FOOTNOTES:

Anderson was recommitted to the Brantford Jail.[27]The case came to the knowledge of many in England. It was taken up by the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society and many persons of more or less note. An application was made to the Court of Queen's Bench of England for a writ of habeas corpus, notwithstanding the Upper Canadian decision, and while Anderson was in jail at Toronto, the court after anxious deliberation granted the writ[28]but it became unnecessary owing to further proceedings in Upper Canada.

In those days the decision of any Court or of any judge in habeas corpus proceedings was not final. An applicant might go from judge to judge, court to court[29]and the last applied to might grant the relief refused by all those previously applied to. A writ of habeas corpus was taken out from the other Common Law Court in Upper Canada, the Court of Common Pleas. This was argued in Hilary Term, 1861, and the court unanimously decided that the warrant of commitment was bad and that the court could not remand the prisoner to have it amended.[30]The prisoner was discharged. No other attempts were made to extradite him or any other escaped slave; and Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation put an end to any chance of such an attempt being ever repeated.[31]

FOOTNOTES:[1]The first Fugitive Slave Law was passed by the United States in 1793. Three years afterwards occurred an episode, little known and less commented upon, showing very dearly the views of George Washington on the subject of fugitive slaves, at least of those slaves who were his own.A slave girl of his escaped and made her way to Portsmouth, N. H.; Washington on discovering her place of refuge, wrote concerning her to Joseph Whipple the Collector at Portsmouth, November 28, 1796. The letter is still extant. It is of three full pages and was sold in London in 1877 for ten guineas. (Magazine of American History, Vol. 1, December, 1877, p. 759.) Charles Sumner had it in his hands when he made the speech reported in Charles Sumner'sWorks, Vol. III, p. 177. Washington in the letter described the fugitive and particularly expressed the desire of "her mistress" Mrs. Washington for her return to Alexandria. He feared public opinion in New Hampshire for he added."I do not mean by this request that such violent measure should be used as would excite a mob or riot which might be the case if she has adherents; or even uneasy sensations in the minds of well disposed citizens. Rather than either of these should happen, I would forego her services altogether and the example also which is of infinite more importance."In other words if the slave girl has no friends or "adherents" send her back to slavery—if she has and they would actively oppose her return, let her go—and even if it only be that "well-disposed citizens" disapprove of her capture and return let her remain free.[2]Whitney's first patent was 1784. His rights were firmly established in 1807.[3]Landon,Canada's Part in Freeing the Slave, Ontario Historical Society, Papers, etc. (1919), quoting Birney'sJames G. Birney and His Times, p. 435.Mr. Landon's paper is of great interest and value and I gladly avail myself of the permission to use it.[4]A fairly good account of the Underground Railroad will be found in William Still'sUnderground Railroad, Philadelphia, 1872, in W.H. Mitchell'sUnderground Railway, London, 1860; in W.H. Siebert'sUnderground Railway, New York, 1899, and in a number of other works on Slavery. Considerable space is given the subject in most works on Slavery.One branch of it ran from a point on the Ohio River, through Ohio and Michigan to Detroit; but there were many divagations, many termini, many stations; Oberlin was one of these. See Dr. A.M. Ross,Memoirs of a Reformer, Toronto, 1893, andMich. Hist. Coll., XVII, p. 248.[5]The Buxton Mission in the County of Kent is well known. The Wilberforce Colony in the County of Middlesex was founded by free Negroes but they had in mind to furnish homes for future refugees. See Mr. Fred Landon's account of this settlement in the recent (1918)Transactions of the London and Middlesex Hist. Soc., pp. 30-44. For an earlier account see A. Steward'sTwenty Years a Slave(Rochester, N.Y., 1857).[6]"The Kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force." There can be no doubt that the Southern Negro looked upon Canada as a paradise. I have heard a colored clergyman of high standing say that of his own personal knowledge dying slaves in the South not infrequently expressed a hope to meet their friends in Canada.[7]Souvenirs of the Past, by William Lewis Baby, Windsor, Ontario, 1896. Mr. Baby is a member of an old French-Canadian family of the highest repute for honor and public service. Charles Baby was the author's brother. The author lived with him and tells the story of his own knowledge. The quotations are from Mr. Baby's book.[8]As was done in the case of Solomon Mosely, spoken of infra, p.[9]I have not been able to verify other tales of attempted abduction to my satisfaction, there are, however, several stories which may be true.[10]Canadian Archives Sundries, U. C., 1819.[11]John Beverley Robinson was the son of Christopher Robinson mentioned above.[12]The same rule obtained in Lower Canada; (1827) re Joseph Fisher, 1 Stuart's L. C. Rep. 245.[13]This is the Act (1833), 3 Will IV, c. 7 (U. C.). This statute came forward as cap. 96 in theConsolidated Statutes of Upper Canada, 1859, but was repealed by an Act of (United) Canada (1860), 23 Vic. c. 91 (Can.).The Act of 1833 was drawn by Chief Justice Robinson and introduced by him into the Legislative Council of which he was Speaker—it was a "Government measure." Notice of bringing in the bill was given November 28, 1832; the bill brought in November 30; read the second time December 3 passed the committee of the whole on the fourth of December and was finally passed by the Council the following day. It reached the Legislative Assembly the same day where it was passed without opposition and received the Royal Assent February 13, 1833.[14]At the meeting were present His Excellency Sir John Colborne, K. C. B. Lieutenant Governor, the Hon. and Rev. John Strachan, D.D., Archdeacon of York, the Honorable Peter Robinson, the Honorable George Herchmer Markland, the Honorable Joseph Fells, and the Honorable John Elmsley. The Executive Council at that time was very much under the influence of the Chief Justice and Dr. Strachan, then Archdeacon afterwards the first Anglican Bishop of York or Toronto.[15]Robert Sympson Jameson an English barrister of the Middle Temple, a familiar friend of Coleridge and Southey and the husband of Anna Jameson of some literary note.The report is from theCanadian Archives, State J., p. 137.[16]The Executive Council on September 7th 1837 recommended his extradition. The following is a copy of the Proceedings:Executive Council Chamber at Toronto Thursday 7th September 1837Requisition for Solomon MoselyRead the Requisition of the Governor of the State of Kentucky and other documents relating to the surrender of Solomon Mosely a fugitive from the State of Kentucky charged with Horse stealing.Read also the Attorney General opinion thereon as follows:Attorney General's OfficeToronto6th September 1837Sir,I have the honor to report that in my opinion there is sufficient proof of the guilt of Solomon alias John Mosely a fugitive from the State of Kentucky charged with horse stealing in that Country—to Warrant His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor (with the advice of the Executive Council) to deliver him up upon the request made by the Governor of the State referred to.I have the honor to be &c(Signed)Cs Hagerman,Atty, GenJ Joseph Esq,Civil Secretary.The Council concur in the above opinion of the Attorney General and consider that the case comes within 3rd Wm 4 Ch 7 and therefore advise His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor to deliver up the Fugitive alluded to in the requisition of His Excellency the Governor of the State of Kentucky.