USA > Indiana > Indiana, a redemption from slavery > Part 21
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
1 Annals 6th Cong., p. 1515.
285
THE NORTHWEST TERRITORY.
born after that period are absolutely free. Your peti- tioners, however, humbly contend that such after-born issue are as much slaves as those born before, because the owners of their parents have, and, as your petitioners humbly conceive, always had, as fixed and incontrovert- ible a right to, and interest in, the future issue and in- crease of such slaves as they have to the slaves them- selves. That, notwithstanding the articles in the said Ordinance are said to be 'articles of compact between the original States and the people and States of the said Territory,' it is, however, a truth that they were made ex parte by the original States only ; for sure your peti- tioners are that, if the people then in the Territory had been called upon to make such compact, they never would have consented to enter into one that would de- prive them of their most valuable property.
"Your petitioners humbly hope they will not be thought presumptuous in venturing to disapprove of the article concerning slavery in toto, as contrary not only to the interest, but almost to the existence of the country they inhabit, where laborers cannot be procured to assist in cultivating the ground under one dollar per day, ex- clusive of washing, lodging, and boarding ; and where every kind of tradesmen are paid from a dollar and a half to two dollars per day; neither is there, at these exorbitant prices, a sufficiency of hands to be got for the exigencies of the inhabitants, who, attached to their native soil, have rather chosen to encounter these and many other difficulties than, by avoiding them, remove to the Spanish dominions, where slavery is permitted, and con- sequently the price of labor much lower." For these reasons the petitioners asked a repeal of the slavery clause, with a provision that slaves could be imported
286
INDIANA.
only from the states of the Union ; but, apparently being doubtful of obtaining so great a concession, they also asked that, if the clause were not repealed, Congress might pass a law declaring that the Ordinance, as it stood, meant that when slaves were brought into the territory they became free, but were still bound to serve their owners for life; that they were apprentices, dif- fering from ordinary apprentices only in the extent of their terms of service. If this course were preferred, they asked Congress to provide " how far, and for what period of time, the masters of servants are to be entitled to the service of the children of parents, born during such servitude, as an indemnity for the expense of bring- ing them up in their infancy."
This petition was forwarded to Congress by Governor St. Clair,1 and was probably called forth by the action of Judge Turner, a few months earlier, in attempting to release Vanderburgh's slaves ; for the petitioners state that they ask the act declaring the meaning of the Ordi- nance because " a diversity may happen in the opinions of different judges." It was referred to a committee of which Joshua Coit, of Connecticut, was chairman, and on May 12, 1796, he reported adversely. The com- mittee say : " The petitioners being only four in number, and producing no power by which they claim to petition, even in behalf of the inhabitants of the said counties ; and no evidence appearing of the wishes of the rest of the inhabitants of the said counties ; and your committee having information that an alteration of the Ordinance, in the manner prayed for by the petitioners, would be disagreeable to many of the inhabitants of the said Ter- ritory ; they have conceived it needless to enter into any
1 Annals 4th Cong. 1st Sess., p. 1171.
287
THE NORTHWEST TERRITORY.
consideration of the policy of the measure, being per- suaded that, if it could be admissible under any circum- stances, a partial application, like the present, could not be listened to." 1 The justice of this decision could scarcely be questioned, even by the petitioners. It was certain that the New England settlers of the eastern part of the Territory, who were a majority of its population, were opposed to the introduction of slavery. It was evi- dent that the petition of four men could not possibly be considered a consent of the people of the Territory to the amendment of the Ordinance.
The four signers were John Edgar, William Morrison, William St. Clair, and John Du Moulin. Whether the petition was of their own motion, or was their request as representatives in some way chosen by the people, is not known. They professed to sign it " for and on behalf of the inhabitants " of Randolph and St. Clair counties, and there is not, so far as has been ascertained, any further evidence on the subject now in existence. It is unquestionable that what they asked was generally de- sired by the people of those counties, and that they were the most influential men of those counties. John Edgar was a refugee Irish naval officer, of liberal education and agreeable manners, noted for his intelligence and benevolence. He amassed a large fortune at Kaskaskia by milling and dealing in land, and held numerous offices, both elective and appointive. William Morrison, since coming to Kaskaskia in 1790, had by native talent and energy become the foremost merchant of the Upper Mississippi valley. St. Clair and Du Moulin were al- most as influential in St. Clair County as the others were
1 For petition and report see Am. State Papers : Pub. Lands, vol. i. pp. 60, 61.
288
INDIANA.
