CHAPTER LXV.
Contents—Canada’s first step in civilization—Slavery in America—By whom introduced—False charge—Slavery in Canada—History—Imperial Acts—Legislation in Canada—The several clauses—In Lower Canada—Justice Osgood—Slavery at the Rebellion—Among the U. E. Loyalists—Those who held slaves—Descendants of the slaves—“A British slave”—“For sale”—“Indian slave”—Upper Canada’s Record—Compared with the States—Liberty—Why the United States abolished slavery—Honor to whom honor is due.
SLAVERY.
We devote a chapter to the subject of slavery, which may be appropriately noticed under advance of civilization. There can be no greater indication of a truly civilized people than a successful attempt to emancipate those in bondage. In this respect Upper Canada was very far in advance of the United States, and even of England herself.
The Americans have not unfrequently essayed to fasten the ignominy of this domestic institution upon the British nation, by asserting that it was the English that first brought slaves to the American continent. Supposing this to be true, it was the most pitiable attempt at excuse for continuing the accursed thing, after Britain had spent millions to abolish slavery in all her broad realm, that can possibly be imagined. But it is all untrue that slaves were first brought by the English. It was the Dutch, who found sale for them in Virginia. This was in 1620. “Shortly after the New England States adopted the ‘institution,’ the colonists and merchants introducing and controlling the whole trade, Massachusetts leading the way.” And with all the cry, for ever echoing in the North against the South, because of slavery; it was the Yankee owners of ships, sent out from Northern ports to engage in the world-condemned crime of the slave trade, that kept alive the worst feature of American slavery, until the celebrated military necessity of Lincoln, emancipated the Southern slaves.
The present generation of Canadians are almost ignorant of the fact that the “institution” of slavery once existed in Canada, both Lower and Upper. The proud and pleasing appellation, which Canada enjoyed for so many years, of a safe asylum for slaves, who had effected their escape from the United States, is in most cases alone known to have belonged to us. But the record of our young country is so honorable upon the question of slavery, that the fact that slaves did once breathe among us, casts no stigma upon the maple leaf, no single stain upon her virgin garments. The fact is, slavery could not live in Canada; much less grow. The leading principles which guided the settlers of the country were of too noble a nature to accept the monstrous system of human bondage as an appendage of the Colony. They felt the truthfulness of the words, not long before uttered by John Wesley, that slavery was the “sum of all villainies,” and knew they would be villains of the deepest dye to encourage it.
The history of slavery from the time Joseph was sold by his brothers into Egypt, by which it may be inferred that persons were already held in bondage, up to the present, is of no little interest; but it forms no part of our task to give even a sketch of it, except in relation to its existence in Canada.
In the year 1732, an Act was passed in the Imperial Parliament “for the more easy recovery of debts in His Majesty’s plantations and colonies in America,” by which “lands, houses, negroes, and other hereditaments and real estate, shall be liable to be taken by due process of law for any indebtedness.”
Another Imperial Act having reference to slavery in Canada, was passed so late as 1790. The Act is intituled “An Act for encouraging new settlers in His Majesty’s colonies and plantations in America.” Among other things it is provided that if any persons shall come to the West India Islands or the Province of Quebec, from United States, with the view of settling, it shall be lawful for such, having obtained a license from the Governor, to import among other things “any negroes” he may possess. Such was the law in all Canada when Upper Canada was erected into a distinct Province.
The first Session of Parliament in Upper Canada was naturally and necessarily occupied in arranging the machinery requisite for the government of the body public. The second Session witnessed legislation to secure defence of the country by organizing a militia body; and also upon two most important subjects having reference to moral principles, viz.: concerning marriages, and
“An Act to prevent the further introduction of slaves, and to limit the term of contract for servitude within this Province.”
“Whereas it is unjust that a people who enjoy freedom by law, should encourage the introduction of slaves, and whereas it is highly expedient to abolish slavery in this Province, so far as the same may gradually be done without violating private property; be it enacted by the King’s Most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Council and Assembly of the Province of Upper Canada,” &c. It is enacted “that from and after the passing of this Act, so much of a certain Act of the Parliament of Great Britain, entitled “An Act for encouraging new settlers,” &c., as may enable the Governor or Lieutenant-Governor of this Province, heretofore parcel of His Majesty’s Province of Quebec, to grant a license for importing into the same, any negro or negroes, shall be, and the same is hereby repealed; and that from and after the passing of this Act, it shall not be lawful for the Governor to grant a license for the importation of any negro or other person to be subjected to the condition of a slave, or to a bounden involuntary service for life, in any part of this Province, nor shall any negro, or other person who shall come, or be brought into the Province after the passing of this Act, be subject to the condition of a slave, or to such service as aforesaid, within this Province, nor shall any voluntary contract of service or indentures that may be entered into by any parties within this Province, after the passing of this Act, be binding upon them or either of them for a longer term than a term of nine years.”