—Can. Arch. State J. Upper Canada, p. 595.In a despatch from Head to Lord Glenelg, October 8, 1837, Can. Arch. 398, p. 149, Head says: "In a case brought before me only a few days previous to that which is the subject of this communication (i.e., the Jesse Happy case) I insisted on giving up to the Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (a slave) who in order to effect his escape had been guilty of stealing his Master's horse." It was suggested that the real object was to get him back to his Master—not to punish him for the crime. But the crime was perfectly proved and the Council followed the judicial opinion in the Thornton Blackburn case that as the black had been shown to have committed an offence clearly coming within the statute of 1833, they could not advise a course to be taken "different from that which should be pursued with respect to free white persons under the same circumstances." They, therefore, advised an order for extradition.[17]To his people he seems to have been known as "Hubbard Holmes" he is always called a "yellow man," whether mulatto, quadroon, octoroon or other does not appear.[18]The contemporary accounts of this transaction,e.g., in theChristian Guardianof Toronto, and theNiagara Chronicle, are not wholly consistent. The main facts are clear; although there is some doubt as to the time, the military guard were ordered to fire.[19]Present, Allen, Hon. Augustus Baldwin and Hon. William Henry Draper (afterwards Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, 1856, Chief Justice of the Province of Upper Canada, 1863, and President of the Court of Error and Appeal 1868 till his death, 1877).[20]Canadian Archives State J., p. 597.[21]Canadian Archives, G. 84, p. 277. The letter to Sir George Arthur isibid., G. 84, p. 275. The despatch from Lord Glenelg to Sir Francis Bond Head dated January 4, 1837, has endorsed on it a pencil memorandum "Jesse Happy has been liberated by Lieutenant Governor's command November 14, 1837,"ibid., G. 83, p. 238.[22]Concluded at Washington, August 9, 1842.[23]It was held in the Province of Upper Canada that the Act of 1833 was superseded by the Ashburton Treaty in respect to the United States, but that it remained in force with respect to other countries (Reg.v.Tubber, 1854, 1, P.R. 98). Since the treaty our government has refused to extradite where the offence charged is not included in the treaty. In re Laverne Beebe (1863), 3 P.R. 273—a case of burglary. The provisions of the treaty were brought into full effect in Canada (Upper and Lower) by the Canadian Statute of 1849, 12, Vic. c. 19; C.S.C. (1859), c. 89.[24]The Chief Justice Sir John Beverley Robinson, Mr. Justice McLean (afterwards Chief Justice of Upper Canada) and Mr. Justice Burns.[25]The seat of the Superior Courts in Toronto, the Palais de Justice of the Province.[26]Mr. Samuel B. Freeman Q.C., of Hamilton, a man of much natural eloquence, considerable knowledge of law and more of human nature; he was always ready and willing to take up the cause of one unjustly accused and was singularly successful in his defences. I have heard it said that it was Mr. M.C. Cameron, Q.C., who so addressed the gathering but he does not seem to have been concerned in the case in the Queen's Bench.[27]The case is reported in (1860) 20 U. Can. Q.B., pp. 124-123. The warrant is given at pp. 192, 193.[28]The case is reported in (1861) 3 Ellis & Ellis Reports, Queen's Bench, p. 487; 30, Law Jour., Q.B., p. 129; 7 Jurist N.S., p. 122; 3 Law Times, N.S., p. 622; 9 Weekly Rep., p. 255.It was owing to this decision that the statute was passed at Westminster (1862) 25, 26, Vic. c. 20, which by sec. 1 forbids the courts in England to issue a writ of habeas corpus into any British possession which has a court with the power to issue such writ. The Court was Lord Chief Justice Cockburn and Justices Crompton Hill and Blackburn, a very strong court. The Counsel for Anderson was the celebrated but ill-fated Edwin James. The writ was specially directed to the sheriff at Toronto, the sheriff at Brantford and the jail keeper at Brantford. Judgment was given January 15, 1861.[29]Common Law of course, not Chancery.[30]The court was composed of Chief Justice William Henry Draper, C.B., Mr. Justice Richards, afterwards Chief Justice successively of the Court of Common Pleas, of the Court of Queen's Bench and of the Supreme Court of Canada and Mr. Justice Hagarty, afterwards Chief Justice successively of the Court of Common Pleas, of the Court of King's Bench, and of Ontario.Mr. Freeman was assisted in this argument by Mr. M.C. Cameron, a lawyer of the highest standing professionally and otherwise, afterwards Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench and afterwards Counsel for the Crown on both arguments were Mr. Eccles, Q.C., a man of deservedly high reputation, and Robert Alexander Harrison, afterwards Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench, an exceedingly learned and accurate lawyer.The case in the Court of Common Pleas is reported in Vol. 11. Upper Can., C.P., pp. 1 sqq.[31]Canadian Archives, Sundries U.C., 1807.It would be unfair to the United States to say or suggest that all the flights for freedom were in the one direction. Very early trouble was experienced by Canadian owners of slaves from their running away to the United States. The following letter tells its own story. D.M. Erskine the British representative writing from New York, May 26, 1807, to Francis Gore, Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada, says:"I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th ult enclosing a Memorial presented to you by the Proprietors of Slaves in the Western District of the Province of Upper Canada."I regret equally with yourself the Inconvenience which His Majesty's subjects in Upper Canada experience from the Desertion of their slaves into the Territory of the United States, and of Persons bound to them for a term of years, as also of his Majesty's soldiers and sailors; but I fear no Representation to the Government of the United States will at present avail in checking the evils complained of, as I have frequently of late had occasion to apply to them for the Surrender of various Deserters under different circumstances and always without success."The answer that has been usually given, has been, 'That the Treaty between Great Britain & the United States which alone gave them the Power to surrender Deserters having expired, it was impossible for them to exercise such an authority without the Sanction of the Laws.'"I will however forward to His Majesty's Minister for Foreign Affairs the Memorial above mentioned in the Hope that some arrangements may be entered into to obviate in future the great Losses which are therein described."In theLife and Adventures of Wilson Benson, written by himself(Toronto, 1876), is found the following, pp. 34-36:"In 1849 I shipped on the schooner Rose of Milton, Capt. Hamilton, cruising on Lakes Ontario and Erie. In one trip to the town of Erie, Pennsylvania, for a cargo of coal, while lying at the dock, a diminutive negro man, with a white beard, came on board the vessel, and inquiried of me if this was a British vessel. On being informed that it was, he desired to be secreted, stating that he was a runaway slave, and that his pursuers were on his track. I at once secreted him in a closet which served as a store-room for vegetables, &c., and as we were almost ready to set sail, I did not discover his presence to either Captain or crew until we were some distance out on the lake. When he appeared, Capt. Hamilton inquired of me where I had obtained 'that child,' and on being informed, expressed some anxiety, as we were liable to be captured had we been followed by a steamer. As it was, he merely looked up at the rigging, and exclaimed, 'Blow, breezes, blow!' The negro, who knew no other name than 'Sambo' we brought to Toronto. On one occasion, when I offered him some molasses, he shook his head and made grimaces expressive of disgust. He informed me that the slaves employed on the sugar plantations, when beaten by their masters, in order to obtain an indirect revenge, spat in the syrup, and committed other filthy things as an imaginary punishment upon the whites. I frequently saw Sambo in Toronto, and many times he expressed thankfulness to me for his deliverance. I may here mention that shortly after the arrival of Sambo on board the Rose of Milton at Erie, two suspicious-looking men, dressed in plain clothes, came aboard and paced up and down the deck several times, and as all the crew were absent at the time, I felt some apprehenson for the safety of the poor fugitive; but seeing nothing of a suspicious appearance, and the almost entire absence of the crew, they sauntered away. I made several other trips up and down the lakes during that summer on the same vessel."

