USA > Missouri > Missouri the center state, 1821-1915 > Part 6
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
27
SLAVERY AND AFTER
views of life. He united with the First Presbyterian Church, of which the Rev. Dr. W. S. Potts was the pastor. Young Lovejoy believed that it was his duty to become a minister. On the advice of Dr. Potts he went to the Theological Seminary at Princeton, New Jersey, in 1832, and stayed until April, 1833, when he was given a license to preach by the Second Presbytery at Philadelphia. In the autumn of 1833 he was back in St. Louis for the purpose of establishing a religious weekly newspaper at the request of a number of church people who had known him as a writer on the Times. The capital was raised by St. Louis busi- ness men. The editorial and business management was given over to Lovejoy. The first number of the St. Louis Observer appeared November 22, 1833. Besides getting out his weekly paper, Mr. Lovejoy visited communities in the vicinity of St. Louis on week days as well as Sundays and conducted religious meetings. It was not until the summer of 1834 that he formally declared himself against slavery and began the aggressive course which cost him his life at Atlon on the 7th of November, 1837.
Citizens of St. Louis appealed to Lovejoy to stop when he began the discus- sion of slavery in the Observer. They told him that his views caused resentment on the part of the pro-slavery people and would lead to trouble. Editor Lovejoy replied to the protests in an address calling attention to the clause of the con- stitution of Missouri declaring that "the free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the inalienable rights of man, and that every person may freely speak, write and print on any subject-being responsible for the abuse of that liberty." The deliberate determination is announced in one of the closing para- graphs of the appeal: "I do, therefore, as an American citizen and Christian patriot, and in the name of liberty, law and religion, solemnly protest against all these attempts, howsoever and by whomsoever made, to frown down the liberty of the press and forbid the free expression of opinion. Under a deep sense of my obligations to my country, the church and my God, I declare it to be my fixed purpose to submit to no such dictation. And I am prepared to abide by the con- sequences. I have appealed to the Constitution and laws of my country ; if they fail to protect me, I appeal to God, and with him I cheerfully rest my cause."
The Observer continued to print attacks on slavery. The man who had pro- vided the capital concluded that it would be safer to remove the plant to Alton. Before the transfer a group of men went to the Observer office one night, broke some of the furniture and material and threw the fragments into the river. The press was not seriously damaged. It was shipped to Alton but was seized by pro- slavery men and thrown into the river. At a public meeting in Alton this act of violence was denounced in resolutions which at the same time declared the meeting not in sympathy with Mr. Lovejoy's views on slavery. A new press was bought. The publication of the Observer continued from September, 1836, to August, 1837. In the summer of 1837 another public meeting was held. Resolutions were adopted which condemned the course of the Observer. A committee was appointed to present the expression of the meeting to the editor. Lovejoy replied that he intended to continue the publication. On the night of August 2Ist a mob entered the office of the Observer and wrecked the plant. In September the third press was delivered and placed in a warehouse. The same night it was taken out and thrown into the river. Lovejoy ordered a fourth press. The excitement increased. An indignation meeting of citizens was held on the 3d of November. Very strong
28
MISSOURI, THE CENTER STATE
resolutions against the continuance of the Observer were passed. Lovejoy was given an opportunity to express his sentiments. His address to the meeting was put in writing by him. In the course of it he said:
"Mr. Chairman, what have I to compromise? If freely to forgive those who have so greatly injured me, if to pray for their temporal and eternal happiness, if still to wish for the prosperity of your city and State, notwithstanding all the indignities I have suffered in it; if this be the compromise intended, then do I willingly make it. My rights have been shamefully, wickedly outraged; this I know, and feel, and can never forget. But I can and do freely forgive those who have done it. But if by a compromise is meant that I should cease from doing that which duty requires of me, I cannot make it. And the reason is, that I fear God more than I fear man. Think not that I would lightly go contrary to public sentiment around me. The good opinion of my fellow-men is dear to me, and I would sacrifice anything but principle to obtain their good wishes; but when they ask me to surrender this, they ask for more than I can-than I dare give. Reference is made to the fact that I offered a few days since to give up the editorship of the Observer into other hands. This is true. I did so because it was thought or said by some that perhaps the paper would be better patronized in other hands. They declined accepting my offer, however, and since then we have heard from the friends and supporters of the paper in all parts of the State. There was but one sentiment among them; and this was that the paper could be sustained in no other hands than mine. It is also a very different question whether I shall voluntarily, or at the request of friends, yield up my post; or whether I shall forsake it at the demand of a mob. The former I am at all times ready to do, when circum- stances occur to require it, as I will never put my personal wishes or interests in competi- tion with the cause of that Master whose minister I am. But the latter, be assured, I never will do. God, in his providence-so say all my brethren, and so I think-has devolved upon me the responsibility of maintaining my ground here; and, Mr. Chairman, I am determined to do it. A voice comes to me from Maine, from Massachusetts, from Con- necticut, from New York, from Pennsylvania; yea, from Kentucky, from Mississippi, from Missouri, calling upon me in the name of all that is dear in heaven or earth, to stand fast; and by the help of God I will stand. I know I am but one and you are many. My strength would avail but little against you all. You can crush me if you will; but I shall die at my post, for I cannot and will not forsake it.
