ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 175 slave prisoner walked out. She remained in that town for a short time with the full knowledge of officers and citizens and no attempt was made to take her into custody. She then crossed the river and found employment with a family in Marietta. The governor of Virginia doubtless heard that the slave had escaped. Her owner had received pay for her. The conscience of the jailer and the village in which she had lived was satisfied and there we might naturally expect this case to end. But in the course of nature something occurred in the pioneer Town of Marietta that made this fugitive more valuable. She married a free colored man and a child was born. Both were subject to the claim of the slave State of Virginia, or rather to the cupidity of any citizen of that commonwealth who might have knowledge of the location of the fugitive and her child and the legal process by which both might be acquired. A Virginian by the name of Jacob Beeson, who had been advised of the refuge of the slave Jane and her increased value, appeared in Marietta armed with legal papers including a requisition from John Tyler, governor of Virginia, for the surrender of the slave. He found her in the employ of Abner Lord, who protested against her return to Virginia, and in this attitude he was supported by a number of the most prominent men of Marietta, including Samuel Hildreth, Rufus Putnam, Benjamin Ruggles and John Brough ( father of Governor John Brough). Much displeased, Jacob Beeson returned to Virginia empty handed and wrote a letter to Governor Samuel Huntington of Ohio, enclosing the requisition from the governor of Virginia, in which he wrote, among other things : "Governor Tyler did suppose that the citizens of Marietta would have sufficient respect for the rights of this Old Dominion, and that they would have delivered up its slave without your interposition. But I lament that we have been disappointed, for immediately upon my application to a justice of the peace for the delivery of the slave, she was secreted and put out of reach of such officer. "It is with great concern that the people of Virginia (who reside on its western extremity) look forward to the evils which will grow out of this course of conduct pursued by the people of your state residing on and near the Ohio. The idea of emancipation is propagated, and that such will fire the breast of every slave no one will doubt." It appears that Governor Huntington did not honor the requisition, on the ground that the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793 did not require a governor to participate directly in the return of fugitive slaves. A petition from leading citizens of Marietta probably helped the governor to this conclusion. Persistent Jacob Beeson, however, was not to be thwarted or diverted from his purpose to get possession of the fugitive, and two months later, April 26, 1810, Governor Tyler sent to Governor Huntington a requisition, not "to cause the said slave to be arrested and delivered up to Jacob Beeson," but to cause the said slave to be delivered up to Jacob Beeson "as a fugitive from justice." Governor Huntington held that this demand left small discretion to him and that he was in duty, bound to honor the requisition. He therefore directed the arrest of the negro Jane, who was delivered to Jacob Beeson, the agent of the State of Virginia. The agent having returned in triumph with the fugitive and her child to the soil of the "Old Dominion," made a report of his success to Governor Tyler who was duly authorized by his council of state to pardon the negro Jane of her crime of purloining goods valued at "more than $4," and to direct the public or private sale of "said slave for the best price he can obtain" by the "said Jacob Beeson." Thus ended the case, and the persistent and politically influential Jacob, as a reward of his perseverance, had the disposal of this slave 176 - HISTORY OF OHIO property at the best price he could get "either by private or public sale." disappeared in the Cimmerian darkness of slavery." In the month of June, 1910, we are told that "Jane and her child disappeared in the Cimmerean darkness of slavery." EARLY ANTI-SLAVERY NEWSPAPERS A study of the early anti-slavery movement in Ohio at this late day occasions some surprises. It seems that the first participants came from the South, a number arriving before. the state was admitted into the Union. The Ordinance of 1787 prohibited slavery in the Northwest Territory. The states carved out of it were thus, from the beginning dedicated to freedom. While the ordinance contained a provision for the return of slaves to their masters in other states, this did not prevent the free soil north of the Ohio River from becoming a haven and a refuge for slaves seeking freedom from bondage or masters convicted by conscience. As early as 1796, William Dunlop left Fayette County, Kentucky, and settled in Brown County, Ohio (then in the Northwest Territory). He brought a large number of slaves with him, set them free and "established them on land about Ripley." Others did likewise. Among the number was Dr. Alexander Campbell, who came from Kentucky in 1803, liberated his slaves, advocated immediate abolition, served in the Legislature of Ohio, represented the state in the United States Senate, and in 1835 stood at the head of the list of vice presidents of the Ohio Anti-Slavery Society. Thomas Morris, member of the Legislature, judge and United States Senator, came from Virginia to what is now Ohio in 1795 and resided in Clermont County from 1800 till his death in 1844. Though not a slave holder, like many other men from the Southern states he came to free territory in order that he might entertain and freely express his opposition to slavery. Thomas Kirker, member of the Constitutional Convention of 1802, of the General Assembly of Ohio, and acting governor of the state, it is said, came to the state from Kentucky because of his opposition to slavery. In the constitutional convention he did not manifest any especial sympathy for the negro, voting usually with those who limited his rights to a minimum. Possibly Governor Kirker left the South to escape the negro as well as slavery. A comparatively large number of ministers of the Gospel, chiefly of the Presbyterian and Baptist faith, came early from the slave states to counties on the southern border of Ohio in order