[1]The first Fugitive Slave Law was passed by the United States in 1793. Three years afterwards occurred an episode, little known and less commented upon, showing very dearly the views of George Washington on the subject of fugitive slaves, at least of those slaves who were his own.A slave girl of his escaped and made her way to Portsmouth, N. H.; Washington on discovering her place of refuge, wrote concerning her to Joseph Whipple the Collector at Portsmouth, November 28, 1796. The letter is still extant. It is of three full pages and was sold in London in 1877 for ten guineas. (Magazine of American History, Vol. 1, December, 1877, p. 759.) Charles Sumner had it in his hands when he made the speech reported in Charles Sumner'sWorks, Vol. III, p. 177. Washington in the letter described the fugitive and particularly expressed the desire of "her mistress" Mrs. Washington for her return to Alexandria. He feared public opinion in New Hampshire for he added."I do not mean by this request that such violent measure should be used as would excite a mob or riot which might be the case if she has adherents; or even uneasy sensations in the minds of well disposed citizens. Rather than either of these should happen, I would forego her services altogether and the example also which is of infinite more importance."In other words if the slave girl has no friends or "adherents" send her back to slavery—if she has and they would actively oppose her return, let her go—and even if it only be that "well-disposed citizens" disapprove of her capture and return let her remain free.

A slave girl of his escaped and made her way to Portsmouth, N. H.; Washington on discovering her place of refuge, wrote concerning her to Joseph Whipple the Collector at Portsmouth, November 28, 1796. The letter is still extant. It is of three full pages and was sold in London in 1877 for ten guineas. (Magazine of American History, Vol. 1, December, 1877, p. 759.) Charles Sumner had it in his hands when he made the speech reported in Charles Sumner'sWorks, Vol. III, p. 177. Washington in the letter described the fugitive and particularly expressed the desire of "her mistress" Mrs. Washington for her return to Alexandria. He feared public opinion in New Hampshire for he added.

"I do not mean by this request that such violent measure should be used as would excite a mob or riot which might be the case if she has adherents; or even uneasy sensations in the minds of well disposed citizens. Rather than either of these should happen, I would forego her services altogether and the example also which is of infinite more importance."

In other words if the slave girl has no friends or "adherents" send her back to slavery—if she has and they would actively oppose her return, let her go—and even if it only be that "well-disposed citizens" disapprove of her capture and return let her remain free.

[2]Whitney's first patent was 1784. His rights were firmly established in 1807.

[3]Landon,Canada's Part in Freeing the Slave, Ontario Historical Society, Papers, etc. (1919), quoting Birney'sJames G. Birney and His Times, p. 435.Mr. Landon's paper is of great interest and value and I gladly avail myself of the permission to use it.

[3]Landon,Canada's Part in Freeing the Slave, Ontario Historical Society, Papers, etc. (1919), quoting Birney'sJames G. Birney and His Times, p. 435.

Mr. Landon's paper is of great interest and value and I gladly avail myself of the permission to use it.

[4]A fairly good account of the Underground Railroad will be found in William Still'sUnderground Railroad, Philadelphia, 1872, in W.H. Mitchell'sUnderground Railway, London, 1860; in W.H. Siebert'sUnderground Railway, New York, 1899, and in a number of other works on Slavery. Considerable space is given the subject in most works on Slavery.One branch of it ran from a point on the Ohio River, through Ohio and Michigan to Detroit; but there were many divagations, many termini, many stations; Oberlin was one of these. See Dr. A.M. Ross,Memoirs of a Reformer, Toronto, 1893, andMich. Hist. Coll., XVII, p. 248.

One branch of it ran from a point on the Ohio River, through Ohio and Michigan to Detroit; but there were many divagations, many termini, many stations; Oberlin was one of these. See Dr. A.M. Ross,Memoirs of a Reformer, Toronto, 1893, andMich. Hist. Coll., XVII, p. 248.

[5]The Buxton Mission in the County of Kent is well known. The Wilberforce Colony in the County of Middlesex was founded by free Negroes but they had in mind to furnish homes for future refugees. See Mr. Fred Landon's account of this settlement in the recent (1918)Transactions of the London and Middlesex Hist. Soc., pp. 30-44. For an earlier account see A. Steward'sTwenty Years a Slave(Rochester, N.Y., 1857).

[6]"The Kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence and the violent take it by force." There can be no doubt that the Southern Negro looked upon Canada as a paradise. I have heard a colored clergyman of high standing say that of his own personal knowledge dying slaves in the South not infrequently expressed a hope to meet their friends in Canada.

[7]Souvenirs of the Past, by William Lewis Baby, Windsor, Ontario, 1896. Mr. Baby is a member of an old French-Canadian family of the highest repute for honor and public service. Charles Baby was the author's brother. The author lived with him and tells the story of his own knowledge. The quotations are from Mr. Baby's book.

[8]As was done in the case of Solomon Mosely, spoken of infra, p.

[9]I have not been able to verify other tales of attempted abduction to my satisfaction, there are, however, several stories which may be true.

[10]Canadian Archives Sundries, U. C., 1819.

[11]John Beverley Robinson was the son of Christopher Robinson mentioned above.

[12]The same rule obtained in Lower Canada; (1827) re Joseph Fisher, 1 Stuart's L. C. Rep. 245.

[13]This is the Act (1833), 3 Will IV, c. 7 (U. C.). This statute came forward as cap. 96 in theConsolidated Statutes of Upper Canada, 1859, but was repealed by an Act of (United) Canada (1860), 23 Vic. c. 91 (Can.).The Act of 1833 was drawn by Chief Justice Robinson and introduced by him into the Legislative Council of which he was Speaker—it was a "Government measure." Notice of bringing in the bill was given November 28, 1832; the bill brought in November 30; read the second time December 3 passed the committee of the whole on the fourth of December and was finally passed by the Council the following day. It reached the Legislative Assembly the same day where it was passed without opposition and received the Royal Assent February 13, 1833.

The Act of 1833 was drawn by Chief Justice Robinson and introduced by him into the Legislative Council of which he was Speaker—it was a "Government measure." Notice of bringing in the bill was given November 28, 1832; the bill brought in November 30; read the second time December 3 passed the committee of the whole on the fourth of December and was finally passed by the Council the following day. It reached the Legislative Assembly the same day where it was passed without opposition and received the Royal Assent February 13, 1833.

[14]At the meeting were present His Excellency Sir John Colborne, K. C. B. Lieutenant Governor, the Hon. and Rev. John Strachan, D.D., Archdeacon of York, the Honorable Peter Robinson, the Honorable George Herchmer Markland, the Honorable Joseph Fells, and the Honorable John Elmsley. The Executive Council at that time was very much under the influence of the Chief Justice and Dr. Strachan, then Archdeacon afterwards the first Anglican Bishop of York or Toronto.

[15]Robert Sympson Jameson an English barrister of the Middle Temple, a familiar friend of Coleridge and Southey and the husband of Anna Jameson of some literary note.The report is from theCanadian Archives, State J., p. 137.

[15]Robert Sympson Jameson an English barrister of the Middle Temple, a familiar friend of Coleridge and Southey and the husband of Anna Jameson of some literary note.

The report is from theCanadian Archives, State J., p. 137.

