Chapter VI. Slavery in Illinois As Affecting Settlement.
Slavery, as well as indentured servitude, existed in Illinois as late as 1845,[491] and the “Black Laws” of the state were repealed on February 7, 1865.[492] From 1787 until years after 1830 the slavery question was an unsettled one. In addition to the arguments for or against the institution that were used everywhere, the pro-slavery party in Illinois asserted that as the Ordinance of 1787 guaranteed to the French inhabitants their property, the French could hold slaves, and that as all citizens of a state had equal rights other persons in Illinois could hold slaves. The reply was that the Ordinance plainly forbade slavery.[493]
Whatever the merits of the argument, slavery did exist in Illinois. The fear of the French that they might lose their slaves, and the desire to attract slaveholders to Illinois, led to determined and repeated efforts to legalize slavery. Early in 1796 a petition was sent from Kaskaskia to Congress, praying that the anti-slavery article in the Ordinance of 1787 might be either repealed or so altered as to permit the introduction of slaves from the original states or elsewhere into the country of Illinois, that a law might be enacted permitting the introduction of such slaves as servants for life, and that it might be declared [pg 177] for what period the children of such servants should serve the masters of their parents. This petition was signed by four men, including some of the largest landowners in Illinois, but as the petition, while purporting to come from Illinois alone, concerned the entire Northwest Territory, as there was no indication that the four petitioners represented Illinois sentiment, and as the congressional committee was informed that many of the inhabitants of the territory did not desire the proposed change, the prayer of the petition was denied.[494]
In 1800, two hundred and sixty-eight inhabitants of Illinois, chiefly French, petitioned Congress to repeal the anti-slavery provision of the Ordinance, stating that many of the inhabitants were crossing the Mississippi with their slaves. The petition was not considered.[495] A similar request, presented late in 1802, was twice reported upon by committees, one report (Randolph's) declaring that the growth of Ohio proved that a lack of slavery would not seriously retard settlement, while the other was in favor of suspending the anti-slavery article for ten years, the male descendants of immigrating slaves to be free at the age of twenty-five years, and the females at twenty-one.[496] In 1805 a majority of the members of the respective houses of the Indiana legislature petitioned for the repeal of the anti-slavery article, and this petition was closely followed by a memorial from Illinois expressing the hope that the general government would not pass unnoticed the act of the last legislature authorizing the importation of slaves into the territory. It violated the Ordinance, the memorialists declared, and although they desired slavery they [pg 178] professed themselves to be law-abiding.[497] A committee report on the petition and memorial recommended that permission to import slaves into Indiana (then including Illinois) for ten years be granted, in order that the evil effects of slavery might be mitigated by its dispersion, but no legislation resulted from the report,[498] and the next year petitioning was resumed. The legislature sent resolutions asking for the suspension of the anti-slavery article, and elaborating the argument for such suspension. A committee of which the territorial delegate from Indiana was chairman, presented a favorable report.[499]
In September, 1807, a petition for the suspension of the anti-slavery article was sent to Congress from the Indiana legislature. It was signed by Jesse B. Thomas, later author of the Missouri Compromise, but then Speaker of the territorial House of Representatives, and resident in what was to become the State of Indiana, and by the president pro tem. of the Legislative Council. Action in committee was adverse,[500] Congress being then busied with the question of the abolition of the slave trade.
During the territorial period in Illinois (1809-1818), the slavery question was not much agitated. The Constitution of 1818 provided that slaves could not be thereafter brought into the State, except such as should be brought under contract to labor at the Saline Creek salt works, said contract to be limited to one year, although renewable, and the proviso to be void after 1825, but existing slavery was not abolished, and existing indentures—and some were [pg 179] for ninety-nine years[501]—should be carried out. Male children of slaves or indentured servants should be free at the age of twenty-one and females at eighteen.[502] In Congress, as has been seen, Tallmadge, of New York, objected to admitting Illinois before she abolished slavery, but his objection was ineffectual.
