USA > Missouri > Centennial history of Missouri (the center state) one hundred years in the Union, 1820-1921, Volume I > Part 73
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 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56 | Part 57 | Part 58 | Part 59 | Part 60 | Part 61 | Part 62 | Part 63 | Part 64 | Part 65 | Part 66 | Part 67 | Part 68 | Part 69 | Part 70 | Part 71 | Part 72 | Part 73 | Part 74 | Part 75 | Part 76 | Part 77 | Part 78 | Part 79 | Part 80 | Part 81 | Part 82 | Part 83 | Part 84 | Part 85 | Part 86 | Part 87 | Part 88 | Part 89 | Part 90 | Part 91 | Part 92 | Part 93 | Part 94 | Part 95 | Part 96 | Part 97 | Part 98 | Part 99 | Part 100 | Part 101 | Part 102 | Part 103 | Part 104 | Part 105 | Part 106 | Part 107 | Part 108 | Part 109 | Part 110 | Part 111 | Part 112 | Part 113 | Part 114
Blair Emancipated His Slaves.
At the time when he was advocating gradual emancipation and practical colonization, Frank Blair was a slave owner. But in 1859 he removed himself from this classification. It was an interesting fact that just three months after U. S. Grant freed his slave in St. Louis by going into court and making affidavit to the act, Frank Blair similarly freed his four slaves. This took place on the 28th of June, 1859. Blair had previously freed Henry Dupe, owned by him. He Vol. 1-43
674
CENTENNIAL HISTORY OF MISSOURI
now emancipated Sarah Dupe, the wife of Henry, and her three daughters. The document he filed was as follows :
"I. Francis P. Blair, Jr., of the City of St. Louis and the State of Missouri, in con- sideration of faithful services to me rendered and for divers other good and sufficient reasons moving me thereto, do by these presents emancipate and set free my negro slave woman, Sarah, wife of Henry Dupe (heretofore emancipated by me). Said Sarah is about 42 or 43 years of age, light-colored and about medium-sized. Also negro girl, Courtenay, daughter of Sarah, who is about 18 years of age; also negro girl, Caroline, daughter of said Sarah, about 12 years of age, and Sallie, daughter of Sarah, about 9 years of age. And I do hereby grant Courtenay, Caroline, Sallie and Sarah as perfect freedom as if they had been born free. In testimony whereof, I hereunto set my hand and seal this, the 28th day of June, 1859, in the presence of the undersigned witnesses.
"(Signed) FRANK P. BLAIR."
Lucian Carr said: "Blair approached the subject as a statesman rather than as a moralist."
Emancipation Movement in Missouri.
William Hyde saw the evolution of the emancipation movement of Missouri in the decade before the Civil war. From close range as a newspaper man he measured its growth and character. His impressions were given to the Globe- Democrat in 1892:
"Mr. Francis Preston Blair, who became the universally recognized leader of the emancipation party, together with Messrs. Edward Bates, B. Gratz Brown, Dr. Linton, Henry T. Blow, John D. Stevenson, John How, O. D. Filley and other conspicuous mem- bers, were not believers in immediate emancipation. They proposed and advocated a gradual system-a fixed time after which children born of slave parents would be free and a further fixed time in the life of each slave when all should be free. Deportation and colonization was a dream of this utopia, involving compensation to slave owners who might demand the same for the term of service cut off by the act of emancipation as nearly as it could be calculated. In view of the fact that from the organization of the American Colonization Society up to twenty years ago, the whole number of colored persons emigrat- ing from this country was but 13,598, the futility of the scheme appears amazing. But on the other hand, it is recorded that long after the Southern war had itself freed thou- sands, President Lincoln was ready to negotiate for peace with emancipation, on the basis of a money compensation for the slaves.