that they might freely bear testimony against the "peculiar system of the South." Pre-eminent among the anti-slavery advocates from the South was James G. Birney, born in Kentucky, February 4, 1792, a graduate of Princeton, a scholar and an eminent lawyer, who manumitted his slaves, became the candidate of the liberty party for President in 1840 and again in 1844. His son, Gen. William Birney, in his biography of his father, "James G. Birney and His Times," dwells upon the contribution of the South to anti-slavery leadership and gives illuminating information upon the early movement in Ohio. His purpose, as he freely admits, is to show that undue credit has been given to William Lloyd Garrison for the overthrow of the slave power in the United States. This lays his book open to the charge of ex parte testimony, but for all that it reveals the fact that much of the early opposition to slavery on Ohio soil was of Southern origin, transported across the Ohio River from the land of bondage. The Quaker testimony against the institution of slavery is too well known to call for extended notice. The Society of Friends were among the earliest settlers of Ohio and wherever they made their home their anti-slavery views found expression. They came in large numbers to Eastern Ohio early in the last century and settled in the counties of Belmont, Jefferson and Columbiana. They were among the pioneers of ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 177 other counties as well. On September 12, 1817, Charles Osborn, a Quaker preacher from Tennessee, published the first issue of the Philanthropist at Mount Pleasant, Jefferson County, Ohio, the first ant-islavery paper published in America. 1 The second issue of this paper, bearing date, "ninth month 19th 1817" has recently come into the possession of the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society. This is the earliest issue known to be in existence. While this paper was at first mildly anti-slavery and strongly religious and moral, the editor gradually warmed up in his advocacy of abolition. He had previously been active in the organization of the Tennessee Manumission Society, which proclaimed the doctrine of immediate emancipation. Benjamin Lundy, from the first issue, was an agent for the Philanthropist and had arranged to join Osborn in the enterprise, when the latter became discouraged and sold his paper to Elisha Bates in October, 1818. Of the character of the first anti-slavery paper in America, George W. Julian says : Its anti-slavery character is quite as clearly defined and as uncompromising in tone as Lundy's Genius or Birney's Philanthropist. It was just such a paper as Elijah P. Lovejoy was murdered for publishing." 2 Much space is given in the Philanthropist to a consideration of the comparative merit of abolition and colonization. It was about this time that the organization of colonization societies had commenced in the United States. He published the views of the advocates of both methods of eliminating the evils of the system, but left no room to doubt his preference for emancipation. His views are also reflected in contributed letters and quoted matter. Among the former is a communication signed "Philo Justitia," which was written by Benjamin Lundy. The paper was a small four-page sheet, seven and one-half inches wide and nine and one-half inches long. The circulation of the Philanthropist was comparatively small, but it was thoroughly read, a single copy reaching many persons in a neighborhood. Osborn was in advance of his time and too radical against slavery for the Quaker Church even, many members of which preferred colonization as the solution of the slavery problem. Under the editorship of Elisha Bates, the principles proclaimed by Osborn and Lundy were advocated, but more mildly. For this reason the paper was not popular with previous subscribers. With the issue of April 20, 1822, the Philanthropist suspended, never to resume publication. THE PHILANTHROPIST Published Weekly BY CHARLES OSBORN. MOUNT PLEASANT,—OHIO SIXTH-DAY, NINTH MONTH 19th. 1 - Some confusion has resulted from the claim by Oliver P. Temple, in his East Tennessee and the Civil War, that the first "out-and-out" emancipation paper was published at Jonesborough in East Tennessee in the year 1819. The name of this paper was Manumission Intelligence. It may be true that the paper published there was more radical than the early issues of the Philanthropist, but that in no way disproves the claim that the latter was the first anti-slavery newspaper published in America. 2 - Julian, George W., Charles Osborn in Indiana Historical Society Puhlications, Vol. II, pp. 232-267. 178 - HISTORY OF OHIO AGENTS FOR THE PHILAN- THROPIST. The following persons will please receive monies and subscriptions for the Philanthropist. OHIO. Smithfield—Wm. Blackstone. Flushing—Amos Garretson. Belmont—Joseph Wright. Zanesville—Jesse Gause. St. Clairsville—Benjamin Lundy. Barnesville—Camm Thomas. New Lisbon—Benjamin Hanna. Fairfield—William Heald. Salem—John Street. Richmond—A. Farquahar. Cincinnati—Jesse Embree. THE PHILANTHROPIST The above is a facsimile of the head of the editorial column of the second issue (Vol. I, No. 2, September 19, 1817). The original is in the library of the Ohio State Archaeological and Historical Society. Benjamin Lundy was the pioneer anti-slavery leader in America ; Benjamin Hanna was the grandfather of Senator Marcus A. Hanna. In July, 1821, appeared the first issue of the Genius of Universal Emancipation. It was published in Mount Pleasant in the office of the Philanthropist. The seven monthly numbers following were printed in Steubenville, Ohio. Lundy walked from Mount Pleasant for the papers, twenty miles distant, and carried them back from the printing office. His devotion to the anti-slavery cause was absolute. He was frail of body and his educational advantages had been limited, but his industry was unfailing and his will indomitable. He was born in Hardwick, Warren County, New Jersey, January 4, 1789. His parents were Quakers, and he grew up to young manhood in that faith. At the age of nineteen years he moved to Wheeling, Virginia (now West Virginia), where he lived for four years and learned the trade of saddler. While there he was impressed with the wrongs of slavery. He crossed the Ohio River each week to attend church at Mount Pleasant. He frequently saw slaves in chains as they passed