh, Gilbert T. Pell, and James Sims, of the house.
* Ford's "Illinois, " p. 53.
+ "My Own Times," 2d Ed., 153.
320
ILLINOIS-HISTORICAL AND STATISTICAL.
demned by all honest men," was fully set forth and published through the State, constituting one of the most effective cam- paign documents ever issued.
Of the five newspapers in the State, the Edwardsville Spectator, edited by Hooper Warren, was opposed to the con- vention, as was also The Illinois Intelligencer after it changed hands early in the campaign, edited by David Blackwell. The Illinois Gasette, printed at Shawneetown, managed by Henry Eddy, published articles on both sides, but was regarded as more friendly to that of freedom. The Republican Advocate at Kaskaskia, controlled by Elias K. Kane, afterward United- States senator, and Thomas Reynolds; and The Republican at Edwardsville, under the direction of Judge Theophilus W. Smith, Emanuel J. West, and Judge Samuel McRoberts, after- ward United-States senator, were the organs of the convention.
The contest which followed these preparations and which continued for the long period of eighteen months, was not only the most exciting that had yet occurred in the State, but loomed up into national importance. With Illinois as a slave- state, the preponderance of the slave-holder's party in the national councils would be assured, and the eyes of the peo- ple of the entire country were turned toward the Prairie State with anxious looks. Missouri had been thus secured, would the effort be successful in Illinois ? The aspects of the conflict in the State were most extraordinary. The popular interest was confined to neither age, sex, nor color-even the women and children entering earnestly the arena of party- strife. Other elections had aroused more or less activity and rancour, but into this campaign was infused a spirit of bitter- ness, if not of malignity which only the agitation of the slavery question could have generated. The press fairly sparkled with the sharpest of editorials, which were eagerly and sometimes laboriously perused by the light of "dip-candles" in border log-cabins. The hustings were occupied by the most eloquent speakers either side could produce; while the rude pulpit of those days, especially on the side of freedom, counting it as a christian virtue, thundered its anathemas against those who would pollute the soil by the spread of human slavery over the Prairie State. When reason failed to convince, resort was
THE CONTEST TO MAKE ILLINOIS A SLAVE-STATE. 321
not infrequently had to personal conflicts, and indeed every avenue through which the public mind might be reached and influenced was employed.
The advocates of the convention undoubtedly had the advan- tage in the number, official position, and personal and political influence of their leaders. Among these were Jesse B. Thomas, John McLean, Elias Kent Kane, John M. Robinson, Samuel McRoberts, and Richard M. Young, the former of whom then, and each of the latter subsequently, filled the office of United- States senator; Joseph Phillips, late chief-justice, John Reyn- olds, and Thomas C. Browne of the supreme court, A. F. Hubbard, then, and Wm. Kinney, and Zadoc Casey, afterward lieutenant-governors of the State, Gen. Willis Hargrave, Col. A. P. Field, T. W. Smith, afterward judge of the supreme court, Chief-Justice Thomas Reynolds, E. J. West, and ex-Gov. Bond.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.