"Why should I flee from Alton? Is not this a free State? When assailed by a mob at St. Louis, I came hither, as the home of freedom and of the laws. The mob has pur- sued me here, and why should I retreat again? Where can I be safe if not here? Have not I a right to claim the protection of the laws? What more can I have in any other place? Sir, the very act of retreating will embolden the mob to follow me wherever I go. No, sir ; there is no way to escape the mob but to abandon the path of duty, and that. God helping me, I will never do."
The fourth press was received and placed in a warehouse. Friends of Lovejoy divided into squads of six to maintain guard over it. On the night of the 7th a mob proceeded to the warehouse. Lovejoy's friends were armed. Authority had been given by the mayor, John M. Krum, afterwards mayor of St. Louis, to defend the property. There was firing on both sides. A man named Bishop was killed. Lovejoy and two others of his party ventured outside of the building. The mob had fallen back after an attempt to set fire to the roof. Several shots were fired from ambush. Lovejoy was struck by five bullets. He was mortally wounded but was able to enter the warehouse and reach the second story before he fell and almost immediately expired. The others who had been on guard escaped with wounds by running down the levee. The mob entered the ware- house and destroyed the press.
29
SLAVERY AND AFTER
Treatment of Missouri Slaves.
The slave population of St. Louis was never large. Evils of slavery were mitigated by the humane, gentle, even affectionate care which the wives of St. Louis slave owners bestowed upon their dependents. The traveling companions of Kossuth, the Hungarian patriot, came to St. Louis expecting to find material for criticism of slavery. They wrote about a close view they had of the institution.
"Today I visited a large American establishment belonging to Colonel O'Fallon. The place reminded me of a Hungarian house, a large solid stone building on a hill, in the midst of a park with stately trees, surrounded by cottages. But here the likeness ceased, the inmates were black slaves. As far as I saw, they are well fed and well clothed. When we arrived at the door a negro woman opened it; it was the former nurse of Mrs. Pope, the lady who accompanied me, the daughter of the proprietor. Black Lucy seemed delighted to see her young mistress, and brought all her children and grandchildren to greet her- a numerous band of woolly haired imps, by no means handsome, but Mrs. Pope petted them, and genuine affection seemed to exist on both sides. Tomorrow we leave St. Louis. On the whole it has left me the pleasant impression of young and expansive life."
Tradition tells of the consideration which Madame Chouteau bestowed upon her slaves. There were free negroes in St. Louis long before the American occu- pation. They received concessions of land. The wills filed in the colonial records show that freedom was given the faithful servants. To the Spanish governor petitions, such as the following, were addressed: "Louis Villars, lieutenant of infantry, in the battalion of Louisiana, humbly prays you that he is the owner of a negress named Julie, about thirty years of age; that she has rendered him great services for a number of years, especially during two severe spells of sick- nesses your petitioner has undergone. The zeal and attachment she exhibited in his service having completely ruined her health, he desires to set her at liberty with a view to her restoration."
The Slave Trade in Colonial Days.
