Fugitive Slave Act Quotes

The nation in 1848 was very polarized over the issue of slavery. Taylor, never even mentioned the subject in his speeches and writings. He reused to answer any questions about the subject or indicate his own views. His strategy worked as the other politicians who took a stand—either way—alienated a large number of voters.

What makes this quotation so historically interesting is that the abiding by the Supreme Court’s decisions on constitutionality was even an issue. It was because of the terrible Dred Scott decision which required Northern States to return fugitive slaves to their owners despite the constitutions of those states which stated that all men were free. A substantial part of the Democratic Party was the “solid South” and the return of fugitive slaves was one of the major issues of the 1860 Presidential Election. Ironically, the Southern States were arguing AGAINST states’ rights when the Northern States’ laws and Constitutions made fugitive slaves free the minute they set foot in the state.

This Biblical Quotation was one of the main reasons that Christian religious abolitionists were so active in the Underground Railroad and other efforts to assist and harbor fugitive slaves. It was also a motivating force for those states which passed laws making a slave free the second he set foot in the state. It was cited by many of those Northerners refusing to follow the Federal Fugitive Slave Act even after the Supreme Court upheld it in the Dred Scott decision. The act required them to return a fugitive slave to his master. This clearly violated this passage of the Bible. and the concept of States Rights. The Southern States which pushed the Fugitive Slave Act through Congress and complained bitterly when it was ignored by many Northern States were never able to provide any refute to the argument that because of this passage, following the act would be violating the law of God. The South which viewed itself as a bastion of Christianity, never were troubled by this passage when they passed state laws requiring the return of fugitive slaves. It illustrates the hypocrisy that slavery forced upon its advocates.

Hughes was a strong critic of the exploitation of laborers in the North by what he called the “bloated capitalist” First Irish Bishop in the United States

The phrase “give him a call” is interesting before the telephone. The ad gave a general area where he hunted and might be found. Potential customers were to go to that general area and “give him a call” vocally.

Many free Negroes of the day did not have the paperwork, education, , sophistication, or access to attorneys that could prove that they were free. Scheming Southerner slave owners would go north find poor ignorant free blacks and swear that they ran away from their plantation. If the victim could not prove the contrary, he was enslaved, transported South and usually sold.

It is not only in modern times that there were “litmus tests” for appointees. Franklin Pierce had been elected as a Democrat with a coalition that included Southerners who were able to dominate the weak Pierce precluding abolitionists from any appointments.

In the early days of the Civil War slaves who escaped and reached the Northern lines were routinely returned to their Southern owners as the Fugitive Slave Act required. The first actual emancipation of the Civil war was not the President’s proclamation but was Butler who as a Union General ordered that the slaves escaping from Virginia no longer be returned. He was accused of violating the then existing law, however he had a legal rationale which hoisted Virginia on its own petard.

The State of Wisconsin was very much against slavery. Opposing the Fugitive Slave Act, the state passed a Personal Freedom Act under which Wisconsin officials refused to return fugitive slaves as required by the Fugitive Slave Act. The Wisconsin Courts upheld the Wisconsin law citing, among other things, States’ Rights. The Taney Supreme Court which was strongly pro-slavery (a majority of the justices were Southern slaveowners) then overturned Wisconsin’s law. Taney’s opinion said that if there was to be Federal Supremacy in laws, there must be Federal Supremacy in enforcement of laws and in the decisions of the courts. The quotation is noteworthy for three reasons. First, it illustrates a certain hypocrisy that has existed over the issue of States’ Rights. The South, which is thought of as the bastion of the principle of States Rights were outraged that a Federal law that favored their slavery position would be “nullified” by a Northern state. So they claimed and fought for Federal supremacy and preemption at that time. However, when the Federal Government later passed laws controlling slavery and reconstruction, the South claimed that States’ Rights should prevail. The Northerners, who were the losers in this case, then later turned around and used the precedent to prevent the South from nullifying anti slavery and civil rights legislation. So it also illustrates that court decisions that are favored or opposed in one situation can cut the other way with a different set of facts. While there are those that believe the law should be above political considerations, there are others who use this quotation and its aftermath to illustrate that much of law is just a question of “whose ox is gored.”

Parker and other escaped slaves in Christiana fought off slave catchers and killed the slave owner leading them. Charged with treason, he escaped to Canada with his family and lived there the rest of his life. While not a polished writer, after he himself had escaped and went to Christiana and leaned to read and write. He wrote this narrative of his life as a slave—one of the few written works we have from slaves.

The Federal Fugitive Slave Act required all in free states to assist owners of escaped slaves to return them to their owners. The reaction in the North to the Fugitive Slave Act was extensive and even violent. See related quotes.

The Federal Fugitive Slave Act required all in free states to assist owners of escaped slaves to return them to their owners. In 1854 a Missouri slave owner tracked his escaped slave to Wisconsin and the Federal officials incarcerated the slave pending his return. A Wisconsin mob broke the slave out of jail and helped him escape to Canada. Sherman M. Booth, Publisher & Editor of the Wisconsin Free Soil Democrat was convicted under the Fugitive Slave Act for aiding the escape. Smith’s opinion overturned the Fugitive Slave Act on the grounds that it had usurped state’s rights. The Supreme Court overturned Smith’s ruling, but Booth was pardoned. See {587927} & {587928}.

The problem was that Congress was gridlocked on the slavery issue. The Southern states had more than their proportional share of Congressional power with slave populations being counted as 3/5 of a person for seats in the House of Representatives and parity with the other states in the Senate. The South could not stop all the attempts to debate slavery and the abolitionists attempts to end it, but they could block all legislation that might curtain slavery. As the United States was getting more sophisticated and educated hostility toward slavery was steadily increasing. The economies of the non Southern states was growing faster and more assuredly than the slave economies of the South. Abolition was all but inevitable but it would still take more time. Note that the President totally deferred to Congress on the leadership of what the policy should be. Presidents at that time were far less influential in making national policy and national legislating than they have become. Many think that the balance has shifted too far towards the Executive Branch.