on their way to Kentucky and Missouri to meet the increasing demand for slave labor in the expanding settlements of the West. The effect of the harrowing spectacles that he witnessed is described in his own words : "My heart was deeply grieved at the gross abomination ; I heard the wail of the captive ; I felt his pang of distress, and the iron entered my soul." He moved to Mount Pleasant, Ohio, and later to St. Clairsville. Belmont County, in that state. While at the latter place in 1815, he organized an anti-slavery association called "The Union Humane Society," which soon had a membership of 500. In his address to "Philanthropists" signed "Philo Justicia," published in 1816, he gave expression to the resolution with which he entered upon his life work : "I have had this subject long in contemplation and I have now taken it up, fully determined, for one, never to lay it down while I breathe or until the end shall be attained." Later he contributed to the Philanthropist and was from its first ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 179 issue listed as one of its agents. In 1819 he moved to St. Louis when the question of the admission of Missouri as a slave state was one of the great issues of the time, and entered with enthusiasm into the campaign to exclude slavery from that state. From the beginning his efforts were doomed to failure so far as the admission of the new state was concerned, but the influence of the campaign that he carried on by speeches and through the newspapers survived the issue that called them forth. He returned to Mount Pleasant after he had spent the small earnings that he had accumulated through years of frugality. Elihu Embree, who had been publishing the Emancipator in Greenville, Tennessee, died about the time that Lundy returned from St. Louis, and this helped him to determine upon the publication of the Genius of Universal Emancipation to take the place of the Emancipator, which was a pronounced anti-slavery paper. Later he took over Embree's printing plant and issued the ninth number of the Genius from Greenville, Tennessee. Here he literally produced his own paper, writing the editorials, editing the news, setting the type and doing the press work. In 1824 he moved the paper to Baltimore and issued it as a weekly. In the latter part of 1825 he visited Hayti to make arrangements with the government there for the settlement of emancipated slaves. Three years later he lectured through the Eastern states and formed the acquaintance of William Lloyd Garrison, with whom he afterward became associated in editing the Genius. In the winter of 1828-1829 he was assaulted, because of an article he had published in his paper, by Austin Woolf olk, a slave dealer. Woolf olk seems to have escaped the clutches of the law, but Lundy was censured by the court and compelled to leave the city. He first went to Washington and then to Philadelphia, continuing to publish his paper, but changing the name to the National Inquirer and later to the Pennsylvania Freeman. In 1829 he went a second time to Hayti, taking with him several slaves that had been emancipated for that purpose. In 1830 he visited the Wilberforce colony of fugitive slaves in Canada, and then went to Texas to provide a similar colony under the Mexican flag. He visited the latter place in 1833, but the movement for the annexation of Texas to the United States brought an end to his enterprise in this section. He finally moved to La Salle County, Illinois, intending to renew the publication of the Genius there, but was prevented by death, which ended his labors August 22, 1839. After Lundy left Ohio, and the Philanthropist, published at Mt. Pleasant, suspended, for a period there was no anti-slavery paper published within the state. There were papers, not especially devoted to the cause, with editors holding anti-slavery views and expressing these occasionally in mild and guarded form ; but for a few years there was no paper devoted chiefly to the advocacy of abolition. On March 15, 1832, John Frost published the first issue of the Aurora in New Lisbon, Ohio. In his salutatory 3 he announced that the paper would be non-partisan and opposed to Masonry. He said nothing about slavery. The paper was a four-page, twenty-column sheet of which about nineteen columns were made up of clippings from other papers. One of these extracts dwelt upon the evils resulting from the use of intoxicating liquor. Later this paper became a temperance organ and a vigorous opponent of slavery. It published proceedings of anti-slavery meetings, addresses and communications that otherwise would not have reached the people and become matters of permanent record. Eastern Ohio, where the first anti-slavery paper was published, was a section of rapidly growing anti-slavery sentiment, and the publication in the Aurora of local matter relating to the progress of the movement is a valuable contribution to its history. While the first issue 3 - For this salutatory see Ohio Archaeological and Historical Publications, Vol. XXX, pp. 393-395. 180 - HISTORY OF OHIO of this paper contained practically no original matter except the salutatory, the columns were gradually devoted more and more to local news, editorials and contributions. Files of the Aurora are still in existence, but only a few of the earlier issues have been preserved. It was published continuously till the year 1856. The first issue of the Anti-Slavery Bugle was published at New Lisbon, as we shall see presently, in the office of the Aurora. The year 1835 is an important one in the anti-slavery calendar of Ohio. Early in the year previous occurred the anti-slavery upheaval in Lane Theological Seminary and Cincinnati. A colonization society 4 had been organized there with the sanction of the faculty and the evident approval of the patrons of the seminary. The organization of the American Anti-Slavery Society and the progress of sentiment favorable to immediate emancipation influenced the young candidates for the ministry to form an abolition society. Practically the entire student body was drawn into the movement, including the sons of slave holders and others from the South who had been reared under pro-slavery influences. Dr. Lyman Beecher, the eminent divine, father of Henry Ward Beecher and Harriet Beecher Stowe, was at that time president of the institution. In his absence the trustees passed resolutions suppressing the colonization