[16]The Executive Council on September 7th 1837 recommended his extradition. The following is a copy of the Proceedings:Executive Council Chamber at Toronto Thursday 7th September 1837Requisition for Solomon MoselyRead the Requisition of the Governor of the State of Kentucky and other documents relating to the surrender of Solomon Mosely a fugitive from the State of Kentucky charged with Horse stealing.Read also the Attorney General opinion thereon as follows:Attorney General's OfficeToronto6th September 1837Sir,I have the honor to report that in my opinion there is sufficient proof of the guilt of Solomon alias John Mosely a fugitive from the State of Kentucky charged with horse stealing in that Country—to Warrant His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor (with the advice of the Executive Council) to deliver him up upon the request made by the Governor of the State referred to.I have the honor to be &c(Signed)Cs Hagerman,Atty, GenJ Joseph Esq,Civil Secretary.The Council concur in the above opinion of the Attorney General and consider that the case comes within 3rd Wm 4 Ch 7 and therefore advise His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor to deliver up the Fugitive alluded to in the requisition of His Excellency the Governor of the State of Kentucky.—Can. Arch. State J. Upper Canada, p. 595.In a despatch from Head to Lord Glenelg, October 8, 1837, Can. Arch. 398, p. 149, Head says: "In a case brought before me only a few days previous to that which is the subject of this communication (i.e., the Jesse Happy case) I insisted on giving up to the Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (a slave) who in order to effect his escape had been guilty of stealing his Master's horse." It was suggested that the real object was to get him back to his Master—not to punish him for the crime. But the crime was perfectly proved and the Council followed the judicial opinion in the Thornton Blackburn case that as the black had been shown to have committed an offence clearly coming within the statute of 1833, they could not advise a course to be taken "different from that which should be pursued with respect to free white persons under the same circumstances." They, therefore, advised an order for extradition.

[16]The Executive Council on September 7th 1837 recommended his extradition. The following is a copy of the Proceedings:

Executive Council Chamber at Toronto Thursday 7th September 1837Requisition for Solomon MoselyRead the Requisition of the Governor of the State of Kentucky and other documents relating to the surrender of Solomon Mosely a fugitive from the State of Kentucky charged with Horse stealing.Read also the Attorney General opinion thereon as follows:Attorney General's OfficeToronto6th September 1837Sir,I have the honor to report that in my opinion there is sufficient proof of the guilt of Solomon alias John Mosely a fugitive from the State of Kentucky charged with horse stealing in that Country—to Warrant His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor (with the advice of the Executive Council) to deliver him up upon the request made by the Governor of the State referred to.I have the honor to be &c(Signed)Cs Hagerman,Atty, GenJ Joseph Esq,Civil Secretary.The Council concur in the above opinion of the Attorney General and consider that the case comes within 3rd Wm 4 Ch 7 and therefore advise His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor to deliver up the Fugitive alluded to in the requisition of His Excellency the Governor of the State of Kentucky.—Can. Arch. State J. Upper Canada, p. 595.

Executive Council Chamber at Toronto Thursday 7th September 1837

Requisition for Solomon Mosely

Read the Requisition of the Governor of the State of Kentucky and other documents relating to the surrender of Solomon Mosely a fugitive from the State of Kentucky charged with Horse stealing.

Read also the Attorney General opinion thereon as follows:

Attorney General's OfficeToronto6th September 1837

Sir,

I have the honor to report that in my opinion there is sufficient proof of the guilt of Solomon alias John Mosely a fugitive from the State of Kentucky charged with horse stealing in that Country—to Warrant His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor (with the advice of the Executive Council) to deliver him up upon the request made by the Governor of the State referred to.

I have the honor to be &c

(Signed)Cs Hagerman,Atty, Gen

J Joseph Esq,Civil Secretary.

The Council concur in the above opinion of the Attorney General and consider that the case comes within 3rd Wm 4 Ch 7 and therefore advise His Excellency the Lieutenant Governor to deliver up the Fugitive alluded to in the requisition of His Excellency the Governor of the State of Kentucky.

—Can. Arch. State J. Upper Canada, p. 595.

In a despatch from Head to Lord Glenelg, October 8, 1837, Can. Arch. 398, p. 149, Head says: "In a case brought before me only a few days previous to that which is the subject of this communication (i.e., the Jesse Happy case) I insisted on giving up to the Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky (a slave) who in order to effect his escape had been guilty of stealing his Master's horse." It was suggested that the real object was to get him back to his Master—not to punish him for the crime. But the crime was perfectly proved and the Council followed the judicial opinion in the Thornton Blackburn case that as the black had been shown to have committed an offence clearly coming within the statute of 1833, they could not advise a course to be taken "different from that which should be pursued with respect to free white persons under the same circumstances." They, therefore, advised an order for extradition.

[17]To his people he seems to have been known as "Hubbard Holmes" he is always called a "yellow man," whether mulatto, quadroon, octoroon or other does not appear.

[18]The contemporary accounts of this transaction,e.g., in theChristian Guardianof Toronto, and theNiagara Chronicle, are not wholly consistent. The main facts are clear; although there is some doubt as to the time, the military guard were ordered to fire.

[19]Present, Allen, Hon. Augustus Baldwin and Hon. William Henry Draper (afterwards Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, 1856, Chief Justice of the Province of Upper Canada, 1863, and President of the Court of Error and Appeal 1868 till his death, 1877).

[20]Canadian Archives State J., p. 597.

[21]Canadian Archives, G. 84, p. 277. The letter to Sir George Arthur isibid., G. 84, p. 275. The despatch from Lord Glenelg to Sir Francis Bond Head dated January 4, 1837, has endorsed on it a pencil memorandum "Jesse Happy has been liberated by Lieutenant Governor's command November 14, 1837,"ibid., G. 83, p. 238.

[22]Concluded at Washington, August 9, 1842.

[23]It was held in the Province of Upper Canada that the Act of 1833 was superseded by the Ashburton Treaty in respect to the United States, but that it remained in force with respect to other countries (Reg.v.Tubber, 1854, 1, P.R. 98). Since the treaty our government has refused to extradite where the offence charged is not included in the treaty. In re Laverne Beebe (1863), 3 P.R. 273—a case of burglary. The provisions of the treaty were brought into full effect in Canada (Upper and Lower) by the Canadian Statute of 1849, 12, Vic. c. 19; C.S.C. (1859), c. 89.

[24]The Chief Justice Sir John Beverley Robinson, Mr. Justice McLean (afterwards Chief Justice of Upper Canada) and Mr. Justice Burns.

[25]The seat of the Superior Courts in Toronto, the Palais de Justice of the Province.

[26]Mr. Samuel B. Freeman Q.C., of Hamilton, a man of much natural eloquence, considerable knowledge of law and more of human nature; he was always ready and willing to take up the cause of one unjustly accused and was singularly successful in his defences. I have heard it said that it was Mr. M.C. Cameron, Q.C., who so addressed the gathering but he does not seem to have been concerned in the case in the Queen's Bench.

[27]The case is reported in (1860) 20 U. Can. Q.B., pp. 124-123. The warrant is given at pp. 192, 193.

[28]The case is reported in (1861) 3 Ellis & Ellis Reports, Queen's Bench, p. 487; 30, Law Jour., Q.B., p. 129; 7 Jurist N.S., p. 122; 3 Law Times, N.S., p. 622; 9 Weekly Rep., p. 255.It was owing to this decision that the statute was passed at Westminster (1862) 25, 26, Vic. c. 20, which by sec. 1 forbids the courts in England to issue a writ of habeas corpus into any British possession which has a court with the power to issue such writ. The Court was Lord Chief Justice Cockburn and Justices Crompton Hill and Blackburn, a very strong court. The Counsel for Anderson was the celebrated but ill-fated Edwin James. The writ was specially directed to the sheriff at Toronto, the sheriff at Brantford and the jail keeper at Brantford. Judgment was given January 15, 1861.