"It was, indeed, a most difficult and perplexing problem with which the courageous gradual emancipationists, deporters and colonizationists of Missouri had to deal. What to do with the freedmen when they should be set at liberty; what should be their social status; how should they be educated and prepared for the duties of citizenship-these and cognate questions staggered the most thoughtful promoters of the movement, and stagnated even those who in their hearts were more than willing to let slavery go. In a city like St. Louis the question of antagonizing the cheap labor of slaves against the labor of free white men was susceptible of being worked to great advantage, and it was so worked. 'Free labor' was one of the rallying cries of the anti-slavery party. Even after the organization of the Republican party, in 1856, in which Francis P. Blair, jr., was one of the prime movers, the junior Blair hesitated to adopt the name for the Missourians. 'Free Democratic ticket' was the caption swung out at the head of the list of Blair candidates for local offices in the Democrat. But it was scarcely a disguise. The columns of the Democrat bristled with elaborate emancipation articles. Henry Boernstein, who conducted the Anzeiger des Westens, was not particular as to hair-splitting names, and, indeed, the word republican conveyed to his readers, many of whom were German exiles of 1848, a meaning which was itself a rallying cry. In point of fact, the Anzeiger and its followers were the radicals
675
SLAVERY AND AFTER
of the day, much more advanced in their anti-slavery views than Blair and his coterie, who endured undeserved disparagement on their account. For it was not cowardice or timidity which induced the latter to hesitate to adopt the Republican title at once. The dubitation was whether that name expressed the objects of the organization in its primary form. However there was no beating around the bush relative to the fact that this organ- ization meant anti-slavery, emancipation and free soil. There was no occasion for con- cealment. Liberty of thought and speech was as secure in St. Louis as in Boston."
During a part of the time when emancipation sentiment was growing in Mis- souri, Mr. Hyde was the correspondent of the Missouri Republican at Springfield, Illinois, while the legislature was in session. Blair visited Springfield and held conferences with Lincoln. Mr. Hyde held to this view of the relations between the two :
"It was a sufficient indorsement of Frank Blair, in a partisan sense, that the political career of Abraham Lincoln, from the time of the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, was patterned on his model. In all their public discussions both were anxious that the agitation of the slavery question should not imperil the Union. They had no part or lot with those who, like N. P. Banks, would 'let the Union slide,' or with those who, like William Lloyd Garrison, regarded the Union as 'a league with hell and a covenant with death.' Both opposed 'conceded disunion or constrained emancipation,' as a dreaded and unnecessary alternative. Adopting the view made prominent in Blair's speeches, Mr. Lincoln, in one of his earliest messages, advocated a system of colonizing the blacks freed by the war, and even hinted at the deportation of those who were free before. In his first cabinet were Montgomery Blair and Edward Bates, who held identical views with Francis P. Blair. In his opposition to Fremont's administration in Missouri, Blair was heartily sustained by the President. But, by this time, Judge Bates had quarreled with the Blairs about the adminis- tration methods in Missouri, their differences dating back, in fact, to the time when General Harney was superseded by Captain Lyon, just previous to the capture of Camp Jackson."
Slave Auctions Made Odious.
The slave traders had no social recognition in St. Louis. One of them was stoned by boys shortly before the Civil war. St. Louis parted with slavery will- ingly. What pro-slavery sentiment had existed was largely because of sympathy for the South, where family ties bound and trade relations existed. New Year's Day, 1861, brought a curious revelation of sentiment in St. Louis on the slavery question. In the settlement of estates not infrequently there were negroes to be disposed of. Like other property, to be distributed to heirs, these slaves were put up at partition sales. The sheriff or his deputy appeared at the front door of the courthouse, announced the terms and called for bids. While estates were in progress of settlement, the slaves were held in the custody of the court officers and were boarded for safekeeping in the county jail. It had become the custom of the court to set the Ist day of January as the date to clean up slave property left by estates. Encouraged by the election of Lincoln in the preceding November, a secret organization was formed to put an end to these auction sales of slaves by court procedure. On the Ist day of January, 1861, the sheriff had seven slaves to sell for the benefit of certain heirs of the deceased owners. In the usual legal form the sale was announced. Rev. Galusha Anderson, at the time pastor of the Second Baptist Church, tells in his book, "A Border City in the Civil War," the story of this last slave auction by order of court in St. Louis :
-
676
CENTENNIAL HISTORY OF MISSOURI
