The fugitive slave laws were laws passed by the United States Congress in 1793 and 1850 to provide for the return of slaves who escaped from one state into another state or territory. The idea of the fugitive slave law was derived from the Fugitive Slave Clause which is in the United States Constitution ( Article IV , Section 2, Paragraph 3). It was thought that forcing states to return fugitive slaves to their masters violated states' rights due to state sovereignty and was believed that seizing state property should not be left up to the states. The Fugitive Slave Clause states that fugitive slaves "shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due", which abridged state rights because apprehending runaway slaves was a form of retrieving private property. The Compromise of 1850 entailed a series of laws that allowed slavery in the new territories and forced officials in free states to give a hearing to slave-owners without a jury.
45-675: The New England Articles of Confederation of 1643 contained a clause that provided for the return of fugitive slaves. However, this only referred to the confederation of colonies of Massachusetts, Plymouth , Connecticut , and New Haven , and was unrelated to the Articles of Confederation of the United States formed after the Declaration of Independence . There were African and Native American slaves in New England beginning in
90-511: A forum for resolving inter-colonial disputes. In practice, none of the goals were accomplished. The confederation was weakened in 1654 after Massachusetts Bay refused to join an expedition against New Netherland during the First Anglo-Dutch War , although it regained importance during King Philip's War in 1675. It was dissolved after numerous colonial charters were revoked in the early 1680s. John Quincy Adams remarked at
135-638: A fugitive slave law in the Congress of the Confederation. The Ordinance of 1784 was drafted by a Congressional committee headed by Thomas Jefferson , and its provisions applied to all United States territory west of the original 13 states. The original version was read to Congress on March 1, 1784, and it contained a clause stating: That after the year 1800 of the Christian Era, there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in any of
180-583: A justification for secession by Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas in 1860–1. The Fugitive Slave Laws of 1793 were grossly unfair to the accused. The intended purpose of the laws was to give slave owners the legal protection when dealing with the problem of escaped slaves. In reality, the Fugitive Slave Laws actually expanded the slave trade. These laws provided the opportunity for slave owners to go into northern states and reclaim previously freed slaves. The laws gave any slave owner
225-490: A meeting of the Massachusetts Historical Society on the 200th anniversary of the Confederation's founding: The New England confederacy was destined to a life of less than forty years' duration. Its history, like that of other confederacies, presents a record of incessant discord-of encroachments by the most powerful party upon the weaker members, and of disregard, by all the separate members, of
270-501: A part of the Compromise of 1850 . Special commissioners were to have concurrent jurisdiction with the U.S. circuit and district courts and the inferior courts of territories in enforcing the law; fugitives could not testify in their own behalf; no trial by jury was provided. Penalties were imposed upon marshals who refused to enforce the law or from whom a fugitive should escape, and upon individuals who aided black people to escape;
315-647: A series of legislative acts that were implemented in the United States between the 1800s and the beginning of the Civil War . These laws were a direct response to the Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and of 1850. The Personal Liberty Laws were designed to make the legal system more fair for all people and to ensure the safety of freedmen and escaped slaves without employing the controversial tactic of nullification . The reasoning behind this decision
360-480: A slave catcher, to go to Pennsylvania and bring Margret Morgan, and her children, back with him to Maryland. It was his plan to reinstate them as slaves. The Personal Liberty Law of 1826 decreed that no person could be taken out of the state of Pennsylvania to be held as a slave. Prigg was arrested and tried upon his return to the state with Margret and her family. Prigg argued in front of the Supreme Court that
405-492: A slave. This contradiction made the Personal Liberty Laws controversial. Prigg was not the only one to openly attack the Personal Liberty Laws. Many of these laws were ignored by officials of the law and judges. This unequal treatment however did not stop the abolitionists from their fight to win justice for all people. Because most of the abolitionists and supporters of the Personal Liberty Laws resided in
450-478: A tense and strained relationship between the Northern and Southern states in the years leading up to the civil war. The Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 did not provide for trial by jury. Indiana (1824) and Connecticut (1828) enacted laws making jury trials for escaped slaves possible upon appeal. In 1840 Vermont and New York granted fugitives the right of jury trial and provided them with attorneys. After 1842, when