in Randolph. William St. Clair, youngest son of the then Earl of Roslin, and a cousin of Governor St. Clair, was then serving as clerk of the St. Clair County court. John Du Moulin was a highly educated Swiss, who ac- quired a considerable fortune by land speculations, and was very popular as a militia commander. He was at this time chief justice of the court of common pleas in St. Clair County. It is certain that these four men could have secured the signatures of a majority of the people of the two western counties to their petition if they had desired to present it again ; but they realized that the other objection - the adverse wishes of the Ohio people - would be fatal to their project so long as the Territory was undivided. They accordingly dropped the matter, but revived it as soon as Indiana became a separate territory.
The second attempt to introduce slavery into North- west Territory was directed to the legislature of 1799. It was a petition from several officers of the late Vir- ginia Line, " praying for toleration to bring their slaves into this Territory, on the military lands between the Little Miami and Scioto rivers." This was presented at the beginning of the session and promptly disposed of. On September 27, the fourth day of the session, Wil- liam Goforth, of Hamilton County, reported for the com- mittee to which it was referred, " that the prayer of the petitioners was incompatible with the articles of compact contained in the Ordinance of Congress made for the government of this Territory, and, therefore, could not be granted." On the reading of this report, it was " Resolved unanimously, That this House doth agree to the same." 1 It is evident that the prohibition of the 1 St. Clair Papers, vol ii. p. 447, note.
289
THE NORTHWEST TERRITORY.
introduction of slaves was a hardship to these Virginia soldiers. They were entitled to their bounty lands north of the Ohio, and many of them were desirous of settling there, but this provision barred their way. True, they might have disposed of their slaves before coming, but Virginia sentiment at that time was against such action. There was a notable attachment to family servitors, and a common aversion to masters who dis- posed of such slaves from mere monetary considerations. In addition to this, living without slaves necessitated a complete change in their habits of life, which these people were unwilling to make. The action of the legis- lature on the first memorial was not encouraging, but they determined to make one more attempt; and this time they carefully put their request in the most re- stricted and least objectionable form that would serve their purpose. On November 19, " A memorial of Thomas Posey, on behalf of himself and several officers and soldiers of the Virginia line, on the continental establishment of the late army of the United States, was presented to the House and read, praying that an act may be passed authorizing persons holding slaves under the laws of the State in which they acquire that species of property, and removing into this Territory, to bring their slaves with them, under certain restrictions." 1 No action appears to have been taken on this petition. In consequence of its failure, many of the Virginians gave up their intentions of coming north of the Ohio, and settled in the southern territories. General Posey was among the number.
It is not surprising that these petitions were not granted, for a majority of the members of the legisla-
1 St. Clair Papers, vol. ii. p. 451, note.
290
INDIANA.
ture were Eastern men, and both they and their constitu- ents were heartily opposed to having slavery fastened on the government of their new homes ; but it appears re- markable that the vote on the first petition should have been unanimous. Judge Burnet says of this : " The pub- lic feeling, on the subject of admitting slavery into the Territory, was such that the request would have been denied, by a unanimous vote, if the Legislature had possessed the power of granting it. They were not only opposed to slavery on the ground of its being a moral evil, in violation of personal right, but were of opinion that, whatever might be its immediate advan- tages, it would ultimately retard the settlement and check the prosperity of the Territory, by making labor less reputable, and creating feelings and habits un- friendly to the simplicity and industry they desired to encourage and perpetuate." 1 This flattering estimate of the representatives is clearly erroneous. John Edgar, who represented Randolph County in this legislature, had petitioned Congress to admit slavery three years earlier, as we have just seen ; and he labored ardently to secure the same end afterward. Shadrach Bond, who represented St. Clair County, joined in a petition for the admission of slaves in 1800, and in another in 1805. John Small, who represented Knox County, was always identified with the pro-slavery party in Indiana Territory, and was himself a slaveholder, even after Indiana became a state.2 In their pro-slavery senti-
1 Burnet's Notes, p. 306.
2 He died in the summer of 1821; and by his will, which is dated April 19, 1817, and probated July 5, 1821, he devised his negro women "Judah " and " Nancy," his boy " George," and his girl " Queen Ann " to his widow and children. (Knox County probate record.)