The second clause provided that the owners of slaves, at the time within the Province, should be secured in their property and contracts already made should not be affected. But in the third clause it is declared that
“In order to prevent the continuation of slavery within this Province, be it enacted by the authority aforesaid, that immediately from and after the passing of this Act, every child that shall be born of a negro mother, or other woman subjected to such service as aforesaid, shall abide and remain with the master or mistress in whose service the mother shall be living at the time of such child’s birth, (unless such mother and child shall leave such service, by and with the consent of such master or mistress) and such master or mistress shall, and is hereby required to give proper nourishment and clothing to such child or children, and shall and may put such child or children to work, when he, she, or they shall be able so to do, and shall and may retain him or her in their service until every such child shall have obtained the age of 25 years, at which time shall be entitled to demand his or her discharge from, and shall be discharged by such master or mistress, from any further service. And to the end that the age of such child or children may be more easily ascertained, the master or mistress of the mother thereof, shall, and is hereby required, to cause the day of the birth of every such child as shall be born of a negro or other mother, subjected to the condition of a slave, in their service, as aforesaid, to be registered within three months after its birth, by the clerk of the parish, township or place wherein such master or mistress reside, which clerk shall be authorized to demand and receive the sum of one shilling for registering the same. And in case any master or mistress shall refuse or neglect to cause such register to be made within the time aforesaid, and shall be convicted thereof, either on his or her confession, or by the oath of one or more credible witnesses before any justice of the peace, he or she shall for such offence forfeit and pay the sum of £5 to the public stock of the district.
“And be it further enacted, that in case any master or mistress shall detain any such child born in their service, after the passing of this Act, under any pretence whatever, after such servant shall have attained the age of 25 years, except by virtue of a contract of service or indentures duly and voluntarily executed, after such discharge as aforesaid, it shall be for such servant to apply for a discharge to any justice of the peace,” and the party accused may be summoned to show cause why the servant is not discharged. The master failing to prove the servant under age, the justice is to discharge the same, and it was “provided always that in case any issue shall be born of such children during their infant servitude or after, such issue shall be entitled to all the rights and privileges of free-born subjects.”
“And be it further enacted, that whenever any master or mistress shall liberate or release any person subject to the condition of a slave from their service, they shall at the same time give good and sufficient security to the church or town wardens of the parish or township where they live, that the person so released by them shall not become chargeable to the same, or any other parish or township.” This act which reflects so much glory upon the Upper Canadian Legislators, was passed July 9, 1793. We thought our readers would prefer to see the act complete than any synopsis we might prepare.
To Robert Gray, then Solicitor-General, is Upper Canada primarily indebted for the above act. He was an earnest friend of the African race. He was lost in the schooner Speedy, on Lake Ontario.
Slavery in Lower Canada.—According to Garneau, in the year 1689, it was proposed to introduce negroes to the colony of France. But it was thought the climate would prove unsuitable. That slavery was, not long after introduced, seems certain, and that it “was legally recognized in Canada, is plain, from an ordinance of intendant Hocquart, dated 1736, regulating the manner of emancipating slaves in Canada.”—(Bell.)