In March, 1819, a slave code was enacted. Any black or mulatto coming into the State was required to file with the clerk of a circuit court a certificate of freedom. Slaves should not be brought into the state for the purpose of emancipation. Resident negroes, other than slaves and indentured servants, must file certificates of freedom. Slaves were to be whipped instead of fined, thirty-nine stripes being the maximum number that might be inflicted. Contracts with slaves were void. Not more than two slaves should meet together without written permission from their masters. Any master emancipating his slaves must give a bond of $1000 per head that such emancipated slaves should not become public charges, failure to give such a bond being punishable by a fine of $200 per head. Colored people must present passes when traveling.[503]
Stringent as was the code of 1819, it was of a type that was common in the slave states. Its passage may have kept some negroes, both free and slave, from coming into the state upon their own initiative without certificates of freedom. From 1810 to 1820 the number of slaves in Illinois increased from 168 to 917, Illinois being the only state north of Mason and Dixon's line having an increase in the number of slaves during the decade, although in the Territory of Missouri, during this time, the number increased from about 3000 to over 10,200. At the same [pg 180] time the number of free blacks in Illinois decreased from about 600 to some 450, while they increased in Indiana from nearly 400 to over 1200. Of the slaves in Illinois in 1820 precisely 500 were in the counties of Gallatin and Randolph, the former being the center of the salt-making industry, and the latter the seat of the early French settlement at Kaskaskia.[504]
Whether the anti-slavery clause of the Ordinance of 1787 freed the slaves of the old French settlers was long a disputed question, and it is certain that a strict construction of the Illinois Constitution of 1818 made further importation of slaves illegal. Many slave-owners passed through southern Illinois to Missouri, because the main road for emigration by land to that territory crossed the Ohio River at Shawneetown. Many of the slaves who produced the large increase in the number of slaves in Missouri from 1810 to 1820 must have gone over this route. In 1820 more than one-seventh of the population of Missouri was slave.[505] The people of Illinois could not fail to see that they were losing a certain class of emigrants—the prosperous slaveholders. The loss became greater as the likelihood of Missouri's admittance as a slave state increased. As early as 1820 there was a rumor of the formation of a party in Illinois to introduce slavery into the state in a legal manner.[506] The next year an editorial in a leading newspaper of Illinois said: “Will the admission of slavery in a new state tend to increase its population?—is a question which has been of late much discussed both within and without this state. It has been contended that its admission would induce the emigration of citizens of states as well where slavery was, as where it [pg 181] was not tolerated—that while it would attract the attention of the wealthy southern planter, it would not deter the industrious northern farmer.” The editor cites Ohio and Kentucky as proof against the above argument. In 1810 Ohio had a population, in round numbers, of 230,700 and Kentucky one of 406,500; in 1820 Ohio had 581,400, while Kentucky had 563,300, giving a difference in favor of Ohio of over 18,000; and an excess of gain during the decade, in favor of Ohio, of 93,847. “We are willing to take into consideration the unsettled titles of land in the last-mentioned state [Kentucky], and admit that in this respect Ohio had a decided advantage—we will therefore deduct the fraction of 93,847, believing it equivalent to the loss of population from this cause—there is still a difference of 100,000.”[507] The editor's figures for 1810 were correct and those for 1820 were approximately so. It is also true, and in line with his argument, that during the same decade Indiana showed an increase from 24,500 to 147,200, while Missouri's increase was from 20,800 to 66,500; the increase in Illinois being between the two in proportion of increase—from 12,282 to 55,162.[508] The passing of the slaveholders to Missouri continued and the discussion of the slavery question became animated.
In the gubernatorial election of 1822 there were four candidates for governor, two being anti-slavery and two pro-slavery in belief. Edward Coles, from Virginia, an anti-slavery man, was elected by a plurality of but a few votes. His election was due to a division in the ranks of the opposite party, as is shown by the fact that the pro-slavery party polled over 5300 votes, while the anti-slavery party polled only some 3300.[509] In his message of December [pg 182] 5, 1822, Governor Coles strongly urged the passage of a law to prevent kidnapping[510]—then a regular trade. This was referred to a select committee which reported as follows: “Your committee have carefully examined the laws upon the subject, and with deep regret announce their incapability of devising a more effectual plan than the one already prescribed by law for the suppression of such infamous crimes. It is believed that the benevolent views of the executive and the benign purposes of the statutes can only be realized by the redoubled diligence of our grand juries and our magistrates, aided by the well-directed support of all just and good men.”[511] The legislature was politically opposed to the governor, and the committee's report sounds like the baldest irony. With the report was presented a scheme for introducing slavery into the state,[512] a scheme which eventually led to the vote of 1824.[513]
The Constitution of Illinois provided that upon the vote of two-thirds of the members of each house of the legislature, the question of calling a convention for the revision of the Constitution should be submitted to the people. For calling a convention only a majority vote from the people was necessary. This method of procedure the pro-slavery party determined upon. The two-thirds in favor of the project could be secured without difficulty in the senate, but in the house the desperate expedient of [pg 183] reconsidering the right of a member to a contested seat and seating his opponent was resorted to.[514] This being done the resolution to submit the question of a constitutional convention to the people was passed by a bare two-thirds vote in each house.[515] Of the eighteen men who voted against the resolution, eleven were natives of southern states, two of New York, two of Connecticut, one of Massachusetts, one of Vermont, and one of Sweden. There were some northern men who voted in favor of the resolution.[516]
The campaign resulting from the passage of the convention resolution was waged for eighteen months with great vigor. Press and pulpit were actively employed.[517] A large anti-slavery society was formed in Morgan county,[518] and it was in all probability one of many such organizations. In August, 1824, came the final vote, and the official count of the votes showed a majority of 1668 against calling a constitutional convention.[519]
It is noteworthy that in this struggle the governor of the state was an anti-slavery southerner; eleven of the eighteen anti-slavery men in the legislature were southern; the pro-slavery party, which polled 1971 more votes than its opponents in 1822, was defeated by 1668 votes in 1824. It is also true that of the leaders in the campaign some of the most noted were southern anti-slavery or northern pro-slavery men.