In 1801 and 1802 a subject of considerable correspondence between the Spanish governor at St. Louis and his superior at New Orleans was the importation of negro slaves into St. Louis and into other settlements of Upper Louisiana. The Spanish representative at New Orleans was Juan Ventura Morales. In 1801 he sent to the Spanish governor at St. Louis, Don Carlos Dehault Delassus, a copy of royal orders "that His Majesty does not wish for the present to have any negroes introduced into that Province." The reason assigned is that the King "has allowed 5,000 negroes to be introduced free under a concession given to a French firm, Cassague, Huguel, Raymon and Company.
"For your information," writes Morales, "I send you copy of the royal orders." And he adds, "May the Lord keep you many years." About ten months later Intendant Morales wrote at considerable length about this order against importa- tion of slaves into St. Louis. The inference might be drawn that Governor Delassus had found difficulty in the enforcement of the royal orders and had questioned the wisdom of the orders. It seems evident that Don Carlos felt the need of advice or instruction from his superior. Morales wrote in May, 1802, in this way: "It is not the place of the subordinate chiefs or of any good subject to inquire or investigate the causes which may help the King in his determina- tions. The duty of these chiefs is to obey and comply blindly with whatsoever is
30
MISSOURI, THE CENTER STATE
ordered to them and what is prescribed in the royal laws unless by so doing they see there is some danger. In such cases the subordinate chiefs can delay the compliance with such orders until the King shall learn of this and may resolve what His Royal Majesty shall consider agreeable. Under this principle, the introduction of negroes being considered, it is my duty to obey and comply with the orders of His Majesty."
Morales told Delassus that he had been denying the applications of planters to import slaves and that this policy must continue until the French firm had brought in the 5,000 under the concession. He pointed out to Delassus the argu- ment which might be used in defense of the royal orders and suggested the course of action against the violators of the King's instructions: "The King, perhaps, had strong political reasons for the concession given to the mentioned French citizens. It might compromise his royal authority if this Intendance should not watch for the introduction of negroes. To refuse the introduction of negro slaves we have an excuse in the revolution attempted not many years ago in Virginia and Carolina by that class of people. There is no doubt that the Ameri- can government and the owners of slaves wish to get free of these people at any sacrifice. What, then, would become of this Province if its chiefs, with closed eyes to such an important matter, should permit the introduction of such a danger- ous people ?"
Intendant Morales proceeded with real diplomacy to make a fine virtue of the necessity to enforce the royal orders: "The unfortunate example of the French islands and the knowledge of what was attempted in the North colonies, which was not effected because the plot was discovered in time, must persuade not only the sensible men, but also those who are interested in an imaginary prosperity caused by this dangerous people, that it would be against public tranquility and law and justice if this Intendance does not see the wise order prohibiting intro- duction of negro slaves is not ignored. Therefore, I request you to exercise the most exact watchfulness without accepting any permission but the one from the King. In the event there shall be any introduction of negro slaves you will make verbal process of the case and apprehend the negroes. You will forward every- thing to this Intendance."
Negro Taxpayers in St. Louis.
The first list of taxpayers of St. Louis is not a long one but it contained the names of several people of color who owned real estate. Geoffrey Camp was listed as a mulatto and Marie Labastille as "negresse libre." Suzanne, "negresse," owned a house and lot which was assessed at $250, quite a comfortable homestead for 1805. Laveille, "free negro;" Flores, "free negress;" were among these first taxpayers in St. Louis. Esther Morgan, "a free mulatto," owned valuable prop- erty on South Third street.
During one of the cholera epidemics Maj. Richard Graham, living at his country seat, Hazelwood, in St. Louis county, wrote to a friend: "The cholera made its appearance and was followed by a congestive fever which carried off sixteen of my negroes. It has shattered me a good deal, Marshall, and I have not as yet recovered from the shock of melancholy feelings in seeing so many human beings dying around me and looking up to me as their only hope in their despair and their agonies. My place was a perfect hospital and Mrs. Graham and
SAMUEL HAWKEN
Inventor of the Hawken rifle used by Missouri pioneers
O
PIONEER FIRE ENGINE
FIRST MARKET HOUSE OF ST. LOUIS
31
SLAVERY AND AFTER
myself constant attendants and nurses amidst the thickest of the cholera. We escaped as well as our children." Mrs. Francis D. Hirschberg, who was Miss Mary Frost, a granddaughter of Major Graham, wrote in comment on this letter : "A sidelight, this, upon the position of master and slave-since so often mis- understood. The kindly Virginia traditions were held to: no slaves were sold; no corporal punishment was allowed. The family ties were held as sacred and respected accordingly."