"About 2,000 young men had secretly banded themselves together to stop the sale, and, if possible, put an end to this annual disgrace. The auctioneer on his arrival at the courthouse found this crowd of freemen in a dense mass waiting for him. The sight of bondsmen about to be offered for sale, and that, too, under the floating folds of their national flag, crimsoned their cheeks with shame' and made their hearts hot within them. Yet they scarcely uttered a word as they stood watching the auctioneer and the timid, shrinking slaves at his side. At last he was ready and cried out, 'What will you bid for this able-bodied boy? There's not a blemish on him.' Then the indignant, determined crowd in response cried out, at the top of their lungs, 'Three dollars, three dollars,' and without a break kept up the cry for twenty minutes or more. The auctioneer yelled to make himself heard above that deafening din of voices, but it was all in vain. At last, however, the cry of the crowd died away. Was it simply a good-natured joke carried a little too far? The auctioneer seemed to be in doubt how to take that vociferating throng. 'Now,' he said, in a bantering tone, 'gentlemen, don't make fools of yourselves; how much will you bid for this boy?' Then, for many minutes, they shouted, 'Four dollars, four dollars,' and the frantic cries of the auctioneer were swallowed up in that babel of yells. His efforts were as futile as if he had attempted to whistle a tornado into silence. To the joy of that crowd of young men the auctioneer was at last in a rage. It had dawned upon him that this was no joke; that the crowd before him were not shouting for fun on this annual holiday, but were in dead earnest. When their cries once more died away, he soundly berated them for their conduct. But they answered his scolding and storming with jeers and catcalls. At last he again asked, 'How much will you bid for this first-class nigger?' This was answered by a simultaneous shout of 'Five dollars, five dollars'; and the roar of voices did not stop for a quarter of an hour. And so the battle went on. The bid did not get above eight dollars, and at the end of two hours of exasperating and futile effort, the defeated auctioneer led his ebony charges back to the jail. Through the force of public opinion freedom had triumphed. No public auction of slaves was ever again attempted in St. Louis."
Lincoln's Border States Policy.
President Lincoln wanted to pay the loyal slaveholders of Missouri $300 apiece for every man, woman and child slave in the state. He chose Gen. John B. Henderson to champion this policy in Congress, and he used his influence as far as he felt he consistently could to press the measure. This policy the President adopted before he had been in the White House a year. His desire was to have Congress reimburse the loyal slaveholders of the border states for their slaves, and then to emancipate by proclamation slaves in the other states. Missouri was selected for the first application of the policy. John B. Henderson entered the Senate by appointment of Governor Gamble, taking the place of Trusten Polk, who, had gone into the Confederate army. He was but little beyond the age which made him eligible. When the Missouri legislature met Senator Henderson was elected for the unexpired term, and when the term ended he was elected for the new term. Within three months after he became senator, in 1862, General Hen- derson had been taken into the confidence of Mr. Lincoln and was urging the policy of payment for the slaves of the border states.
As early as his message to Congress on December 3, 1861, the President said the government must use all indispensable means to maintain the Union. He hinted at colonization as a possible remedy for slavery.
On the 6th of March he sent to Congress a message recommending pay for slaves of the loyal. He wrote private letters urging the initiation of emancipa-
1
677
SLAVERY AND AFTER
tion legislation. "I say 'initiation,' " he wrote, "because in my judgment gradual and not sudden emancipation is better for all."
On the 10th of March, he invited the Missourians and the other Members of Congress from border States to the White House for a conference and presented his plan for gradual compensated abolishment. Only two of the Missourians favored the plan. They were Senator John B. Henderson and Representative John W. Noell. Frank Blair, who was for the plan, was not there. He was in the field with his command. Subsequently he wrote a letter on the policy to Rudolph Doehn of Missouri in which he declared himself for a "gradual, peace- ful and just measure of emancipation."
After the March conference the President urged his views upon the Members of Congress individually. He chose Senator Henderson to champion the pay-for- slaves policy. Some years ago, in Washington, Senator Henderson gave the writer his recollections.
John B. Henderson's Recollections.
There was great pressure being brought to bear upon the President to emanci- pate. Delegations of ministers from the North came to Washington to demand such action. The republican leaders were very insistent. Senator Zach Chandler of Michigan, Senator Ben Wade of Ohio, and Senator Charles Sumner of Massa- chusetts, called almost daily at the White House to tell Mr. Lincoln what he ought to do. General Henderson was sent for frequently to report how the border states policy was progressing.
"As I went in one day," General Henderson said, "I noticed that the Presi- dent looked troubled. He was sitting in one of his favorite attitudes-in a rocking chair with one leg thrown over the arm. I knew that he suffered terribly from headaches, and I said :
"'Mr. President, you must have one of your headaches ; you look so gloomy.'