The history of settlement suggests several explanations for the votes of 1822 and 1824. The legislature which passed the convention resolution had not been chosen with the avowed purpose of doing so. Some designing politicians had such an object in view and secured the election of pro-slavery men by anti-slavery constituents. The number of such cases was not large, but as the resolution passed by the minimum vote they are important.[520] In 1822, however, there was almost without doubt a pro-slavery majority in the state, but it is improbable that there was a two-thirds majority. In the election of 1822, there were 8635 votes cast, while in that of 1824 there were 11,612 votes cast. This great increase indicates a large immigration. Immigration at this time was largely to the northern counties of the state, and it is a point of prime significance that each of the seven northern counties gave large majorities against the calling of the convention, [pg 185] and that without the vote of these seven counties the vote would have been 4523 for a convention and 4408 against a convention, thus changing the decision of the state. This vote of the northern counties can not be explained by an increased immigration from the north, because no such increase to any significant degree is discoverable. The admission of Missouri as a slave state would naturally lead pro-slavery emigrants to go to that state instead of to Illinois. Another event which tended to influence the vote in Illinois was the decision of Indiana against slavery, in the summer of 1823, in the midst of the campaign in Illinois.[521] The unjust action of the Illinois House of Representatives in unseating an anti-convention member was a powerful argument against the pro-slavery party.
In his message to the legislature, on November 16, 1824, Governor Coles said: “In the observations I had the honor to make to the last Legislature, I recommended that provision should be made for the abolition of the remnant of African slavery which still existed in this state. The full discussion of the principles and policy of personal slavery, which has taken place since that period, resulting in its rejection by the decided voice of the people, still more imperiously makes it my duty to call your attention in an especial manner to this subject, and earnestly to entreat you to make just and equitable provision for as speedy an abolition of this remnant of slavery, as may be deemed consistent with the rights and claims of the parties concerned.
“In close connection with this subject, is my former recommendation, to which I again solicit your attention, that the law as it respects those held in service should be rendered less severe, and more accordant with our political [pg 186] institutions and local situation; and that more severe penalties should be enacted against the unnatural crime of kidnapping, which then prevailed to a great extent and has since considerably increased, in consequence of the defects of the present law. Regarding the former, our laws in general are a mere transcript of those of the more southern states, where the great number of slaves makes it necessary for the safety of the whites, that the laws for their government, and concerning free blacks, should be very strict.—But, there being no such motive here, the necessity of such laws ceases, and consequently their injustice and cruelty are the more apparent. The latter are found every day more and more defective and inefficient; and kidnapping has now become a regular trade, which is carried on to a vast extent to the country bordering on the lower Mississippi, up the Red River, and to the West Indies. To put an immediate and effectual stop to this nefarious traffic, is the imperious duty of the Legislature.”[522]
The house of representatives referred the governor's remarks concerning kidnapping to a select committee. A bill was reported, but after being weakened by amendments it was tabled.[523] In his message in 1826 the governor renewed his recommendations,[524] and a section of the criminal code of January, 1827, provided that kidnapping should be punishable by confinement in the penitentiary for not less than one nor more than seven years.[525] An act of January, 1825, provided that anyone who had failed to give the bond required by the black code of 1819 from [pg 187] those who emancipated slaves, should be released from any verdict or judgment arising from such failure, upon indemnifying the county for any money expended for the relief of the freedmen.[526] By an act of 1829 relating to slaves, whites were not to marry blacks, slaves were not to come to the state in order to be free, and runaway slaves should be advertised in the newspapers of the state.[527] The number of slaves in Illinois decreased after 1820. In 1820 there were 917 slaves in the state; in 1830, 747; in 1840, 331,[528] and before the next census slavery in the state was abolished.