495-544: Is hereby empowered to seize or arrest such fugitive from labor ... and upon proof ... before any Judge ... it shall be the duty of such Judge ... [to remove] the said fugitive from labor to the State or Territory from which he or she fled. Section 4 makes assisting runaways and fugitives a crime and outlines the punishment for those who assisted runaway slaves: SEC. 4. ... That any person who shall knowingly and willingly obstruct or hinder such claimant ... shall ... forfeit and pay
SECTION 10
#1732765362815540-563: The North to counter the Fugitive Slave Acts of 1793 and 1850 . Different laws did this in different ways, including allowing jury trials for escaped slaves and forbidding state authorities from cooperating in their capture and return. States with personal liberty laws included Connecticut , Massachusetts , Michigan , Maine , New Hampshire , Ohio , Pennsylvania , Wisconsin , and Vermont . The personal liberty laws were
585-690: The 18th century. The Articles for the New England Confederation provided for the return of slaves in Section 8: It is also agreed that if any servant ran away from his master into any other of these confederated Jurisdictions, that in such case, upon the certificate of one magistrate in the Jurisdiction out of which the said servant fled, or upon other due proof; the said servant shall be delivered, either to his master, or any other that pursues and brings such certificate or proof. As
630-646: The Fugitive Slave Act, to fulfill the Article IV requirement to return escaped slaves. Section 3 mandates the return of fugitives: SEC. 3. ... That when a person held to labor in any of the United States, or of the Territories on the Northwest or South of the river Ohio ... shall escape into any other part of the said States or Territory, the person to whom such labor or service may be due ...
675-429: The New England colonies to act as a nation, saying that they share a way of life and religion. This alliance was meant to be a perpetual mode of defense and communication among the colonies themselves and with any foreign entities. The treaty outlining the alliance contained the following clauses, in summary: The Massachusetts General Court and the commissioners from Saybrook Colony and New Haven Colony agreed to
720-489: The Personal Liberty Laws preemptively to offset the infringements to personal liberties the Fugitive Slave Laws allowed. The case between Edward Prigg and Margret Morgan demonstrated one of the complications that arose out of the fugitive slave laws. The case began when Margret Morgan, a slave to John Ashmore, was granted her freedom. This was not a formal change, merely a promise that she could do as she pleased. After her former owner's death, Ashmore's heirs hired Edward Prigg,
765-582: The Personal Liberty Laws were unconstitutional. He argued that the crime that he was being charged for was a perfectly legal act under the constitution. In the end, the Court held that the Constitution's Necessary and Proper Clause granted Congress authority to pass the Fugitive Slave Act, and that Prigg had acted lawfully under the authority Congress granted slaveholders under that act. Consequently, Pennsylvania had exceeded its authority when it criminalized
810-602: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act was a federal function, some Northern state governments passed laws forbidding state authorities to cooperate in the capture and return of fugitives. In the reaction to the Fugitive Slave Act contained in the Compromise of 1850, most Northern states provided further guarantees of jury trial, authorized severe punishment for illegal seizure and perjury against alleged fugitives, and forbade state authorities to recognize claims to fugitives. These laws were cited as
855-403: The ability to seize an alleged escaped slave, present the slave to a federal or local judge, and, upon proof of ownership, have the slave legally returned to their service. However, the only proof that was required was the testimony of a witness. This meant that many freedmen were taken back into slavery because of rigged courts and injustice. Another reason that the Fugitive Slave Laws created
900-556: The actual law, it did not ban slavery in practice, and it continued almost until the start of the Civil War. King's phrasing from the 1785 attempt was incorporated in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 when it was enacted on 13 July 1787. Article 6 has the provision for fugitive slaves: Art. 6. There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the said territory, otherwise than in the punishment of crimes whereof
945-520: The colonies expanded with waves of settlers pushing westward, slavery continued in the English territories and in former Dutch territories like New Amsterdam , prompting further legislation of a similar nature. Serious attempts at formulating a uniform policy for the capture of escaped slaves began under the Articles of Confederation of the United States in 1785. There were two attempts at implementing
SECTION 20
#1732765362815990-736: The conclusions adopted by the whole body. Still the main purpose of the union was accomplished. The full name of the 1643 treaty was "The Articles of Confederation between the Plantations under the Government of the Massachusetts, the Plantations under the Government of New Plymouth, the Plantations under the Government of Connecticut, and the Government of New Haven with the Plantations in Combination therewith". The colonies of New England were expanding and growing, and their contact