291
THE NORTHWEST TERRITORY.
ments these three men represented their constituents, for at this time a large majority of the people in the country west of the Miami favored the introduction of slaves.
There was a special cause for this feeling on the part of the French people which did not affect other inhabi- tants of the Territory. It was set forth in a communica- tion to President Washington by Governor St. Clair, on June 11, 1790, as follows : "St. Louis is the most flour- ishing village of the Spaniards in the upper part of the Mississippi, and it has been greatly advanced by the people who abandoned the American side. To that they were induced partly by the oppression they suffered, and partly by the fear of losing their slaves, which they had been taught to believe would all be set free on the establishment of the American Government. Much pains had indeed been taken to inculcate that belief (particularly by a Mr. Morgan, of New Jersey), and a general desertion of the country had like to have been the consequence. The construction that was given to that part of the Ordinance which declares there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude was, that it did not go to the emancipation of the slaves they were in possession of and had obtained under the laws by which they had formerly been governed, but was intended sim- ply to prevent the importation of others. In this con- struction, I hope the intentions of Congress have not been misunderstood, and the apprehensions of the people were quieted by it. But the circumstance that slaves cannot be introduced will prevent many people from returning who earnestly wish to return, both from a dis- like to the Spanish Government and that the country itself is much less desirable than on the American side.
292
INDIANA.
Could they be allowed to bring them back with them, all those who retired from that cause would return, to a man." 1 The desire for the return of these exiles, which was so often manifested by the Illinois people, was not wholly due to the mercenary expectation of an increased value of property from increased population. They longed for the companionship of their old neighbors. Their feeling was one that few Americans can fully comprehend, but of its existence there can be no ques- tion. The old French settlers never removed from one locality to another if they could avoid it; and, when they did, they considered the necessity of a separation from their friends a most grievous calamity.2
The desire for the introduction of slavery was not limited wholly to the people west of the Miami, though pro-slavery men were rare to the east of that stream. Even in 1802, if we may believe the declaration of Governor St. Clair, made in a public speech at Cincin- nati, there were "a few people who wish to introduce negro slavery amongst us, and these chiefly residing in the county of Ross." 8 But more than this, a majority of the legislature of 1799 were apparently brought to a point of hesitancy by the consideration of the circum- stances of the would-be settlers from Virginia ; for on November 15 the House appointed Elias Langham of Ross and John Smith of Hamilton a committee to bring in a bill on the subject of fugitive slaves, "and declar- ing the admission of persons of color by indenture." Although no action resulted in this line, the appoint-
1 St. Clair Papers, vol. ii. p. 175.
2 Reynolds's Pioneer Hist. of Ill., p. 192; Volney's View of the U. S., p. 389.
3 St. Clair Papers, vol. ii. p. 588.
293
THE NORTHWEST TERRITORY.
ment of the committee indicates a willingness on the part of the legislators to permit the introduction of negroes in a servile condition until some other considera- tion intervened. This may have been a belief that they had no power to authorize the action, or a desire to leave the Ordinance unchanged and unimpaired. A striking instance of their respect for that instrument is seen in the fact that they discontinued the preparation of a memorial which had been begun, requesting Con- gress to give their representative the right of voting as well as of debating, for the reason that the proposed request was contrary to the provisions of the Ordinance ; and yet they must have known that the Ordinance could be changed by Congress with their consent. From these facts we must consider Judge Burnet's recollection of the event obscured by that golden haze which so often comes upon the human memory as men advance to new surroundings and lose the bitterness of old an- tagonisms. The unanimity of the vote cannot be attrib- uted wholly to the sentiments of the legislators as to the desirability of the introduction of slaves.
CHAPTER VIII.
THE GOVERNOR AND JUDGES.