When Robert Lewis went to California in the rush of 1849 he took with him Jesse Hubbard, a slave who belonged to his wife. Lewis and the colored man came back with $15,000. The master divided fairly with the slave. Hubbard took his share to his mistress, who in turn divided with him and gave him his freedom. The negro bought a farm and settled in St. Louis county.
Thomas Shackleford's Recollections.
In his address before the Missouri Historical Society in 1901, Thomas Shackle- ford gave some personal recollections of slavery in Missouri :
"John Harrison was a large hemp grower in Howard county. He had many slaves and was kind to them. To illustrate that the spirit of liberty is inherent in the human heart, I recall that I was at his home (he was the father of my wife), in the early 50's, when a poor wayfaring man and his wife called to stay all night. He was a sorry specimen of humanity, traveling with a poor horse hitched to a rickety old chaise. In the morning one of the slaves was directed to get the poor man's horse, which he hitched up. The slave was named Smith, and as he passed his mistress she said to him: 'Smith, how would you like to be that man? Aren't you better off?' 'Ah, Missus,' he replied, 'he has nobody to hinder him.' This poor slave, although well-treated and well-fed, yet longed to be situated where no one hindered him.
"Slavery had many dark phases, but it was always a pleasure to consider only the bright side, where there was such a natural attachment between master and slave, as in the case of this man. Let me illustrate by two incidents. He had a slave named Brown who was a member of the same church, and attended the same class meetings, of which I was leader. Brown had a wife who belonged to a neighbor, who had failed, and the wife of Brown and all her children were about to be sold to a negro trader. Her master was a kind man and had permitted his slave to hire her own time. The law did not permit the slaves to be emancipated and live in the State. Brown came to me and said he was about to be separated from his wife and children. He said his wife had money enough to pay for herself and children. I told him to send her to me. She came with silver to the amount of $1,000 in her handkerchief. I took the money, purchased her, and had the bill of sale made to me. I indorsed the fact on the bill of sale, and kept it among my secret papers. Publicly she was recognized as my property, but kept, as before, her own earnings. When it was apparent that the federal troops were going to occupy Missouri, many persons sent their slaves South in the vain hope of saving them. Mr. Harrison made preparations to send his South, pre- pared his tents for the journey. Brown came to me to intercede against being sent away. I told him to go to his master and say to him that he and his associates would be faithful until legally set free. I came upon them just as they were having the interview, and found both in tears. It is needless to say that the tents were folded up and stored in the garret. All save one remained faithful, and Mr. Harrison provided homes for all. Such incidents were common, but Northern men read only of the dark side of the picture. You would hardly believe it when I tell you I never read 'Uncle Tom's Cabin.' I was satisfied the picture was overdrawn.
"My father had died when I was about fourteen years of age. My mother was left a widow and had the charge and management of many slaves. We had a law in our statutes that a slave should be punished with forty lashes save one, who insulted a white man. One day the constable came to arrest a slave for insulting a white man. My mother told me to
32
MISSOURI, THE CENTER STATE
go to the trial. The evidence was that when the white man was trading with the slave an altercation took place, and the white man cursed the slave, and the slave cursed the white man in return. A great crowd was present. The magistrate heard the evidence and con- demned the slave to be lashed. He then took me aside and said: 'Your slave is not guilty, but to satisfy this crowd of angry men, I had to pass this sentence.' I was indignant. 'What,' said I, 'whip an innocent man?' 'Yes," said the magistrate. While he was talking the constable came and asked if he was to be whipped publicly. 'No,' said the magistrate, 'Take him to the smoke house.' The slave was stripped and taken into the house, and the crowd counted the lashes. When the officer came out he said to the negro, 'You must not tell what occurred.' 'No,' said the negro, 'I will not.' Then said the officer to me: 'You must not tell. I only lashed the post.' I said I would only tell my mother. When I came home I then asked my mother what it meant that the innocent negro was to be whipped. She said to me : 'Ah, my son, I cannot well explain these things to you, but before this evil of slavery is righted, this land will be deluged in blood.' She then called my attention to the fact that sons in good families, as well as husbands, were having children by the slave women, that this social evil was bad enough among free parties, but among bond women was terrible. My mother died before the cloud burst, but her precepts were so indelibly impressed on my young mind that when the secession of the States began, I looked anxiously in fear of the fulfillment of her prophecy."