[28]The case is reported in (1861) 3 Ellis & Ellis Reports, Queen's Bench, p. 487; 30, Law Jour., Q.B., p. 129; 7 Jurist N.S., p. 122; 3 Law Times, N.S., p. 622; 9 Weekly Rep., p. 255.

It was owing to this decision that the statute was passed at Westminster (1862) 25, 26, Vic. c. 20, which by sec. 1 forbids the courts in England to issue a writ of habeas corpus into any British possession which has a court with the power to issue such writ. The Court was Lord Chief Justice Cockburn and Justices Crompton Hill and Blackburn, a very strong court. The Counsel for Anderson was the celebrated but ill-fated Edwin James. The writ was specially directed to the sheriff at Toronto, the sheriff at Brantford and the jail keeper at Brantford. Judgment was given January 15, 1861.

[29]Common Law of course, not Chancery.

[30]The court was composed of Chief Justice William Henry Draper, C.B., Mr. Justice Richards, afterwards Chief Justice successively of the Court of Common Pleas, of the Court of Queen's Bench and of the Supreme Court of Canada and Mr. Justice Hagarty, afterwards Chief Justice successively of the Court of Common Pleas, of the Court of King's Bench, and of Ontario.Mr. Freeman was assisted in this argument by Mr. M.C. Cameron, a lawyer of the highest standing professionally and otherwise, afterwards Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench and afterwards Counsel for the Crown on both arguments were Mr. Eccles, Q.C., a man of deservedly high reputation, and Robert Alexander Harrison, afterwards Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench, an exceedingly learned and accurate lawyer.The case in the Court of Common Pleas is reported in Vol. 11. Upper Can., C.P., pp. 1 sqq.

Mr. Freeman was assisted in this argument by Mr. M.C. Cameron, a lawyer of the highest standing professionally and otherwise, afterwards Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench and afterwards Counsel for the Crown on both arguments were Mr. Eccles, Q.C., a man of deservedly high reputation, and Robert Alexander Harrison, afterwards Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench, an exceedingly learned and accurate lawyer.

The case in the Court of Common Pleas is reported in Vol. 11. Upper Can., C.P., pp. 1 sqq.

[31]Canadian Archives, Sundries U.C., 1807.It would be unfair to the United States to say or suggest that all the flights for freedom were in the one direction. Very early trouble was experienced by Canadian owners of slaves from their running away to the United States. The following letter tells its own story. D.M. Erskine the British representative writing from New York, May 26, 1807, to Francis Gore, Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada, says:"I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th ult enclosing a Memorial presented to you by the Proprietors of Slaves in the Western District of the Province of Upper Canada."I regret equally with yourself the Inconvenience which His Majesty's subjects in Upper Canada experience from the Desertion of their slaves into the Territory of the United States, and of Persons bound to them for a term of years, as also of his Majesty's soldiers and sailors; but I fear no Representation to the Government of the United States will at present avail in checking the evils complained of, as I have frequently of late had occasion to apply to them for the Surrender of various Deserters under different circumstances and always without success."The answer that has been usually given, has been, 'That the Treaty between Great Britain & the United States which alone gave them the Power to surrender Deserters having expired, it was impossible for them to exercise such an authority without the Sanction of the Laws.'"I will however forward to His Majesty's Minister for Foreign Affairs the Memorial above mentioned in the Hope that some arrangements may be entered into to obviate in future the great Losses which are therein described."In theLife and Adventures of Wilson Benson, written by himself(Toronto, 1876), is found the following, pp. 34-36:"In 1849 I shipped on the schooner Rose of Milton, Capt. Hamilton, cruising on Lakes Ontario and Erie. In one trip to the town of Erie, Pennsylvania, for a cargo of coal, while lying at the dock, a diminutive negro man, with a white beard, came on board the vessel, and inquiried of me if this was a British vessel. On being informed that it was, he desired to be secreted, stating that he was a runaway slave, and that his pursuers were on his track. I at once secreted him in a closet which served as a store-room for vegetables, &c., and as we were almost ready to set sail, I did not discover his presence to either Captain or crew until we were some distance out on the lake. When he appeared, Capt. Hamilton inquired of me where I had obtained 'that child,' and on being informed, expressed some anxiety, as we were liable to be captured had we been followed by a steamer. As it was, he merely looked up at the rigging, and exclaimed, 'Blow, breezes, blow!' The negro, who knew no other name than 'Sambo' we brought to Toronto. On one occasion, when I offered him some molasses, he shook his head and made grimaces expressive of disgust. He informed me that the slaves employed on the sugar plantations, when beaten by their masters, in order to obtain an indirect revenge, spat in the syrup, and committed other filthy things as an imaginary punishment upon the whites. I frequently saw Sambo in Toronto, and many times he expressed thankfulness to me for his deliverance. I may here mention that shortly after the arrival of Sambo on board the Rose of Milton at Erie, two suspicious-looking men, dressed in plain clothes, came aboard and paced up and down the deck several times, and as all the crew were absent at the time, I felt some apprehenson for the safety of the poor fugitive; but seeing nothing of a suspicious appearance, and the almost entire absence of the crew, they sauntered away. I made several other trips up and down the lakes during that summer on the same vessel."

[31]Canadian Archives, Sundries U.C., 1807.

It would be unfair to the United States to say or suggest that all the flights for freedom were in the one direction. Very early trouble was experienced by Canadian owners of slaves from their running away to the United States. The following letter tells its own story. D.M. Erskine the British representative writing from New York, May 26, 1807, to Francis Gore, Lieutenant Governor of Upper Canada, says:

"I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th ult enclosing a Memorial presented to you by the Proprietors of Slaves in the Western District of the Province of Upper Canada.

"I regret equally with yourself the Inconvenience which His Majesty's subjects in Upper Canada experience from the Desertion of their slaves into the Territory of the United States, and of Persons bound to them for a term of years, as also of his Majesty's soldiers and sailors; but I fear no Representation to the Government of the United States will at present avail in checking the evils complained of, as I have frequently of late had occasion to apply to them for the Surrender of various Deserters under different circumstances and always without success.

"The answer that has been usually given, has been, 'That the Treaty between Great Britain & the United States which alone gave them the Power to surrender Deserters having expired, it was impossible for them to exercise such an authority without the Sanction of the Laws.'

"I will however forward to His Majesty's Minister for Foreign Affairs the Memorial above mentioned in the Hope that some arrangements may be entered into to obviate in future the great Losses which are therein described."