There are extant several royal declarations respecting slaves in the colony, bearing dates, 1721, 1742, and 1745. At the Conquest there were slaves in the province; and slavery “then increased for an instant, only to disappear forever.” Slavery having continued to exist in Canada until the first decade of the present century. By a stipulation in the treaty of Montreal, the colonists were “to be allowed to retain their slaves.” Says Bell in Garneau’s history, “Sir L. H. Lafontaine in 1859, investigated this matter,” (respecting the existence of slaves in French Canada), and from the published reports of his enquiries, it appears that in 1799–1800, the citizens of Montreal presented requisitions to Parliament, tending to cause the Legislature to vindicate the rights of masters over their slaves. The applicants invoked in favor of their demand, an ordinance rendered by Jacques Roudat, 9th intendant, dated April 13, 1709, which edict was, they urged, in force when the definitive treaty of peace was signed, and by consequence formed part and parcel of the laws, usages, and customs, of Canada, recognized by the Act of Quebec. The bills, on the subject, were introduced, in 1800, 1801, and 1803; but none of them passed. Since that time no Local Legislation sanctioned this matter; and if the act of the Imperial Parliament of 1797, had the effect of abolishing slavery in the British plantations, these would, of course, include Canada. “But,” says Bell, “the act in question could have no such effect. It only enacted, that negroes could not be taken in execution as chattels, for the debts of their masters, as had previously been the case in His Majesty’s American Colonies.” It appears tolerably certain from the foregoing, that slaves were introduced by the French into Canada, about the beginning of the 18th century, and that at least in 1709 it was a recognized institution, by virtue of an edict issued by the intendant. And, when the country was conquered by Great Britain, the colonists were “allowed to retain their slaves.” In 1784, when Upper Canada was first settled, the number of slaves in Lower Canada according to census was 304.
When Upper Canada, in 1793, took the lead in the whole of Britain’s vast domain in legislating against slavery, Lower Canada continued to regard it without disfavour; and, even in Montreal, endeavoured to fix the chains of bondage more firmly upon the negro. But what the Provincial Legislature did not, although presented with the example set by Upper Canada, was done in a different way by Chief Justice Osgood, who in 1803, at Montreal, declared slavery inconsistent with the laws of the country, and gave freedom to the persons in that condition. And when the British Act of Emancipation was passed, in 1833, setting free the slaves in all parts of the Empire, there was no slaves in Canada, Upper or Lower. Thirty years previous had the evil been crushed in Lower Canada, and forty years before Upper Canada had declared that it was “highly expedient to abolish slavery,” and had enacted laws to secure its abolition.
At the time of the rebellion of 1776–83, slavery was not limited to the Southern States.
There were a good many held by the old Knickerbocker families, both amongst the loyalists and rebels. When the families both of English and Dutch nationality, came as refugees to Canada, there accompanied them a number of slaves. In many cases these slaves came of their own accord, would not be separated from their masters, with whom they always lived; upon whose land they had been born. Indeed, the attachment between these faithful blacks and their owners was frequently of the most enduring nature, and, as we shall see, in some cases, although made free, they would not leave their old places as domestics.
The Rev. Mr. Stuart in his memoir, says, in speaking of his removal to Canada; “My negroes, being personal property, I take with me, one of which being a young man, and capable of bearing arms, I have to give £100 security to send back a white prisoner in his stead.” Capt. Joseph Allan brought with him from New Jersey, after the war had ended, to Upper Canada, three slaves—Tom, Sam and Sal. The two men, some years after, ran away to Lower Canada. Their owner pursued them to Montreal, and searched for them for ten days; but failed to get them. He sold the female, Sal, with her child, to Silas Hill. This boy was afterwards sold to Abram Barker, who kept him until he became twenty-one, when he became free. Freedom did not suit him, as he became a worthless fellow. Major VanAlstine had slaves, whom he treated with patriarchal kindness, and who lived in great comfort in the old-fashioned Dutch cellar kitchen, in his home, in Fourth Town. The Bogarts and John Huyck also had slaves. Capt. Myers had slaves; one, Black Bet, would never leave him, but continued until his death, under the care of her old master.
Cartwright, Herkimer, and Everitt, each was the owner of slaves. And Powles Claus, of the Mohawk settlement, had two slaves.
Col. Clark speaks, in his memoirs of his mother’s death, in 1789, and of the funeral, when the negro Joe drove the favorite horses, Jolly and Bonny, before the sleigh, painted black. Again, Col. C. says: “After the Declaration of Independence, drovers used to come in with droves of horses, cattle, sheep and negroes, for the use of the troops, forts, and settlers in Canada, and my father purchased his four negroes, three males and one female, named Sue.” In 1812, she gladly returned to our family, having become old and decrepit. She died in our house at Fifteen-mile Creek, in 1814.
Sheriff Ruttan says, “My uncle brought two negro servants with him, who were very faithful, hard working fellows.” During the year of famine, they were sent from Adolphustown to Albany, “for four bushels of Indian corn; a dreadful hazardous journey through the forest, with no road, and the snow very deep. They executed this mission, and returned in safety.”