"ST. VINCENNES, July 4, 1800. This day the Govern- ment of the Indiana Territory commenced, William Henry Harrison having been appointed Governor, John Gibson Secretary, William Clarke, Henry Vanderburgh & John Griffin Judges in and over said Territory." So opens the executive journal of the Territory, though Secretary Gibson was the only official who acted for some six months. Governor Harrison did not arrive until January 10, 1801; and the territorial court did not convene until March 3 of the same year. The Governor at once called a meeting of the Governor and Judges, which began January 12 and lasted for two weeks. Six laws and three resolutions were passed, most of them concerning the establishment of courts and the practice therein, five of which were amendatory of, supplemental to, or in repeal of, laws of Northwest Ter- ritory. No attempt was made to reënact the laws of Northwest Territory in Indiana Territory at any time, though the laws of the former, passed prior to the divi- sion, were always treated as in force in the latter. The theory adopted was that the division of the old Territory was merely for administrative purposes ; that the laws were as much in force in one division as in the other ; and that there was no need of reenacting them in either. This is perhaps the only instance of such a construction
295
THE GOVERNOR AND JUDGES.
in any country where the common law obtained. It was carried much farther by the territorial court in 1803, in a curious question concerning the law regulating prison bounds ; for it was then held that a law passed in Northwest Territory after 1800 was still in force in Wayne County, which was added to Indiana Territory in 1802, notwithstanding the fact that an entirely different law was in force in the remainder of Indiana.1 This construction was of vital importance to the infant Terri- tory, for, having dropped back to the first stage, under the Ordinance, it could adopt only laws of the original states, which, as had been demonstrated in Northwest Territory, were inadequate to the needs of the people ; whereas the laws of Northwest Territory as revised and extended by the late legislature, were very satisfactory. In 1800, Indiana's civilized population of 5,641 souls were grouped about little villages which were nearly all situated on the boundary lines of the Territory, and as far apart as they could possibly be placed. At Mack- inaw, the extreme northern settlement, were 251 citizens. The fur-traders scattered about the lakes were estimated at 300. In the settlement at Green Bay were 50 people. At Prairie du Chien, on the Upper Mississippi, were 65. Farther down the Mississippi the settlements were more extensive. In and about Cahokia were 719 people. Just below, in Belle Fontaine township, were 286. In L'Aigle, the southernmost township of St. Clair County, were 250. At and about Kaskaskia were 467. At and about Prairie du Rocher were 212. In Mitchel town- ship were 334. Around on the Ohio were 90 souls at
1 Docket of Ter. Court, September Term, 1803, p. 103. This docket is preserved in the office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court at Indianapolis.
296
INDIANA.
Fort Massac. Farther up, in Clark's Grant, were 929. In the interior was nothing that could be called a settle- ment except Vincennes, which had 714 inhabitants, while in its immediate vicinity were 819 more. There were, however, 55 fur-traders scattered along the Wa- bash, and about 100 at " Opee." 1 In what is now In- diana the population was about 2,500; the exact num- ber cannot be given, because a part of those reported as in the neighborhood of Vincennes were west of the Wa- bash. In what is now Illinois were a little more than 2,500, nearly all of them in the region about Kaskaskia and Cahokia, which was commonly called the Illinois country. Of the total population, 163 were reported free negroes and 135 slaves. But this is erroneous, as 42 negroes and no slaves were reported from Cahokia, where there were certainly a number of slaves. The number reported from that place in 1810 was 40, and there must have been near that number ten years earlier ; hence we may estimate the slaves in Indiana Territory in 1800 at 175, and the free negroes at 123. Of the slaves reported, 28 were about Vincennes and on the Wabash, and the remainder were in Randolph County.2
The only purely American settlement was in Clark's Grant, though there were Americans scattered all through the French settlements and a large number of them at Vincennes. The French were largely in the majority in the Territory, and most of the American politicians conformed to their ideas for evident reasons. These people were nearly all Federalistic in their sym-
1 Peoria, i. e., au Piorias. This is an example of that com- pound of French abbreviation with American orthography from which such results as Okas for Kaskaskia, Cahos, Cos, or Okos for Cahokia, and Opost for Post Vincennes were obtained.