In theLife and Adventures of Wilson Benson, written by himself(Toronto, 1876), is found the following, pp. 34-36:

"In 1849 I shipped on the schooner Rose of Milton, Capt. Hamilton, cruising on Lakes Ontario and Erie. In one trip to the town of Erie, Pennsylvania, for a cargo of coal, while lying at the dock, a diminutive negro man, with a white beard, came on board the vessel, and inquiried of me if this was a British vessel. On being informed that it was, he desired to be secreted, stating that he was a runaway slave, and that his pursuers were on his track. I at once secreted him in a closet which served as a store-room for vegetables, &c., and as we were almost ready to set sail, I did not discover his presence to either Captain or crew until we were some distance out on the lake. When he appeared, Capt. Hamilton inquired of me where I had obtained 'that child,' and on being informed, expressed some anxiety, as we were liable to be captured had we been followed by a steamer. As it was, he merely looked up at the rigging, and exclaimed, 'Blow, breezes, blow!' The negro, who knew no other name than 'Sambo' we brought to Toronto. On one occasion, when I offered him some molasses, he shook his head and made grimaces expressive of disgust. He informed me that the slaves employed on the sugar plantations, when beaten by their masters, in order to obtain an indirect revenge, spat in the syrup, and committed other filthy things as an imaginary punishment upon the whites. I frequently saw Sambo in Toronto, and many times he expressed thankfulness to me for his deliverance. I may here mention that shortly after the arrival of Sambo on board the Rose of Milton at Erie, two suspicious-looking men, dressed in plain clothes, came aboard and paced up and down the deck several times, and as all the crew were absent at the time, I felt some apprehenson for the safety of the poor fugitive; but seeing nothing of a suspicious appearance, and the almost entire absence of the crew, they sauntered away. I made several other trips up and down the lakes during that summer on the same vessel."

The French population of the territory by the sea, the Acadians, are described by the poet as:

Men whose lives glided on like rivers that water the woodlands,Darkened by shadows of earth, but reflecting an image of heaven.

History does not bear out this idyll; but whatever their faults, at least the Acadians had the negative virtue of possessing no slaves,[1]Panis or Negro: nor was it until the coming of the people whose native air was too pure for a slave that the curse came upon the land.

The permanent settlement by the English of Acadia may fairly be considered as beginning when in 1749 Cornwallis founded Halifax.[2]Negro slaves were among the population of Halifax from the beginning or very shortly after. Where they came from is uncertain and it has been suggested that they came with the original settlers across the ocean. In the absence of any other explanation more plausible, this might be accepted. Lord Mansfield's decision in the Somerset case was a quarter of a century in the future. But it seems more probable that they were brought from the English Colonies, and some almost certainly were.

The official records of the country exhibit much evidence to this effect. In September, 1751, theBoston Evening Postadvertised "Just arrived from Halifax and to be sold, ten strong hearty, Negro men mostly tradesman, suchas caulkers, carpenters, sailmakers and ropemakers.[3]Any person wishing to purchase may enquire of Benjamin Halliwell of Boston." Such an advertisement indicates that shipbuilding was slack at Halifax and more brisk at Boston. A conjecture may be hazarded that these slaves had been taken by their master to Halifax to build ships and then returned to the colony when required no longer in Acadia.

Some such conjecture receives a little assistance from a will still on record in Halifax. It was made February 28, 1752, by Thomas Thomas "late of New York but now of Halifax" and disposed of his "goods, chattels and negros" including one bequest to this effect: "all my plate and my negro servant Orange that now lives with me at Halifax, I leave and bequeath to my son."

In the same year,The Halifax Gazetteof May 15 contains the advertisement "Just imported and to be sold by Joshua Mauger at Major Lockman's store in Halifax, several Negro slaves as follows: A woman aged 35, two boys aged 12 and 13 respectively, two of 18 and a man aged 30." In theHalifax Gazetteof Saturday, May 30, 1752, sale is advertised thus: "Just imported and to be sold by Joshua Mauger, at Major Lockman's store in Halifax, several negro slaves, viz., a very likely negro wench, of about thirty-five years of age, a Creole born, has been brought up in a gentleman's family, and capable of doing all sorts of work belonging thereto, as needle-work of all sorts and in the best manner; also washing, ironing, cooking, and every other thing that can be expected from such a slave: also two negro boys of about 12 or 13 years old, likely, healthy, and well-shaped, and understand some English. Likewise two healthy negro slaves of about 18 years of age, of agreeable tempers and fit for any kind of business: And also a healthy negro man of about 30 yearsof age." In September 1759, a Halifax merchant, Malachy Salter wrote to his wife then visiting relatives in Boston informing her of the state of the family, saying that "Jack is Jack still but rather worse. I am obliged to exercise the cat or stick almost every day. I believe Halifax don't afford another such idle, deceitful villain"—"Pray purchase a Negro boy if possible."

In the year of the surrender of Montreal, theHalifax Gazette, November 1, 1760, advertised "To be sold at public auction on Monday the 3rd of November, at the house of Mr. John Rider, two slaves, viz., a boy and a girl, about 11 years old; likewise a puncheon of choice cherry brandy with sundry other articles."

Some legal sanction, moreover, was given slavery. A General Assembly the first Elective Legislature in what is now Canada, met at Halifax in 1757. In 1762 the second session of the third General Assembly passed an act[4]which seems not to have received very much attention from legists[5]and writers. It contains a recognition of slavery. The act provides by section 2 that "in case any soldier, sailor, servant, apprentice, bound servant or negro slave or any other person whatsoever shall leave any pawn or pledge with a vendor of liquor for the payment of any sum exceeding five shillings for liquor such soldier, sailor, servant, apprentice bound servant or negro slave ... or the master or mistress of such servant, apprentice, bound servant or negro slave" might by proceedings before a Justice of the Peace obtain an order for the restoration of the pawn or pledge—and the vendor might be fined 20 shillings "for the use of the poor."[6]

For this reason slavery could easily continue as subsequent records prove. In July, 1767, Charles Proctor ofHalifax sold Louisa, a "Mulotta" girl, to Mary Wood of Annapolis for £15 currency[7]and next year Mary Wood assigned the girl to her daughter Mrs. Mary Day. In June, 1767, James Simonds of the St. John River wrote to Hazen and Jarvis at Newburyport, Massachusetts, a letter in which he complains of "that rascal negro, West" who cannot be got to do a quarter of a man's work. In an advertisement in a Halifax paper in 1769 are offered for sale to the highest bidder "two hogsheads of rum, three of sugar and two well-grown negro girls aged 14 and 12." Those were clearly a consignment from the West Indies. The executors of John Margerum of Halifax deceased, in their accounts give credit for £29.9.4.½ "net proceeds of a negro boy sold at Carolina." In 1770 the executors of Joseph Gerrish of Halifax lost £30 on the sale of three Negroes for £150 to Richard Williams and Abraham Constable, the Negroes having been appraised at £180: and a Negro boy named John Fame was not then sold. In April 1770, Mrs. Martha Prichard of Halifax, widow, bequeathed to her daughter, wife of Moses Delesdernier a Negro slave woman named Jessie. If Mrs. Delesdernier did not wish to retain the slave, she was to be sold and the proceeds of the sale given to Mrs. Delesdernier. If she kept her, the slave at the death of Mrs. Delesdernier was to be the property of her son Ferdinand. By the same instrument the testatrix bequeathed to her grand-daughter a mulatto slave John Patten two and a half years old.

By the census of the year 1771 the Rev. James Lyon, the first Presbyterian Minister in Nova Scotia, is shown to have owned a colored boy, the only Negro in the township of Onslow and John Young in the township of Amherst also a Negro boy, the only one in the township. In Annapolis, Magdalen Winnett owned a man, woman and girl; Joseph Winnett owned a woman and a boy; Ebenezer Messenger and Ann Williams each a man, and John Storkof Granville owned a man the only Negro in the township; and Henry Evans of Annapolis had the previous year owned a colored girl.