These slaves were generally faithful, good natured, and occasionally mischievous. It was the custom, in the first years of Canada, to place the ovens in the yard upon stakes, and they could be lifted off them. It is related that sometimes they would carry off slyly, the oven when filled with good things.
Sheriff Sherwood says: “In answer to your letter of yesterday, as regards slaves, I only recollect two or three which settled in the District of Johnstown; one in particular, named Cæsar Congo, owned by Captain Justus Sherwood, who came with his family in the same brigade of boats that my father and family did, and located about two miles above Prescott. They were the very first actual settlers. Well I remember Cæsar Congo, then a stout, strong young man, and who often took the late Justice Sherwood, of Toronto, and myself on his back to assist us along, while the boats were drawn up the rapids. Cæsar was sold to a half-pay officer named Bottom, who settled about six miles above Prescott, who, after a year’s service, gave Cæsar his freedom. Cæsar, soon after married suitably, and by his industry obtained a snug little place in the town of Brockville, where he lived many years, and died.”
Daniel Jones, father of Sir Daniel Jones, of Brockville, had a female slave, and there were a few others residing in the district of which I have no personal knowledge.
Squire Bleeker, of the Trent, had a slave called Ham. Abraham Cronk, of Sophiasburgh, bought a female slave from Mrs. Simpson, of Myers’ Creek, for $300. After a time, she returned to Mrs. Simpson, with whom she lived till her death. This female had a daughter, who grew up to be an unusually “smart girl.”
Nicholas Lazier had slaves. One, named Sal, was noted for her attachment to Methodism, and would go long distances to attend meetings. As a female slave, Black Betty was one of the first congregation, to which the first Methodist preacher in America preached at New York, so this woman was one of the first Methodists at the Bay, and in Upper Canada. John Cronk and she were the only Methodists in the Township for a long time.
Pryne, who lived a short distance above Bath, had two slaves. Col. Thompson also had some, and Lieut. McGinness, of Amherst Isle, likewise possessed them. Capt. Trumpour, of Adolphustown, had two negroes. Leavens, of Belleville, bought a female slave of Wallbridge, for $100. A son of hers was purchased by Captain McIntosh.
The Hon. Peter Russell, when Receiver-General, had a man and his wife as slaves, with their son and two daughters.
Samuel Sherwood, writing to a person at Kingston, from Thurlow, in Oct. 1793, says, “My negro boy, and Canadian boy have absented themselves last night without leave. I send Jim and two Indians in pursuit of them. I beg, if you can give any assistance, you will do me that service. McLean’s black woman is my boy’s mother, he may call to see her.”
We have before us the copy of an assignment made in 1824, by Eli Keeler, of Haldimand, Newcastle, to William Bell, of Thurlow, of a Mulatto boy, Tom, in which it is set forth, that the said boy has time unexpired to serve as the child of a female slave, namely, ten years, from the 29th Feb. 1824, according to the laws of the Province; for the sum of $75. Probably, this was the last slave in Canada whose service closed, 1835.
There are, at the present time, a good many of the descendants of the early Canadian slaves. Some of them have done badly, others again have made themselves respectable and happy. The Mink family are descended from an old slave that belonged to William Herkimer.
When made free, they, in many instances, preferred to remain in connection with their old masters, and even to this day, their children manifest a predilection for the name of their father’s master. In and about Belleville, may yet be found such as spoken of. Most, or all of these are descendants of “Black Bess” who, at different times, was in possession of the Wallbridge’s, Leaven’s, and McLellan.
In the Ottawa Citizen of 1867, appeared the following:
A British Slave.—An old negro appeared at the Court of Assize yesterday, in a case of Morris vs. Hennerson. He is 101 years of age, and was formerly a slave in Upper Canada, before the abolition of slavery in the British possessions. He fought through the American war in 1812, on the side of the British; was at the battles of Chippewa and Lundy’s Lane, and was wounded at Sacket’s Harbour. He is in full possession of all his faculties. He was born in New York State in 1766, and was the slave of a U. E. Loyalist, who brought him to Canada. He was brought to this city to prove the death of a person in 1803, and another in 1804.