"'No,' said he, 'it isn't headache'this time. Chandler has been here to talk again about emancipation, and he came on the heels of Wade and Sumner, who were here on the same errand. I like these three men, but they bother me nearly to death. They put me in the situation of a boy I remember when I was going to school.'"
General Henderson noted the brightening of Mr. Lincoln's face. He recog- nized the signs that a story was coming. Mr. Lincoln leaned forward, began to smile, and clasped his hands around the knee of the leg resting on the arm of the chair.
"The text-book was the Bible," Mr. Lincoln went on. "There was a rather dull little fellow in the class who didn't know very much. We were reading the account of the three Hebrews cast into the fiery furnace. The little fellow was called on to read and he stumbled along until he came to the names of the three Hebrews-Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego. He couldn't do anything with them. The teacher pronounced them over very slowly and told the boy to try. The boy tried and missed. This provoked the teacher and he slapped the little fellow, who cried vigorously. Then the boy tried again, but he couldn't get the names. 'Well,' said the teacher impatiently, 'never mind the names. Skip them and go on.' The poor boy drew his shirt sleeve across his eyes two or three times,
678
CENTENNIAL HISTORY OF MISSOURI
snuffed his nose and started on to read. He went along bravely a little way, and then he suddenly stopped, dropped the book down in front of him, looked despairingly at the teacher and burst out crying. 'What's the matter now?' shouted the teacher, all out of patience. 'H-h-here's them same darn three fellers again,' sobbed the boy.
"That." said the President, "is just my fix today, Henderson. Those same darn three fellers have been here again with their everlasting emancipation talk."
The President stopped a few moments to enjoy the story, and becoming serious, continued :
"But Sumner and Wade and Chandler are right about it. I know it and you know it, too. I've got to do something and it can't be put off much longer. We can't get through this terrible war with slavery existing. You've got sense enough to know that. Why can't you make the border states members see it? Why don't you turn in and take pay for your slaves from the government? Then all your people can give their hearty support to the Union. We can go ahead with emancipation of slaves by proclamation in the other states and end the trouble."
Lincoln and the Missourians.
The President held out as long as he could, hoping to carry out the border states policy upon which his heart was set. On the 12th of July he again invited the delegation from Missouri and the members from other states to come to the White House. He read a carefully written appeal to them to adopt his policy of compensated abolishment. He said :
"I intend no reproach or complaint when I assure you that, in my opinion, if you all had voted for the resolution in the gradual emancipation message of last March, the war would now be substantially ended."
Twenty of these Members sent their reply two days later. They pledged their loyalty but declared their judgment to be against the pay-for-slaves policy. The Missourians signing the paper were Senator Robert Wilson and Representatives James S. Rollins, William A. Hall, Thomas L. Price and John S. Phelps.
Senator Henderson and Representative Noell wrote to the President that they would endeavor to secure from the people of Missouri consideration of his plan. They did so. The policy became the issue in the campaign which followed. Of the nine Members of Congress elected by Missouri in November, six were avowed emancipationists. The lower branch of the legislature was emancipation and chose the emancipation candidate for speaker by a vote of sixty-seven to forty-two. Governor Gamble in his message advised the legislature to take up the subject.
When Congress met in December for the short session the House appointed a select committee on gradual emancipation in the loyal slave-holding states. Frank P. Blair was made the Missouri member of it. On the 10th of December Senator Henderson introduced in the Senate his bill to give Missouri $20,000,000 to pay for the slaves of loyal owners. The next day Noell put in his bill in the House, appropriating $10,000,000 to reimburse loyal owners of slaves in Mis- souri. Both bills passed by large majorities but the difference in the amounts made it necessary to compromise. The President did all he could to expedite the
679
SLAVERY AND AFTER
legislation. On the 10th of January he sent this telegram to General Curtis in command at St. Louis :
"I understand there is considerable trouble with the slaves in Missouri. Please do your best to keep peace on the question for two or three weeks, by which time we hope to do something here towards settling the question in Missouri."
As early as May, 1862, President Lincoln had told General Henderson of his intention to issue the emancipation proclamation. Action was not taken until six months later, and the proclamation was announced, to take effect January 1, 1863. The President held out as long as he could in the hope that he might be able to carry out his border states policy. The introduction of the bill to pay loyal owners in Missouri was the beginning. It was followed by bills to pay for slaves in Kentucky, Maryland and other border slave states.