Jacob Hurd of Halifax offered in 1773 a reward of £5 for the apprehension of his runaway Negro, Cromwell, a "short thick set strong fellow," strongly pock marked "especially on the nose" and wearing a green cloth jacket and a cocked hat. In July 1773, in theNova Scotia Gazette and Weekly Chroniclethe executor and executrix of Joseph Pierpont of Halifax advertised "a Negro named Prince to be sold at private sale." This perhaps indicated a repugnance to offering human beings for sale by auction. In theNova Scotia Gazette and Weekly Chronicle, March 27, 1775 is an advertisement for the sale of a "likely well-made negro boy about 16 year old."

In the inventory of the estate of the late John Rock appeared in 1776 a Negro woman named Thursday. She was inventoried at £25 but sold for £20. In this year also a Windsor farmer, Joseph Wilson left by will two Negro women Byna and Sylla to his wife. In January 1779 theNova Scotia Gazette and Weekly Chronicleadvertised for sale an able Negro woman, about 21 year old, "capable of performing both town and country work and an exceedingly good cook." In the same year Daniel Stratford of Halifax left to his wife a Negro man slave Adam for life, after her death to become the property of his daughter Sarah Lawson. Matthew Harris of Picton sold for £50 to Matthew Archibald of Truro, tanner, a "Negro boy named Abram, about 12 years of age" born of Harris' Negro slave in Harris' house in Maryland.

In 1780 rewards were offered, one of 3 guineas, for the apprehension and delivery at the office of the Commanding Officer of Engineers at Halifax of two runaway Negro men; another "a handsome reward to be paid for securing in any gaol a Negro boy Mungo about 14 years old and well built"—the owner Benjamin De Wolfe of Windsor to be notified. That year the executors of Colonel HenryDenny Denson of West Falmouth debit themselves with £75 received for "Spruce," £60 for "John" and £30 for "Juba" and credit themselves with £2.11.6 paid for taking two of these to Halifax probably for sale there.

Abel Michener of Falmouth advertised in 1781 a reward of £5 for the capture of a Negro named James; and Samuel Mack of Port Medway wanted a Negro named "Chance" returned.

Richard Wenman of Halifax in September of that year agreed to give his Negro, Cato, his liberty "if he will faithfully serve my said daughter, Elizabeth Susannah Pringle two years." Captain Wilson of the transportFriendsrequested in 1782 that masters of vessels will not ship as a seaman his runaway Negro lad Ben, saying: "He is my own property."

There is no need for further particularization; for we now come to the year of the definitive peace between the mother country and the new republic. As in the upper country so by the sea there was a great influx of Loyalists, accompanied in many instances by their slaves. Thereafter sales, advertisements for auctions, rewards for runaway slaves, bequests of slaves, &c., are very common and there were some manumissions. That, however, was not the cause of the great increase in the Negro population of the Maritime Province. The Island of St. John, afterwards Prince Edward Island had been set off as a separate province in 1769 but the Province of Nova Scotia included what became the Province of New Brunswick until 1786.

During the Revolutionary War, the British commanders, Sir Henry Clinton in particular, had made it a point to invite the slaves to the British line and many had accepted the invitation. No few of these refugees were of material service to the British troops in various ways both menial and otherwise. At the peace Washington demanded the return of these quondam slaves.[8]Sir Guy Carletonrefused but made a careful inventory of them with full description, name, former master, etc., so that Washington might claim compensation from the British Government, if he saw fit.[9]In addition to these slaves somewhere about 3,000 freed Negroes accompanied the British troops on their withdrawal from New York, nearly all coming to Nova Scotia. Many of these after suffering great hardships were sent to Sierra Leone on the West Coast of Africa in 1792. Some remained in the province where their descendants are found until this day; but not in any very great numbers. The Loyalists, however, retained their property in their own slaves; and immigration was encouraged by the Act of 1790.[10]

The trade in Negroes was very brisk for some years. For example, on June 24, 1783, theNova Scotia Gazette and Weekly Chronicleadvertised for sale a Negro woman, "25 years of age, a good house servant." On December 11, 1783, Captain Alexander Campbell late of the South Carolina Loyalists sold to Captain Thomas Green late of the Royal Nova Scotia Foot a Negro woman named Nancy for£40. Nancy two years later was sold by Green to Abraham Forst of Halifax and a year later still with her child Tom to Gregory Townsend.

A shipment was made by John Wentworth from Halifax to Surinam, Dutch Guiana, of nineteen Negro slaves, "all American born or well seasoned ... perfectly stout, healthy, sober, orderly, industrious and obedient." These, said he, "I have had christened and would rather have liberated them than send them to any estate that I am not sure of their being treated with care and humanity which I shall consider as the only favour that can be done to me on this occasion" by his correspondent.[11]

On October 29, 1787, John Rapalje, a Royalist, sent from Brookligne (Brookland or Brooklyn Ferry) to George Leonard by desire of his (R's) father a Negro woman named Eve about 35 years and her child named Suke about 15 to sell as he himself cannot go to Nova Scotia. Eve was one of the best servants "perfectly sober, honest" and the only fault she had was her near sight.

The records show occasional manumission also. In 1784 the inventory of the estate of John Porter late of Cornwallis, a Negro man is valued at £80. That same year Charles Montague of Halifax says: "I have only one Negro, named Francis; he is to have his freedom." In May 1787, MargaretMurray, widow of Halifax by her will manumitted her two Negro women Marianne and Flora; and (when he was 21) her Negro boy Brutus. From the records of a trial at Shelburne, in a magistrate's court in 1788 it appears that one Jesse Gray of Argyle had sold a Negro woman for 100 bushels of potatoes. At a trial the ownership by Gray was proved and the sale confirmed.

We now come to the times of a Chief Justice whose heart was set on destroying slavery in the province of Nova Scotia, therein wholly differing from the Chief Justice of New Brunswick, George Duncan Ludlow, who had received his appointment on the separation of that province in 1784. The forward-looking jurist was Thomas Andrew Strange who became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 1791.[12]The same impulse for liberty which about this time was noted in the upper country manifested itself from time to time by the sea. Slaves ran away from their masters; the masters pursued and imprisoned them. Some blacks claimed freedom without fleeing. When a writ of habeas corpus came up in the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Strange did his best to avoid giving a decision. He knew that slavery was lawful but he knew it was detestable and he pursued a course which did not require him to stultify himself but which would nevertheless confer substantial benefits upon the black claiming liberty.

He endeavored in every case to bring the parties to an agreement to sign articles whereby the master would have the services of the Negro for a stated time, after the expiration of which the Negro received his freedom. When the master refused this, as sometimes there was a refusal, the Chief Justice required the matter to be tried by a jury, which usually found for the Negro.[13]

The practice adopted was like the practice in cases of alleged villenage in England. It was recognized that slavery might exist in Nova Scotia, but it was made as difficult as possible for the master to succeed on the facts. Except the act already mentioned there was no statute recognizing slavery and an attempt in 1787 to incorporate such a recognition in the statute law failed of success by a large majority. The existing act, too, was given what seems a very forced and unnatural interpretation so as to emasculate it of any authority in that regard.

Salter Sampson Blowers, the Attorney General, fully agreed with the Chief Justice's plan. On one occasion he threatened to prosecute a person for sending a Negro out of the province against his will.[14]The Negro managed to get back and the master acknowledged his right, so that no proceedings were necessary. After a number of verdicts for the alleged slaves, masters were generally very willingto enter into articles whereby the slave after serving faithfully for a fixed number of years was given his freedom.