2 Census of 1800.
297
THE GOVERNOR AND JUDGES.
pathies. Monarchical institutions had no terrors for them, and political denunciations of a tendency of the government towards such institutions fell lightly on their ears. Their leaders had been favored by the Federal executives, both national and territorial, to such an ex- tent that they held nearly all the offices; and the mere holding of an office added much to the dignity and influ- ence of a man among the French settlers. But Amer- ican politics had little weight with them as compared with their local welfare, and the one thing which they considered essential to their welfare was the introduction of slaves. Their views were natural. Emigrants who objected to slavery usually stopped in Ohio; those who wanted slavery went to Kentucky, or the Spanish posses- sions beyond the Mississippi. Their neighbors who had hastily crossed the river for fear of losing their slaves could not return, and all on account of this absurd American law. The French settlers and their Ameri- can allies wanted this law changed, and, inasmuch as a majority of the inhabitants of the Territory were of that mind, they had hopes that Congress would relent. Be- fore the organization of the Territory was completed the Illinois people prepared a memorial to Congress, making known their wants and supplicating relief. The ingenu- ity of that portion of it which refers to the question of slavery will best be seen in the following extract : " The mode your Petitioners wish and pray you to adopt is to permit of the Introduction into the Territory of any of those who are slaves in any of the United States, who when admitted shall continue in a state of Servitude dur- ing their natural lives, but that all their children born in the Territory shall serve, the males until thirty-one and the females until twenty-eight, at which time they are to
298
INDIANA.
be absolutely free. To the adoption of such a modifi- cation of Slavery your Petitioners cannot conceive any well-founded objections will be made. It cannot but meet with the support of those who are friends to a grad- ual abolition of Slavery, and your Petitioners cannot entertain the Idea that any will be found to oppose a measure which in the course of a very few years will in all human probability rescue from the vilest state of Bond- age a number, and without doubt a considerable num- ber, of Souls yet unborn. Your Petitioners do not wish to increase the number of Slaves in the United States by the introduction of any from foreign Dominions; their wishes on the contrary tend considerably to diminish the number by emancipating those who, whether born in the States where their parents reside, or removed into the Spanish Dominions, would otherwise be born slaves."
In addition to this modification of the sixth article of compact, the petitioners asked the extinction of the In- dian title to the greater part of Southern Illinois, which was held by the little remnant of the Kaskaskia tribe ; the granting of tracts of land to persons who would open roads through the unsettled parts of the country and maintain taverns along the same ; and the establishment of one or two garrisons of troops, - all these being in anticipation of rapid settlement of the country when the slavery restriction should be removed. This petition had 270 signatures, chiefly French. Among the more prominent English and American signers were John Edgar, John Rice Jones, William Morrison, Robert Morrison, and Shadrach Bond. It does not appear to have been circulated for signature at Vincennes. It was forwarded to Congress, but did not there receive the consideration which its philanthropic professions
299
THE GOVERNOR AND JUDGES.
might seem to demand. It was not presented to the House, though addressed to both House and Senate; at least there is no mention of it in the House records, and no copy of it on the House files. It was presented to the Senate on January 23, 1801, and at once laid on the table, whence it was not removed.1
The Illinois people soon learned that their petition would avail nothing, but they were not at all disheart- ened. The first result of the failure was a determina- tion to have a representative in Congress to urge their wishes. This they could not have without advancing to the second grade of territorial government ; but as the law establishing the Territory had fixed no minimum of population for this advance, there was no reason why it could not be made at once, if Governor Harrison were willing. On April 11, 1801, John Edgar wrote to Gov- ernor St. Clair : "During a few weeks past we have put into circulation petitions addressed to Governor Harrison, for a General Assembly, and we have had the satisfaction to find that about nine-tenths of the inhabi- tants of the counties of St. Clair and Randolph approve of the measure, a great proportion of whom have already put their signatures to the petition. I have written to Judge Clark, of Clark County, to Mr. Buntin and Mr. Small, of Post Vincennes, urging them to be active in the business. I have no doubt but that the undertaking will meet with early success so as to admit of the House of Representatives meeting in the fall." 2
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.