The vote of 1824 against calling a constitutional convention marked the end of the slavery question as an obstacle to the immigration of an anti-slavery population. Slaveholders, never a large proportion of the immigrants, practically ceased to come to the state, while the immigration of anti-slavery southerners continued, and the aggregate immigration greatly increased. The population of the state was 55,162 in 1820; 72,817, in 1825; and 157,445 in 1830. Missouri, more populous than Illinois by more than 11,000 in 1820, was less so by 17,000 in 1830.[529] Governor Coles, in his message of January 3, 1826, said: “The tide of emigration, which had been for several years checked by various causes, both general and local, has again set in, and has afforded a greater accession of population during the past, than it had for the three preceding years. This addition to our population and wealth has given a new impulse to the industry and enterprise of our citizens, and has sensibly animated the face of our country. And as the causes which have impeded the [pg 188] prosperity of the state are daily diminishing, and the inducements to emigration are increasing, we may confidently anticipate a more steady and rapid augmentation of its population and resources.”[530]
From 1820 to 1825 the increase of population in Illinois was 17,655, while from 1825 to 1830 it was 84,628. Contemporaries have left some interesting records of immigration during the latter five years—a period in which the population of the state increased more than 116 per cent. Immigration had begun to be brisk by the fall of 1824. At the general election in August, 1820, there were 1132 votes cast in Madison county, while at a similar election in August, 1824, there were 3223 votes cast in the same territory, Madison county having been divided into Madison, Pike, Fulton, Sangamon, Morgan and Greene counties. A Madison county newspaper said: “That country bordering on the Illinois River is populating at this time more rapidly than at any former period. Family wagons with emigrants are daily passing this place [Edwardsville], on their way thither.”[531] During the five weeks ending October 28, 1825, about two hundred and fifty wagons, with an average of five persons to each, passed through Vandalia, bound chiefly for the Sangamo country.[532] The unsettled condition of the slavery question from 1820 to August, 1824, is given as the cause of the slight increase in population during that period, and the settlement of the question is thought to have been a chief cause for the increase after 1824.[533] It must not be supposed, however, that any one cause excludes all others. The country as a whole had scarcely recovered from the great financial depression of 1819; [pg 189] Kentucky was in turmoil over her bank, land titles and old and new courts;[534] early in 1825 over 65,000 acres in a single county in Tennessee were advertised for sale for the delinquent taxes of 1824;[535] and in 1826 a great drought in North Carolina caused a marked emigration from that state.[536]
In 1829 emigration was great. Some forty English families from Yorkshire came by way of Canada and settled near Jacksonville, Illinois. They brought agricultural implements and some money.[537] The Kentucky Gazette lamented the fact that a large number of the best families of Lexington were removing to Illinois.[538] An Illinois newspaper reported: “The number of emigrants passing through our Town [Vandalia] this fall, is unusually great. During the last week the waggons and teams going to the north amounted to several hundred. At no previous period has our State encreased so rapidly, as it is now encreasing.”[539] Another editor estimated the annual increase in population from 1826 to 1829 at not less than 12,000[540]—a figure which was almost certainly too low. In 1830 a meeting of gentlemen from the counties of Hampshire and Hampden (Massachusetts) was held at Northampton to consider the expediency of forming a colony to remove to Illinois. After a discussion it was voted to adjourn to meet on the 10th of October at Warner's Coffee House in Southampton. Similar meetings were held at Pawtucket and Worcester.[541]
The immigration to Illinois was but part of a general westward movement. From Charleston, Virginia, we hear: “The tide of emigration through this place is rapid, and we believe, unprecedented. It is believed that not less than eight thousand individuals, since the 1st September last [written on November 6, 1829], have passed on this route. They are principally from the lower part of this state and South Carolina, bound for Indiana, Illinois, and Michigan.—They jog on, careless of the varying climate, and apparently without regret for the friends and the country they leave behind, seeking forests to fell, and a new country to settle.” The editor attributes this movement to the fact that slavery had rendered white labor disreputable.[542] Three thousand persons bound for the West arrived at Buffalo in one week and six thousand per week were reported as passing through Indianapolis, bound for the Wabash country alone.[543] The great northern tide was chiefly bound to Ohio and Michigan,[544] northern Illinois not being open to settlement. Five years after Detroit received three hundred arrivals per week, Chicago had about a dozen houses, besides Fort Dearborn. This was the Chicago of 1830.[545]