The Underground Railroad from Slavery to Freedom: A comprehensive history

by Wilbur Henry Siebert

Through his denunciation of the law, his justification of those who aided the fugitive, and his recognition of the power of the fugitive's appeal, Sumner may be said to have become the representative and spokesman in the Senate of fugitive slaves and their Northern friends. How closely he identified himself with their cause is indicated by his determined efforts to secure the repeal of the obnoxious law, efforts repeated in July, 1854, and February, 1855, and carried by him to a successful issue in 1864.[944]

The action of public sentiment in the Northern states, which, he said, palsied the Fugitive Slave Law, was accompanied, during the decade from 1850 to 1860, by tokens of open violation of the law, defiant resolutions adopted by mass-meetings, and obstructional legislation passed by various free states; the spirit of nullification was thus aroused in many localities north of Mason and Dixon's line. The demands of character and humanity had long been obeyed by many men and women for whom any compromise involving the continuance in slavery of their fellow-men was a dreadful crime. These persons had refused to yield obedience to that statute which in their belief was subversive of the "higher law." Under the action of causes that have been discussed in earlier chapters, the sentiment that had developed the secret and illicit traffic along numerous lines of the Underground Railroad became more obtrusive and less regardful of congressional legislation. Besides participating in the public and legitimate activities of anti-slavery societies, and sharing in the organization of the Liberty and Free Soil parties, the abolitionists formed vigilance committees in various communities, the avowed purpose of which was to thwart the Fugitive Slave Act; and while these bodies held their meetings in secret and guarded the names of their members, it was often a matter of common report in those localities that certain well-known men of the neighborhood were active members. It was the Vigilance Committee of Syracuse that rescued Jerry McHenry from custody of the officers, in the presence of a great crowd; and the leaders in the affair, Gerrit Smith, Charles A. Wheaton and Samuel J. May, far from seeking oblivion, published an acknowledgment in the newspapers that they had aided all they could in the rescue of Jerry, were ready for trial, and would rest their defence on the "unconstitutionality and extreme wickedness" of the Fugitive Slave Law. None of these men were tried. The citizens of Onondaga County held a mass-convention in approval of the liberation of the negro, and unanimously adopted resolutions justifying and applauding the act.[945]

From this time on till the outbreak of the Civil War bold and open opposition to the authority of the federal law is a purpose not to be mistaken or overlooked. The state reports of the Pennsylvania and Massachusetts Anti-Slavery societies boasted of the steadily increasing numbers of fugitives aided by abolitionists at many centres, and heaped reproaches on the judges and commissioners that gave decisions adverse to runaways.[946] Fugitive slave cases were stubbornly contested in the courts on the ground that the law of 1850 was unconstitutional. The series of cases in which the law was subjected to the penetrating criticism of some of the ablest lawyers in the country is a long and interesting one; nothing in the history of the times more clearly shows the effect of the Underground Railroad in rousing ever-widening indignation at the hunt for fugitives.[947]

In the spring of 1854 two cases, one in Wisconsin and the other in Massachusetts, served to show the pitch to which the spirit of resistance among the most responsible citizens could rise in both the West and the East. On March 10, 1854, Joshua Glover, who was living near Racine, Wisconsin, was arrested as a fugitive slave by United States deputy marshals and the claimant, B. W. Garland, of St. Louis. After a severe struggle Glover was knocked down, placed in a wagon, driven to Milwaukee, and there lodged in jail. The news of the capture reached Racine in a few hours, and a popular meeting, larger than ever before held in the town, assembled on the court-house square to take action. At this meeting it was resolved to secure Glover a fair trial in Wisconsin; and it was voted, "That inasmuch as the Senate of the United States has repealed all compromises adopted by the Congress of the United States,[948] we, as citizens of Wisconsin, are justified in declaring, and do declare, the slave-catching law of 1850 disgraceful and also repealed." This was but one of many nullifying resolutions adopted about this time in various parts of the North, although most of the resolutions were somewhat less extreme in statement.[949]