1035-529: The conduct done pursuant to federal law for which the Commonwealth had convicted Prigg. In this example, Prigg claimed that he was acting under article IV, section 2, of the Constitution, which clearly states that criminals or fugitives cannot escape punishment or recapture by leaving their state for another. The Personal Liberty Law that had passed in 1826 directly stated that anyone, including escaped slaves, could not be brought into Pennsylvania and kept as
1080-461: The early 19th century, personal liberty laws were passed to hamper officials in the execution of the law, but this was mostly after the abolition of the Slave Trade, as there had been very little support for abolition prior; Indiana in 1824 and Connecticut in 1828 provided jury trial for fugitives who appealed from an original decision against them. In 1840, New York and Vermont extended
1125-416: The hope that this would reduce opposition to the objective of the resolution. The resolution contained the phrase: Provided always, that upon the escape of any person into any of the states described in the said resolve of Congress of the 23d day of April, 1784, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the thirteen original states, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and carried back to
1170-431: The marshal might raise a posse comitatus ; a fee of $ 10 (equivalent to $ 366 in 2023) was paid to the commissioner when his decision favored the claimant, only $ 5 (equivalent to $ 183 in 2023) when it favored the fugitive. The supposed justification for the disparity in compensation was that, if the decision were in favor of the claimant, additional effort on the part of the commissioner would be required in order to fill out
1215-593: The national law—was followed by legislation in Massachusetts (1843), Vermont (1843), Pennsylvania (1847) and Rhode Island (1848), forbidding state officials from aiding in enforcing the law and refusing the use of state jails for fugitive slaves. The demand from the South for more effective Federal legislation led to the second fugitive slave law, drafted by Senator James Murray Mason of Virginia , grandson of George Mason , and enacted on September 18, 1850, as
1260-435: The need to be counteracted by the Personal Liberty Laws, was the threat to those who tried to help a fugitive. The Fugitive Slave Laws placed a five hundred dollar fine on anyone who helped an escaped slave or obstructed a slave owner's attempt to retake a slave. This made it extremely daunting for those who wanted to end slavery by assisting those slaves seeking their freedom. The Personal Liberty Laws sought also to protect
1305-557: The number of abolitionists increased, the operations of the Underground Railroad became more efficient, and new personal liberty laws were enacted in Vermont (1850), Connecticut (1854), Rhode Island (1854), Massachusetts (1855), Michigan (1855), Maine (1855 and 1857), Kansas (1858) and Wisconsin (1858). The personal liberty laws forbade justices and judges to take cognizance of claims, extended habeas corpus and
1350-408: The paperwork actually remanding the slave back to the South. Both the fact of the escape and the identity of the fugitive were determined on purely ex parte testimony. If a slave was brought in and returned to the master, the person who brought in the slave would receive the sum of $ 10 (equivalent to $ 366 in 2023) per slave. The severity of this measure led to gross abuses and defeated its purpose;
1395-453: The party shall have been duly convicted: Provided, always , That any person escaping into the same, from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any one of the original States, such fugitive may be lawfully reclaimed and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labor or service as aforesaid. In 1793, Congress passed "An Act respecting fugitives from justice, and persons escaping from the service of their masters", or more commonly known as
Fugitive slave laws in the United States - Misplaced Pages Continue
1440-616: The person claiming his labor or service as aforesaid, this resolve notwithstanding. While the original 1784 ordinance applied to all U.S. territory that was not a part of any existing state (and thus, to all future states), the 1787 ordinance applied only to the Northwest Territory . Congress made a further attempt to address the concerns of slave owners in 1787 by passing the Northwest Ordinance of 1787. The law appeared to outlaw slavery, which would have reduced
1485-664: The privilege of jury trial to fugitives, and punished false testimony severely. In 1854, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin went so far as to declare the Fugitive Slave Act unconstitutional. These state laws were one of the grievances that South Carolina would later use to justify its secession from the Union. Attempts to carry into effect the law of 1850 aroused much bitterness. The arrests of Thomas Sims and of Shadrach Minkins in Boston in 1851; of Jerry M. Henry , in Syracuse, New York , in
1530-611: The right of trial by jury to fugitives and provided them with attorneys. As early as the first decade of the 19th century, individual dissatisfaction with the law of 1793 had taken the form of systematic assistance rendered to African Americans escaping from the South to Canada or New England : the so-called Underground Railroad . The decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Prigg v. Pennsylvania in 1842 (16 Peters 539)—that state authorities could not be forced to act in fugitive slave cases, but that national authorities must carry out