After Blowers became Chief Justice, 1797,[15]he continued Chief Justice Strange's practice with marked results. In one case of which he tells where he had discharged a black woman from the Annapolis gaol on habeas corpus and an action had been brought, the plaintiff proved that he had bought her in New York; but the Chief Justice held that he had not proved the right of the seller so to dispose of her and directed the jury to find for the defendant which they promptly did.

Slavery continued, however. Almost every year we find records of sales, advertisements for runaway slaves, bequests of slaves, &c., till almost the end of the first decade of the 19th century, the latest known bill of sale is dated March 21, 1807 and transfers a "Negro Woman named Nelly of the age of twenty five or thereabout." It was, however, decadent and from about the beginning of the 19th century was quite as much to the advantage of the Negro in many cases as that of the master.

A final effort to legalize slavery in Nova Scotia was made in 1808. Mr. Warwick, member for Digby Township, presented a petition from John Taylor and other slave owners setting up that the doubts entertained by the courts rendered their property useless and that the slaves were deserting and defying their masters. They asked for an act securing them their property or indemnifying them for their loss. Thomas Ritchie member for Annapolis introduced a bill to regulate Negro servants within the province. The bill passed its second reading January 11, 1808, but failed to become law; and the attempt was never renewed.

New Brunswick was separated from Nova Scotia in 1784. The Chief Justice of that province was not as averse from slavery as his brother of Nova Scotia. One of the most interesting and celebrated cases came before the Supreme Court of New Brunswick in Hilary Term, February 1800. Captain Stair Agnew who had been an officer in the Queen's Rangers settled opposite Fredericton. He was a man much thought of as is shown by his being chosen for thirty years to represent York County in the Legislature. He owned a slave Nancy Morton[16]who claimed her freedom and whom apparently he had put in charge of one Caleb Jones. A writ of habeas corpus was obtained directed to Jones and the matter was arranged to be argued before the full court of four judges. For the applicant appearedWard Chipman[17]and Samuel Denny Street for the master, Jonathan Bliss, Attorney General of the province, Thomas Wetmore, John Murray Bliss, Charles J. Peters and Witham Botsford, all men of ability and eminence. On the Bench were Chief Justice Ludlow and Puisne Justices Allen, Upham and Saunders.

The addresses of the Attorney-General and Mr. Chipman are extant. The former divided his speech into thirty-two heads; the latter took eighty pages of foolscap for his. The arguments were extremely able and exhaustive,[18]everything in history, morals and decided cases being brought to bear. The case took two full days to argue and after careful consideration the court divided equally, the Chief Justice and Mr. Justice Upham affirming the right of the master and Mr. Justice Allan and Mr. Justice Saunders held for the alleged slave.

The return of Jones to the writ was that Nancy "was at the time of her birth and ever since hath been a female Negro slave or servant for life born of an African Negro slave and before the removal of the said Caleb Jones from Mary Land to New Brunswick was and became by purchase the lawful and proper Negro slave or servant for life of him the said Caleb Jones ..., that the said Caleb Jones in the year of our Lord 1785 brought and imported the said ... Nancy his Negro slave or servant for life into the Province of New Brunswick ... and has always hitherto held the said ... Nancy as his proper Negro slave or servant for life ... or by laws he has good right and authority to do...."[19]

The Chief Justice based his opinion on what he called the "Common Law of the Colonies"—and although that expression was ridiculed at the time and has been since, there is no difficulty in understanding it. He meant custom recognized as law not contained in an express legislative enactment. In that sense a modern lawyer will agree that he was right. Practically all the English colonies had slavery thoroughly recognized and often without or before legislation; and all the well known legal maxims asserted the cogency of such custom.[20]Mr. Justice Allen considered that no human power could justify slavery—and his brother Saunders agreed with him. It would seem that these judges were concerned with what the law should be, the others with what it actually was.[21]

In the result the return was held sufficient and the master had his slave. But the decision of the divided court had its effect. Agnew reconveyed Nancy to William Bailey from whom he had bought her and she bound herself to serve for fifteen years, then to receive her freedom.[22]The result of this case was that while slavery wasnot formally abolished, it before many years practically ceased to exist.[23]

Prince Edward Island was called Isle St. Jean until 1798. In this island slavery had the same history as in the other maritime provinces. Shortly after the peace Negro slaves were brought into the Island by their United Empire Loyalist masters. As late as 1802 we find recorded the sale of "a Mulatto boy three years old called Simon" for £20, Halifax currency, then £18 sterling, and a gift of "one Mulatto girl about five years of age named Catherine." We also find Governor Fanning (1786-1804), freeing his two slaves and giving one of them, Shepherd, a farm.

In Cape Breton which was separate from 1784 to 1820, Negro slaves were found as early as the former date: "Cesar Augustus, a slave and Darius Snider, black folks, married 4th September 1788," "Diana Bestian a Negro girl belonging to Abraham Cuyler Esq" was buried September 15, 1792 and a Negro slave was killed in 1791 by a blow from a spade when trying to force his way into a public ball in Sydney.[24]In this province, too, slavery met the same fate.

There is now to be mentioned an interesting series of circumstances.[25]During the War of 1812-15 the British navy occupied many bays and rivers in United States territoryand in some cases troops were landed where there was a slave population. These forces came into possession of many slaves, mostly voluntary fugitives, some seduced and some taken by violence from their masters. Admiral Cochrane in April 1814 issued a proclamation inviting all those who might be disposed to emigrate from the United States for the purpose of becoming free settlers in some of "His Majesty's Colonies" to come with their families on board of the British men of war and offering them the choice of joining the British forces or being sent as free settlers to a British possession. He did not say "slaves" but no one could mistake the meaning.[26]Negroes came in droves. Some were taken to the Bahamas and the Bermudas where their descendants are to be found until this day; many were taken to Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.[27]

When the Treaty of Peace was concluded at Ghent, December 24, 1814 the United States did not forget the slaves who had got away from the home of liberty. Article 1 provided for the delivery up of all places taken by either party without carrying away any property captured "or any slaves or other private property." The United States demanded the restoration of "all slaves and other private property which may now be in possession of the forces ofHis Britannic Majesty." The British officers refused to surrender the slaves contending that the real meaning of the treaty did not cover the case. At length in 1818 a convention was entered into that it should be left to the Emperor of Russia[28]to decide whether the United States by the true intent of Article 1 was entitled to the restitution or full compensation for the slaves.

In 1822 the Emperor decided in favor of the United States. Thereupon the next year (1824) a mixed commission of two commissioners and two arbitrators determined the average value to be allowed as compensation;[29]for slaves taken from Louisiana $580: from Alabama Georgia and South Carolina, $390; from Virginia, Maryland and all other States $280.

The commissioners adjourned for the purpose of enabling evidence to be obtained as to the numbers. Clay submitted to the British Government that 3601 slaves had been taken away but was willing for a settlement to accept the price of 1650. Britain declined, but the commissioners failed to agree and finally by diplomacy in 1827 Britain agreed to pay £250,000 or $1,204,960 in full for slaves and other property. Thus Britain assured the freedom of more than 3,000 slaves and paid for them, a fitting prelude to the great Act of 1833 whereby she freed 800,000 slaves and paid £20,000,000 for the privilege.[30]

Back to Index Next