Dred Scott and His "Case."
About 1858 people on the streets of St. Louis called attention to a man of striking appearance and said: "That's Dred Scott." Other people, especially strangers in the city, looked a second time and with evident interest at the stout- built figure, the whiskers and the military bearing. Dred Scott was then about fifty years old. He was of pure negro blood, born in Virginia, and might have passed for an African king. In that period the most military looking man in St. Louis was Thornton Grimsley. He had invented and manufactured the favorite saddle of the United States dragoons. For two generations he was in demand for grand marshal of processions. Physically Dred Scott was "another Thornton Grimsley done in ebony," as a newspaper reporter described him.
For five years the Dred Scott case had been in the courts. It had been the most talked of litigation. It had brought from the United States Supreme Court a decision that the Missouri Compromise was of no force. The papers were full of it.
Dred Scott was the slave and body servant of Dr. Emmerson, a surgeon in the United States Army, stationed in St. Louis. When the surgeon was ordered to the post at Rock Island he took his slave with him. There Dred Scott made the acquaintance of a colored girl named Harriet. The girl belonged to Major Taliaferro of the army and had been brought from Virginia. Dred Scott and Harriet were married. When Dr. Emmerson was ordered to Fort Snelling in what is now Minnesota he was induced by his slave to buy Harriet. Two children were born, one of them on the "Gypsy," during a steamboat trip in free territory. Surgeon Emmerson came back to Jefferson Barracks, bringing the Dred Scott family. He died in 1852. The Scotts passed to the possession, by sale as it was supposed, of John F. A. Sanford. Here was an unusual opportunity to test the Missouri Compromise, by which Congress had declared slavery should not exist north of parallel 36:30, except within the limits of Missouri. Not only had Scott and Harriet been taken into the free territory, but one of the children, Eliza, had been born there. In 1853 suit was brought in the St. Louis circuit court. The first decision freed the family. But Sanford took the case to the supreme
DRED SCOTT
33
SLAVERY AND AFTER
court which reversed the lower court. There was another trial in the St. Louis court. One of the charges was that Sanford had unlawfully laid hands on "the said Dred Scott, Harriet Scott, Eliza Scott and Lizzie Scott." Sanford won. By this time the interest of anti-slavery people in the East had been aroused. Money was supplied in considerable quantities to carry on the case. One news- paper account had it that enough was contributed to "buy a hundred slaves." The best lawyers in St. Louis were retained to carry the case to the United States Supreme Court on a writ of error. On the side of the Scotts, Montgomery Blair, afterwards postmaster general, headed the counsel. Senator Henry S. Geyer and others represented Sanford.
The main question was whether the Missouri Compromise . was in accord- ance with the Constitution of the United States; whether Congress had the power to provide as follows: "That in all that territory ceded by France to the United States under the name of Louisiana which lies north of 36 degrees and 30 minutes north latitude, not included within the limits of the State contemplated by this act, slavery and involuntary servitude, otherwise than the punishment of crimes whereof the parties shall have been duly convicted, shall be and is hereby forever prohibited."
The case was argued in 1854. The Supreme Court decided against Dred Scott. But it held up the decision over a year. Horace Greeley, in his "American Conflict," said the delay was deliberate on the part of the majority, the purpose being to postpone the announcement until after the Presidential election of 1856. He added, "It is quite probable that its action in the premises, if made public at the time originally intended, would have reversed the issue in that Presidential election." Buchanan defeated Fremont, who carried a number of Northern States.
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.