It would seem odd enough at the present day to see the following advertisements in a Canadian journal. This appeared in the Gazette, Newark:
“For Sale.—A negro slave, 18 years of age, stout and healthy, has had the small pox, and is capable of service, either in house or out door. The terms will be made easy to the purchaser; and cash or new lands received in payment. Enquire of the Printer.
“Niagara, November 28th, 1802.”
“Indian Slave.—All persons are forbidden harboring, employing, or concealing my Indian slave, called Sal, as I am determined to prosecute any offender, to the utmost extremity of the law; and persons who may suffer her to remain on their premises for the space of half an hour, without my written consent, will be taken as offending, and dealt with according to law.
(Signed) Charles Fields.
Niagara, August 28th, 1802.”
“For Sale.—The negro man and woman, the property of Mrs. (widow) Clement. They have been bred to the business of a farm; will be sold on highly advantageous terms, for cash or lands. Apply to Mrs. Clement. Niagara, January 9th, 1802.”
We have seen that the record of Upper Canada with respect to the subject of human bondage is particularly bright and honorable. This Province, in its very infancy, took the lead in severing the fetters which a dark and penurious age had rivetted upon the bodies of the African. This blackest curse of the world, which the power of England assisted to create, and which her offspring, the United States, continued to perpetuate for so many years, was put aside by the young Province at the first; while, but a few years later, a Canadian Judge, of Lower Canada, declared slavery to be inconsistent with the laws of Canada. These are facts of which every Canadian may well be proud. It was no “military necessity” which caused the abolition of slavery in Canada. It was a question of right, which the Canadian Parliament experienced no difficulty in solving. How grand the spectacle! How noble the conduct, setting an example to the world! In striking contrast, behold the United States. Flaunting their flag of liberty before the gaze of the world, they cried “All men are born free and equal, with the right to pursue that course which will lead to happiness;” yet notwithstanding these principles, enunciated with so much boldness, and, year after year, proclaimed by wordy fourth of July orators; they continued, not only to hold slaves, but made the bonds tighter until oceans of blood had been shed, and the Union was almost destroyed—when it could not be saved with slavery, as Lincoln had declared he would wish to save it; when it became necessary to strike a blow, which the northern legions had been unable to deal the Southern Confederacy, then, and not until then, were the slaves declared to be free. Lincoln said he would save the Union with slavery, if he could, failing this, then he would enlist the African slave to assist in saving the Union, by giving them liberty. The Southern blacks owe their liberty to-day, to the almost superhuman courage of the people with whom they lived, who held them in bondage, not, it is true, because their masters wished to liberate them; but because they were unable to successfully combat the perfect flood of men that was poured against their northern borders, and which infested their sea-board with an unbroken circle of armed vessels, shutting them out from all means of carrying on the unequal combat. It was this heroic attitude that made it necessary for Lincoln to issue the famous proclamation. Let the freedman thank the exigency which made necessary the step which broke the back of the Confederacy, and thereby gave efficiency to the proclamation. It cannot be doubted that the great body of abolitionists were from the commencement of the war, anxious to secure the abolition of slavery; but they were impotent, their councils to the President were unheeded, their desires disregarded. The great mass of the Northerners had no sympathy with the poor slave, they only cared for the Union; and many of them were even dissatisfied that Lincoln should resort to the plan of freeing them in order to save the Union. It is abundantly easy, now to declare that, from the first the Washington Government was determined to abolish slavery—that, from the first, it was a war for, and against the life of that institution; but reading the events of the war, carefully scanning each page of its history, examining each line, studying every word; looking with an unbiassed eye upon the whole gigantic drama, it is submitted there is no reason for believing that the nation desired to free the slave at all; but, always excepting the Abolitionist, submitted to the necessity of setting the negro free, rather than sacrifice the Union, or, rather than be conquered by the South.
All honor then, to the U. E. Loyalists, in Parliament assembled, at the young capital of Newark—the representatives of the devoted band of refugees, who had been made such by rebels, who pretended to fight for “liberty,” who placed on record their interpretation of the word Freedom; that it meant not liberty to a certain class; but to all, irrespective of color. All honor to the noble Judge, who had the probity and moral courage to enunciate a doctrine that at once made every supposed slave in Lower Canada conscious of being a free man. This noble beginning in the Canadas was followed by events no less interesting. They became the asylum of the slave, who were not only sought after by their Southern masters, but who were chased to the very borders by Northerners themselves.