society and the abolition society in the seminary. The young divinity students refused to submit. They were soon afterward presented the alternative of giving up the society or leaving the institution. About 70 of the 110 students withdrew. Professor Morgan, a member of the faculty, was dismissed without any reason assigned, though it was well understood that his anti-slavery opinions had caused him to lose his position. James Ludlow, a wealthy gentleman, "gave the students use of a building near Cincinnati, where they continued their studies for five months." In May, 1835, many of the students who had left Lane Seminary entered Oberlin College at the founding of the theological department in that institution. The advent of James G. Birney in Cincinnati and his part in the anti-salvery movement of Ohio are matters of prime importance. Birney was a man of distinguished family, inherited a substantial fortune, was a typical Southerner by birth and training, was graduated in 1810 from Princeton University, was later admitted to the bar and entered upon the practice of law in his native state, Kentucky. In 1816 he married a daughter of Judge William McDowell of the United States Circuit Court. In the same year he was elected to the Legislature of Kentucky. In 1818 he moved to Alabama, bought a cotton plantation near Huntsville and served in the first Legislature organized in that state under the Constitution of 1819. Here as in the Legislature of Kentucky he won recognition as an industrious and able member, but brought an end to all hope for further preferment by speaking and voting against a resolution endorsing Gen. Andrew Jackson for the Presidency. This was a few years after the general had won his signal victory at New Orleans. Birney was not moved to this action by personal hostility. He regarded Jackson as a "headstrong and violent man," a duelist, a violator of law, and the author of "brutal deeds" which unfitted him for the high office of President. Birney afterwards sold his plantation, returned to Huntsville, and the practice of the law in which he was remarkably successful. He became actively interested in the American Colonization Society, succeeded in having 4 - The colonization society, which had extensive branches throughout the country, advocated the establishment of colonies outside of the United States to which negroes could be transported when they gained their freedom. It was believed by many prominent men that such a plan would gradually emancipate the slave. It was thought that masters would be encouraged to liberate their slaves if such provision could be made for them. There was in the early half of the last century much opposition to the presence of free negroes in the slave states. ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 181 laws passed prohibiting the importation of slaves into Alabama "for sale or hire," and was repeatedly elected mayor of Huntsville. He took an active interest in education, and at the request of the trustees of the State University of Alabama he selected and recommended the members of the first faculty of that institution. He also aided prominently in the establishment of a female seminary in Huntsville. For a time he was a supporter of Henry Clay, with whom he maintained friendly personal relations. Later, after an interview with Clay, he decided to support him no longer, feeling that no substantial help could be gotten from that source for the emancipation of slaves. At this time, Birney, who had become a moderate abolitionist, hoped to see Virginia and Kentucky abolish slavery and thus limit its extension to the North and West. In June, 1834, he set free his own slaves and severed connection with the Colonization Society. He thought at first of publishing an anti-slavery paper in Kentucky, but found the opposition to such a movement so strong that he abandoned it. Despairing finally of being able to turn the tide against slavery in his native state he decided to move north. He visited Cincinnati in August, 1835, for the purpose of establishing an anti-slavery newspaper there. Scarcely had he reached the city when there were manifestations of opposition to his project. Southern papers, especially those of Kentucky, viewed with alarm the proposed publication of an anti-slavery paper in the free State of Ohio just beyond their northern border. The slave holders of Limestone County, Alabama, denounced Birney, forbade the circulation of "any seditious publication of any kind whatever," 5 organized a vigilance committee and directed that any person found guilty of this offense should be punished by death. In the meantime Birney had established his family in Cincinnati and was preparing to publish his paper. Before he had issued the first number, the papers of the city, with the single exception of the Gazette, were teeming with protests, threats and denunciation. "Send them ( `the incendiary publications') back to the place from whence they came," said one editor, "and if any of their authors or the agents of them should be found here, lynch them." In fact, every local paper in Cincinnati, with the exception mentioned, was either directly or indirectly encouraging the lawlessness that later disgraced the city. Birney finally concluded not to publish the early issues of his paper in Cincinnati. He chose New Richmond, Ohio, as the place from which to launch the enterprise. The first issue bore the date of January 1, 1836. It was named the Philanthropist in honor of the anti-slavery paper published by Charles Osborn at Mount Pleasant, 1817-1818. The first issue was edited with great care. It was free from abuse and intolerance and appealed to the reason and conscience of the slave-holder and his friends. It nevertheless was a staunch opponent of slavery and a fearless advocate of immediate emancipation. The editor declared that "liberty and slavery can not live long in juxtaposition," expressing the thought contained in Lincoln's famous announcement years afterward that "a house divided against itself can not stand." He drew attention to the aggressive spirit of slavery, "pushing its victories and extending its conquest," and warned the people that the liberties of the free states were in imminent danger. He sought the abolition of slavery under the constitution by constitutional methods, and dwelt upon the fact that it was opposed to the spirit of the constitution and the Declaration of Independence—a menace to the whole country, the South as well as the North. His bold but respectfully worded editorials aroused the wrath of 5 - Ohio Archaeological and Historical Publications, Vol. XX, pp. 270-271. 