At an afternoon meeting the deliberations ended in the decision of about a hundred citizens of Racine to take boat at once for Milwaukee. Upon arrival this delegation found the latter city in an uproar. A meeting of five thousand persons had already appointed a Committee of Vigilance to see that Glover had a fair trial, and this demonstration had led the authorities to call for the local militia to preserve order; but the militia did not appear. Such was now the temper of the crowd that it could be satisfied with nothing less than the immediate release of the prisoner. Glover was therefore demanded, but, as he was not forthcoming, the jail door was battered in, the negro brought out, placed in a wagon and forwarded to Canada by the Underground Railroad. The act of the rescuers was indorsed by the public sentiment of the state; with but few exceptions justified by the newspapers. Among the resolutions passed by mass-meetings held to take action against the Kansas-Nebraska bill, then pending in Congress, there was usually one thanking the rescuers for their conduct.

Remembering with satisfaction the deliverance of Jerry, a special convention assembled at Syracuse, New York, on March 22, 1854, and sent a congratulatory message to Milwaukee and Racine, offering to join them and all the sister cities of the North in a "holy confederacy, which ... shall swear that no broken-hearted fugitive shall ever again be consigned to slavery from the North, under the accursed act of 1850." A state convention met at Milwaukee, April 13 and 14, which was attended by delegates from all the populated districts. This assembly adopted a number of resolutions, several of which were quotations from the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions, including the famous one declaring "that, as in other cases of compact among parties having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of infractions, as of the mode and measure of redress." The Fugitive Slave Law was pronounced unconstitutional, and aid was promised the rescuers of Glover.

It is interesting to note that at this convention a state league was also formed, which has been called a forerunner of the Republican party in Wisconsin.

The Supreme Court of the state was soon given an opportunity to place itself on record with regard to the validity of the federal law. The case of one of the rescuers, Sherman M. Booth, came before it for decision. In passing judgment the court showed itself to be in line with the sentiment of the state, for it declared the act of 1850 unconstitutional; the principal grounds assigned were the absence of congressional power to legislate on the subject of the surrender of fugitives from labor, the improper conferring of judicial authority upon commissioners, and the viciousness of depriving a person of his liberty 'without due process of law.' Booth was, of course, discharged. But the matter was not dropped here. The United States District Court now obtained jurisdiction of the case; the jury found the prisoner guilty, and the judge sentenced him to imprisonment for one month, and to pay a fine of $1,000 and the costs of prosecution—in all, $1,451. The news of the conviction caused great excitement; denunciatory meetings were again the order of the day; and money was subscribed for the further defence of the prisoners. Some of the resolutions passed at this time did not stop short of asserting the readiness of the people to maintain their cause with the bayonet. Application was made to the Supreme Court of the state for a writ of habeas corpus, and Booth, together with a colleague, Rycraft, was again released.

The controversy now came before the Supreme Court at Washington, and on petition of the Attorney-General a writ of error was granted by that tribunal to be served on the Supreme Court of Wisconsin. The state court, however, refused to obey this writ. At length, on March 6, 1857, the United States Supreme Court assumed jurisdiction, in an unusual way, acting on the basis of a certified copy of proceedings, which did not appear upon the official record. At the December term, 1858, the judgment of the Supreme Court of Wisconsin was reversed, and that court was directed to return Booth into federal custody. Again the state court would not yield obedience. Booth was therefore rearrested by the United States marshal, March 1, 1860, and was confined in the custom-house at Milwaukee. The friends of the prisoner once more applied to the state Supreme Court for a writ of habeas corpus, but, failing to get it on account of a change in the personnel of the court, they did not rest until they had rescued him from the government prison five months later. On October 8 Booth was again arrested, and this time he remained in prison until, under the pressure brought to bear upon President Buchanan, he was pardoned just before Lincoln's inauguration.[950]

Notwithstanding the obstinacy of the highest state court in refusing to carry out the commands of the highest United States court, the decision rendered by the latter in Booth's case was of great importance. It clearly defined for the first time the limits of state authority and disclosed the powerlessness of state courts to override the jurisdiction granted to the federal courts by the Constitution of the United States.