"I do not remember," said General Henderson, "whether Mr. Lincoln drafted the bill or I got it up, but the inspiration came from him. I did all in my power to press it. The proposition went through the House and Senate, but it was passed in somewhat different forms. The Senate increased the amount, and this difference had to be adjusted in conference. There was a good majority for the Missouri bill in both branches of Congress and there was not much trouble about compromising the difference of opinions on the amount to be appropriated, but the session was almost at an end and a small minority in the House was able, by filibustering and obstructing, to prevent the final action there. If the bill could have been brought before the House in its finished form it would have passed finally as easy as it did in the Senate.
What Cost Missourians $15,000,000.
"President Lincoln watched the progress of the legislation with a great deal of interest," continued General Henderson. "He could not understand why the border states members should not be for it. And I could not, either. It was perfectly plain to me that slavery had to go. Here was a voluntary offer on the part of the government to compensate the loyal men in the border states for the loss of their property. I talked with the members from Missouri and from Ken- tucky and with the others who were most interested, but I couldn't make them see it as I did. They had exaggerated ideas of the results which would ensue from a free negro population. They took the position that slavery must not be touched. It was their determined opposition to the end that deferred the bill to give the Missouri slaveholders $15,000,000 for their slaves. If the Missouri bill had gone through the others would have followed undoubtedly and the loyal slaveholders in all of the border states would have received pay for their slaves."
President Lincoln and General Henderson were so confident the bill to dis- burse $15,000,000 for Missouri slaves would become law that some figuring was done on the amount which would be paid per capita.
"I recollect quite distinctly the calculations I made at the time," General Henderson said. "I found that the amount which the government would have distributed to Missourians under the terms of the bill finally agreed upon in con- ference would have given the loyal owners in my state about $300 for each slave -man, woman and child. That I consider a pretty good price, for while we were legislating the emancipation proclamation had become assured, and it was very
1
CENTENNIAL HISTORY OF MISSOURI
680
evident to my mind that slavery was doomed, even among those slaveholders who had remained loyal."
Beaten by a Small Minority.
The record bears out Senator Henderson's recollections. The House passed Noell's bill by seventy-three to forty-six. The Senate accepted the compromise on the amount, which was $15,000,000, by a vote of twenty-three to fifteen. But the compromise was not reported until six days before the end of the session and a small minority in the House was able to prevent a vote on it. In this minority were three Missourians, William A. Hall, Elijah H. Norton and Thomas L. Price.
To have the courage of their convictions has ever been characteristic of Mis- sourians sent to Congress. The three Missourians who fought the compensated abolishment bill to its death were honest. No one who reads the debate can doubt that. Elijah H. Norton, who represented the Platte district, was one of the leaders of the small opposition minority. He fought the measure from its introduction to the end of the session.
One point which Judge Norton made was that Missouri could not free her slaves without paying the owners the full equivalent for them. He said :
"According to the census of 1860, there were of slaves in Missouri about 120,000. According to the report of the auditor of the state, founded upon returns made for the year 1862 by the assessors of forty odd counties, there can not now be less than 100,000 slaves in the state. In my judgment not over 5,000 of them are subject to confiscation under the confiscation law, leaving 95,000 to be bought and paid for. Before the legislature can emancipate them, they must first pay a full equivalent for them. Not an equivalent which Congress by an arbitrary legislative act fixes; not an equivalent which legislative enactment declares, but the worth, the value of the slave as ascertained from the market rate by a proceeding, not legislative, but judicial in its character. I notice sales recently made in Howard county, in the district of my colleague, at $900; in other counties at from $600 to $700, for negro men. These figures and the former value of slaves lead me to conclude that the average value of slaves in the state would not fall below $450. Thus, sir, we have the price, being $450, and the number 95,000 to be bought. The value of these slaves would be $42,750,000. By this bill you place at the disposal of the governor $20,000,- 000 of bonds; and if the legislature, out of the state treasury, could also appropriate $22,- 750,000, then the legislature could, in twelve months, pass a valid and constitutional law for the emancipation of slaves according to the terms of the bill. But, sir, this is im- possible."
Judge Norton took the position that the general government had no authority to carry out the proposed plan of emancipation. He said :
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.