182 - HISTORY OF OHIO the slaveholders south of the Ohio and their sympathizers north of it. There was soon talk of a mob in Cincinnati to drive the "seditious fanatic" out of the community. The Whig of Cincinnati, in commenting upon Birney's proposal to publish an anti-slavery paper in New Richmond had declared on December 21, 1835: "We deem this new effort an insult to our slaveholding neighbors and an attempt to brow beat public opinion in this quarter. We do, therefore, hope, notwithstanding the alleged respectability of the editor, that he will find the public so inexorably averse to his mad scheme that he will deem it his interest to abandon it." The mayor of the city gave Mr. Birney to understand that he must not expect protection if he persisted in his course. The Philanthropist had not been published at this time in Cincinnati but it circulated freely there and Birney was a resident of the city. While it could not be claimed that he had abused the freedom of the press the cause that lie was advocating made him obnoxious to powerful elements in Cincinnati. The opposition to the publication of his paper was due principally to two considerations : (1) It would interfere with business ; wealthy slaveholders would cease to patronize Cincinnati if the circulation of such a paper were permitted there. (2) It would create insubordination among slaves, encourage them to resist their masters and make more frequent efforts to escape by the "Underground Railroad" to Canada ; it would encourage servile insurrection, the thought of which was a terror not only to slaveholders but to the white population on both sides of the river. The prospect of an uprising among the negroes was a powerful argument with the laboring men in Cincinnati and helped to keep them in line with the politicians and business men against the anti-slavery movement. They did not seem to awaken to the fact that they were doomed to low wages in competition with the slave labor of the South. In Cincinnati the encouragement of the newspapers, the city officials and prominent citizens who had business interests at stake gradually worked up the mob spirit to fever heat. An evening was appointed for an indignation meeting at the courthouse. Hand bills were circulated, the workshops were visited and a large attendance at the meeting was assured. The neighboring towns and villages across the river were invited to send delegations and responded in large numbers. Preliminary conferences were held and the program for the evening of January 22d was carefully mapped out. The friends of Birney were greatly concerned at the threatening attitude of the assembling hosts as the evening approached. Some of them called at his home and urged him to accompany them to the country until the storm should blow over. He courteously declined. His wife and son appealed to him to remain at home that evening. He answered quietly but firmly that he would attend the meeting. His son, a youth of seventeen years, accompanied his father as he left home. In the meantime a great crowd had assembled at the courthouse. Feeling ran high and violent speeches were made. The mayor of the city presided. A committee was appointed to prepare and report resolutions. This was a mere formality as the resolutions had already been prepared. While the committee was ostensibly attending to this duty, Colonel Hale, a liveryman, was regaling the assembly with a violent and inflammatory speech. He denounced the "miscreant Birney" for making "Cincinnati the place of his intrigues to overthrow the constitution and plunge the South into the blood-reeking massacres of a servile insurrection." The turbulent assembly cheered him to the echo and at the conclusion of his harangue were ready for the riotous work that had been planned. At this moment a clear voice called out, "Mr. President, my name is Birney. May I be heard ?" The crowd for the moment was silenced at this audacity. ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 183 "My personal character and my cause have been unjustly attacked," said Birney. "May I defend them ?" The president's answer was lost in the clamor and tumult that followed. There were cries of "Kill him," "Down with him," "Drag him out," "Tar and feather him," and milder calls of "Hear him." The liveryman who had been making the violent speech and others in the crowd tried to force their way toward Birney, but a more general shout went up, "Fair play." In the midst of the confusion, Surveyor-General Robert T. Lytle, chairman of the committee on resolutions to rid the city of the presence of Birney, sprang forward and from the judges bench demanded silence. He was one of the instigators of the meeting and the tumult ceased. "My friends," said he, "hear before you strike. Don't disgrace our city and our cause before the nation. I oppose abolitionism, but I honor a brave man ; and Mr. Birney has tonight shown himself the bravest man I have ever seen." He then respectfully requested Mr. Birney to wait until the resolutions were read. After the conclusion of the reading of the resolutions Mr. Birney held the attention of the audience for three-quarters of an hour. He was a ready and forceful speaker and made the most of this unusual opportunity. He stated clearly his attitude toward the constitution and declared that he sought to accomplish emancipation under its authority. He assured the audience that "he was not indifferent to the safety of his fellow citizens in the South. He was from the South. He was born in the South. He had spent his life there. He had numerous beloved kindred who held slaves. To their safety he was not indifferent, and he certainly should pursue no course which he thought likely to put them in peril. He considered that the ultimate safety of the South was more in danger from perpetual slavery than from abolition." 