1575-757: The rights of those who didn't want to turn in escaped slaves. In 1850, amendments were made to the Fugitive Slave Laws, which made them even more onerous. These amendments decreed that the alleged fugitive was not allowed to testify at the hearing and federal marshals were financially liable if they did not execute the warrants or if they allowed fugitives to escape. The 1850 amendments also provided Commissioners with twice as much compensation, ten dollars verses five dollars, for granting certificates of ownership as for denying them. Furthermore, penalties were increased for obstructing slave owners or helping fugitives, and included imprisonment. These laws were blatantly unfair, intrusive, and prompted some northern states to introduce
1620-414: The said states, otherwise than in punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted to have been personally guilty. This was removed prior to final enactment of the ordinance on 23 April 1784. However, the issue did not die there, and on 6 April 1785 Rufus King introduced a resolution to re-implement the slavery prohibition in the 1784 ordinance, containing a fugitive slave provision in
1665-896: The same year; of Anthony Burns in 1854, in Boston; and of the Garner family in 1856, in Cincinnati , with other cases arising under the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, probably had as much to do with bringing on the Civil War as did the controversy over slavery in the Territories. With the beginning of the Civil War, the legal status of many slaves was changed by their masters being in arms. Major General Benjamin Franklin Butler , in May 1861, declared that Confederate slaves used for military purposes such as building fortifications were contraband of war. The Confiscation Act of 1861
1710-575: The sum of five hundred dollars. High demand for slaves in the Deep South and the hunt for fugitives caused free blacks to be at risk of being kidnapped and sold into slavery, despite having "free" papers. Many people who were legally free and had never been slaves were captured and brought south to be sold into slavery. The historian Carol Wilson documented 300 such cases in Freedom at Risk (1994) and estimated there were likely thousands of others. In
1755-519: The treaty on May 19, 1643. The General Court of the Plymouth Colony agreed to it on August 29. Massachusetts Bay Connecticut Colony New Haven Colony Plymouth Colony 42°01′49″N 72°08′12″W / 42.03028°N 72.13667°W / 42.03028; -72.13667 Personal liberty law In the context of slavery in the United States , the personal liberty laws were laws passed by several U.S. states in
1800-545: The votes of slave states in Congress, but southern representatives were concerned with economic competition from potential slaveholders in the new territory, and the effects that would have on the prices of staple crops such as tobacco. They correctly predicted that slavery would be permitted south of the Ohio River under the Southwest Ordinance of 1790, and therefore did not view this as a threat. In terms of
1845-711: Was considered still to hold in the case of fugitives from masters in the border states who were loyal to the Union government, and it was not until June 28, 1864, that the Act of 1850 was fully repealed. Attribution: New England Confederation The United Colonies of New England , commonly known as the New England Confederation , was a confederal alliance of the New England colonies of Massachusetts Bay , Plymouth , Saybrook (Connecticut), and New Haven formed in May 1643. Its primary purpose
Fugitive slave laws in the United States - Misplaced Pages Continue
1890-482: Was increasing with other European colonial settlements, as well as with surrounding Native American tribes. The New England colonial leaders, therefore, sought an alliance that would allow the colonies to coordinate a collective defense of New England. The New England leaders also felt that they were unique among the American colonies, and they hoped to band together to preserve their Puritan values. The treaty calls on
1935-509: Was passed in August 1861, and discharged from service or labor any slave employed in aiding or promoting any insurrection against the government of the United States. By the congressional Act Prohibiting the Return of Slaves of March 13, 1862, any slave of a disloyal master who was in territory occupied by Northern troops was declared ipso facto free. But for some time the Fugitive Slave Law
1980-402: Was simply to avoid more feuding between the northern and southern states. Only two states, New Jersey , and California , gave direct official sanction or assistance to the forced return of fugitive slaves, but Indiana , Illinois and Oregon , did so indirectly, by prohibiting the entrance within their borders of black people either slave or free . However, the United States would still endure
2025-662: Was to unite the Puritan colonies in support of the church, and for defense against the Native Americans and the Dutch colony of New Netherland . It was the first milestone on the long road to colonial unity and was established as a direct result of a war that started between the Mohegan and Narragansett Native American peoples. Its charter provided for the return of fugitive criminals and indentured servants, and served as
#814185