6 He spoke of the rapid increase of the colored population in the South and declared that emancipation was the way to safety from the dangers of a servile insurrection. He concluded by courteously thanking the audience and the officers of the meeting for the opportunity to present his views, and the assembly that had gathered to drive him from the city dispersed without any effort to injure him. He had won a great personal victory, but the end was not yet. A little later the editor of the Philanthropist announced that after March the paper would be published in Cincinnati. A centrally located office, at the northeast corner of Main and Seventh streets, was fitted up and the paper was regularly issued for more than three months without molestation. Those who were the prime movers in the organization of the riotous meeting of January, however, had not abandoned their resolution to get rid of the anti-slavery paper and its editor. Having failed in the first effort they determined to accomplish their purpose by a slight change in plan. This time they avoided publicity. There was no public announcement of a meeting. A comparatively small band of picked and determined men, including a few from Covington, Kentucky, and a number of salveholders temporarily the guests of hotels in the city, numbering all told about forty, at midnight on July 12th, entered the pressroom from the roof, pied the type, emptied the ink, carried away parts of the press and destroyed a large number of copies of an issue of the Philanthropist that had not been mailed. While this occurred shortly after midnight, an uproar attended the riotous work and the police made no effort to interfere. On the morning of the 14th, hand bills were circulated through the city warning all abolitionists to beware and threatening any who should attempt to reestablish their press. Inflammatory editorials were published in some of the local papers. Mr. Birney was out of the city the 6 - Cincinnati Gazette, January 23, 1836. 184 - HISTORY OF OHIO night of the raid on the office of his paper. By hard work the printers succeeded in issuing the Philanthropist at the usual hour on the 15th. The editor and some of his friends called on the mayor of the city who promised to issue a proclamation in the interest of peace and order. The proclamation that appeared the day following is so characteristic of the indisposition at that time to afford any adequate protection that it is here reproduced in part. The following paragraph is significant.: "And I do earnestly entreat those persons whose proceedings it is alleged, have prompted to the commission of the riot complained of, as they value the quiet of the city, to abstain from the further prosecution of such measures as may have a tendency to inflame the public mind and lead to acts of violence and disorder, in contempt of the laws and disgraceful to the city." This naturally did not discourage the instigators of the mob that had made a successful start but had not yet suppressed the Philanthropist. The executive committee of the local anti-slavery society issued an address to the people of Cincinnati, closing with this paragraph: “We have now in some degree, from the force of circumstances, committed to our custody the rights of every free man in Ohio, of their offspring, of our own. Shall we as cravens voluntarily offer them up sacrifices to the spirit of misrule and oppression, or as American citizens contend for them till a force which we can not withstand shall wrest them from our hands? The latter part of the alternative we have embraced with a full determination by the help of God to maintain unimpaired the freedom of speech and the liberty of the press, the palladium of our rights." This declaration was regarded by the pro-slavery element of Cincinnati as a defiant resolution to resist opposition by force. The three partisan papers—the Republican, the Post, and the Whig, the first two democratic and the second advocating the party whose name it bore—in almost daily editorials denounced the Philanthropist and its editor and encouraged once more the mob spirit to drive both from the city. The Gazette, which was strictly neutral, remained silent editorially. The democratic politicians were playing a shrewd political game in forcing the opposing party to join hands with them in violent opposition to the abolitionists, whose ranks at this time were recruited chiefly from the whig party, although the majority of that party in Cincinnati were pro-slavery in sympathy. The whig politicians took the pro-slavery horn of the dilemma, and their organ suggested "dangling from a bough" and "tar and feathers" for Birney and his associates. A meeting at the Lower Market House was called for the evening of July 23d, and a committee of forty-two prominent and respectable citizens was designated to prepare and report resolutions. In spite of efforts to drum up a large attendance at the meeting, the crowd that assembled was smaller than at the January meeting in the courthouse. About 1,000 persons all told were present, but the prominent business men who were expected to take a leading part were not there. The meeting was therefore officered by the politicians who were chiefly instrumental in promoting it. The democratic postmaster of the city presided and a goodly number of whig candidates for office filled the minor positions. Resolutions were passed pledging the meeting to "use all lawful means to discountenance and suppress every publication in the city which advocates the modern doctrines of abolitionism." The actual suppression was postponed, however, and a committee of twelve prominent citizens was appointed to "wait upon James G. Birney and his associates," "to remonstrate with him" and persuade him, if possible, to eliminate himself and his paper from the city. It was generally understood that he would not do this, and the appointment of the committee was simply a device to prepare the way for the events that followed. Two members of the committee refused to serve. The most ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 185 prominent man that remained and acted in this capacity was the venerable Judge Jacob Burnet. Mr. Birney, as was anticipated, refused to surrender his rights, vouchsafed by the constitution and the laws, to continue the publication of his paper ; and the committee of ten announced the failure of their mission and closed their report as follows : "They [the committee] owe it to themselves and those whom they represent to express the utmost abhorrence of every thing like violence ; and earnestly to implore their fellow citizens to abstain therefrom." While Gen. William Birney, the son of James Birney, in after years declared that these lines were added to the report "with the conventional hypocrisy of the mobocrats of the period," this judgment is doubtless too harsh for some members of the committee. It is reasonable to assume that these lines were included at the request of Judge Burnet and Nicholas Longworth, who reluctantly served on the committee with a sincere desire to find a peaceful solution of the controversy disturbing the city. It is certain, however, that the report of the committee did not have a mollifying effect on the mob that was brewing. The partisan local papers printed it on Saturday, July 30th. The Gazette refused to publish it until the following Monday. Probably it did not wish to be in any way responsible for the riotous proceedings that were taking organized form. On the day preceding, representatives of the local Anti-Slavery Society went to the mayor and offered their services as special policemen. He refused to act on this suggestion. Mr. Birney was not a non-resident, and he had in his home firearms and ammunition, which he would not have hesitated to use in self defense. The printing press and type of the office of the Philanthropist, however, belonged to a Mr. Pugh, a Quaker, who would not permit firearms to be used to protect his property. At six o'clock on the evening of the 30th, resolutions were adopted by the mob demanding that the press of the Philanthropist should be destroyed and the type scattered along the street; that Mr. Birney should be notified to leave the city in twenty-four hours. The mob then proceeded with its work. The number of persons actually engaged was comparatively small, according to one estimate not to exceed fifty. On the following Monday, August 1st, the Gazette contained the following account of the destruction of the anti-slavery printing office and the riotous proceedings that followed. Here is the account : DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY On Saturday night, July 30th, very soon after dark, a concourse of citizens assembled at the corner of Main and Seventh streets in this city, and, upon a short consultation, broke open the printing office of the Philanthropist, the abolition paper, scattered the type into the streets, tore down the presses, and completely dismantled the office. It was owned by A. Pugh, a peaceable and orderly printer, who published the Philanthropist for the Anti-Slavery Society of Ohio. From the printing office, the crowd went to the house of A. Pugh, where they supposed there were other printing materials, but found none nor offered any violence. Then to Messrs. Donaldson's, where ladies only were at home. The residence of Mr. Birney, the editor, was then visited. No person was at home but a youth, upon whose explanations the house was left undisturbed. A shout was raised for Doctor Colby's, and the concourse returned to Main Street, proposing to pile up the contents of the office in the street and make a bonfire of them. Joseph Graham mounted the pile and advised against burning it, lest the houses near might take fire. A portion of the press was then dragged down the Main Street, broken up, and thrown into the river. The Exchange 186 - HISTORY OF OHIO was then visited and refreshments taken. An attack was then made upon the residence of some blacks in Church Alley ; two guns were fired upon the assailants and they recoiled. It was some time before a rally could be again made, several voices declaring that they did not wish to endanger themselves. A second attack was made, the houses were found empty and their interior contents destroyed. It was now about midnight, when the party parading down Main Street was addressed by the mayor, who had been a silent spectator of the destruction of the printing office. He told them they might as well now disperse. A dispersion to a considerable extent followed. The mayor's brief speech was reported in full. It is evidently characteristic of the man and the influences that elevated him to office. The latter consideration entitles it to a place in history : "Gentlemen : It is now late at night and time we were all in bed—by continuing longer, you will disturb the citizens or deprive them of their rest, besides robbing yourselves of rest. No doubt it is your intention to punish the guilty and leave the innocent. But if you continue longer, you are in danger of punishing the innocent with the guilty, which I am convinced no one in Cincinnati would wish to do. We have done enough for one night. ["Three cheers for the Mayor."] The abolitionists themselves must be convinced themselves by this time, what public sentiment is, and that it will not do any longer to disregard or set it at naught. [Three cheers again.] As you cannot punish the guilty without endangering the innocent, I advise you all to go home. [Cries of "home !" "home !" from the crowd drowned the balance of the harangue.] " 7 On Monday following, reaction had set in, and many citizens of Cincinnati who thus far had taken no part in the contest, realized that the city had been disgraced by mob violence and that something must be done for the restoration of law and order. The population of Cincinnati at that time included many good people of this class who were now thoroughly aroused and resolved to restore order. A meeting was called for the afternoon of Tuesday, August 2nd, at three o'clock, in the courthouse. Among those prominently identified with this meeting were Charles Hammond, editor of the Gazette, Salmon P. Chase, William D. Gallagher, Thomas H. Shreve, M. Lyon, F. W. Chester, James Calhoun and J. M. McCullough. Volunteer companies were organized to preserve order "and the mayor reluctantly swore them in as special policemen." This promptly brought an end to disorder. The Philanthropist did not resume publication immediately. It was reestablished and reissued in the following September. For a time Mr. Birney did not venture out much at night, but he soon abandoned this precaution. Most of the time he was in the lecture field while his assistant, Dr. Gamaliel Bailey, looked after the interests of the Philanthropist while Mr. Birney wrote the leading editorials. Later Doctor Bailey became the editor of the paper which he published in Cincinnati until 1847, in whi.ch year he moved it to Washington, District of Columbia, where it was published and renamed the National Era. It wielded great influence for the anti-slavery cause prior to the Civil war. In its columns, by chapters, was first published Uncle Tom's Cabin by Harriet Beecher Stowe. Mr. Birney in the later part of September, 1837, moved to New York City to assume his duties as secretary of the American Anti-Slavery Society. He continued to be a prominent figure in the antislavery movement, and was the candidate of the liberty party .for President of the United States in 1840 and 1844. He was the author  7 - Green, Sketches of the Life and Writings of James Gillespie Birney, p. 66. ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 187 of many pamphlets against slavery and his speeches on this subject in the United States and England were published and extensively read. He had six sons. James was elected lieutenant-governor of Michigan, served as acting governor and was appointed by President Grant minister at The Hague. William, David Belle, Dion and Fitzhugh rendered distinguished service in the Civil war. The first two rose to the rank of brevet major-general, and the last three made the supreme sacrifice for liberty and union. James Gillespie, a grandson, rose to the rank of captain and died soon after the close of the Civil war. PRO-SLAVERY MOBS AND RACE RIOTS Gen. William Birney, in his biography of his father, has insisted that the mobbing of anti-slavery advocates, though somewhat frequent, was not serious, resulting usually in the breaking of church windows or the hurling of a few over-ripe eggs at abolition speakers. "Tar and feathers," said he, "figured largely in newspaper articles and pro-slavery speeches ; but of the thousands of anti-slavery lecturers one only was subjected to that indignity and that was as early as 1834." General Birney may be right in his contention that certain writers have exaggerated the abuse and insults inflicted upon anti-slavery speakers and writers ; but he is certainly wrong in his claim that only one of them suffered the indignity of "tar and feathers" and that "as early as 1834." The withdrawal of divinity students from Lane Seminary in 1834 has already been noted. Among the number was Marius Robinson who was born at Dalton, Massachusetts, July 29, 1806. He moved with the large family, of which he was the eldest child, to Danville, New York. Soon afterward he went to Utica where he learned the trade of printer. In 1827 he accepted a position in the South and taught in a Cherokee Indian Mission School. While here he studied theology under private teachers. In 1830 he entered Nashville University, from which he was graduated two years later with high honors. His diploma, now in the possession of a relative, bears the signature of President Andrew Jackson. He then became a student in Lane Seminary, intending upon the completion of his course to enter the ministry. The upheaval in that institution over the question of slavery changed his plans. For a time in 1836 he worked in the office of the Philanthropist in Cincinnati. In June of that year he was ordained to the ministry in Jamestown, New York. In August he was appointed by the American Anti-Slavery Society as lecturer for Middle and Northern Ohio. His work brought him to Salem, which later became his permanent home. He entered upon his mission with generous enthusiasm. Though not a Quaker, his wife had been reared in that faith and he had the quiet courage and devotion to his cause so generally attributed to that sect. He was a non-resident--his only weapons were those of reason and spirit. His lectures were well received. Though not an especially eloquent advocate, he was a pleasing and persuasive speaker. At some of his meetings there was evidence of disapproval and threats that he would be harshly dealt with. On June 1, 1837, in answer to an invitation he went to Berlin Center, Mahoning County [then Trumbull County], to deliver an address. Churches and school buildings were closed to him. He declared his intention of showing that the Bible does not support slavery. This seemed to arouse especial hostility. His statement of his effort to be heard and the indignities that he suffered at the hands of the mob indicates the spirit of the times, even in Northeastern Ohio where antislavery sentiment and influence were comparatively strong. 'His account was published in the Aurora of June 15, 1837; and is here reproduced 188 - HISTORY OF OHIO from a Souvenir History of Ye Old Town of Salem, 1806-1906. His communication, written at the Quaker Village of Gillford, Columbiana County, was addressed to the editor of the Aurora as follows : "Mr. Frost : At the request of a number of my fellow-citizens, I send you some of the particulars of a recent gross violation of my rights, in common with those of my fellow-citizens. * * * I shall give a simple narrative of facts, for some of the indignities offered me were of too gross and brutal a character to be thus publicly detailed. In giving this narrative I am actuated by no spirit of resentment, but of unfeigned sorrow for the deep-rooted and widely extended influence of the spirit of slavery among my countrymen, and a strong desire that all may see their danger, and, rising in the vigor of Christian manhood, may remove the cause, by the unceasing proclamation of the great doctrines of universal love. "On Thursday, the first of the present month, I visited Berlin, in Trumbull County (now a part of Mahoning County), for the purpose of discussing the subject of American slavery. Notice was circulated that on the following day there would be a lecture. Application was made to Joseph Holt, Esq., a trustee of the school district, and one of the oldest and most influential citizens of the place, for the use of the schoolhouse. This was refused. Jesse Garretson, a highly respectable merchant of Berlin, at whose house I was welcomed with the warmest of cordiality, opened his dwelling for the lecture. Esquire Holt informed him that if the meeting was held the inevitable result would be a mob. The meeting, however, passed off without a verification of the prediction, and another meeting was appointed to be held on the following day of the week, when I purposed to vindicate the Bible from the charge of supporting slavery. On Saturday there were some buzzings of disapprobation, because we had presumed to have a meeting in opposition to the well-known wishes of the nobility of Berlin. But they were not such as to create in my mind any apprehension of violence. But the result showed that Esquire Holt could penetrate the future with more certainty than myself. About ten o'clock at night Mordecai B. Hughes entered the store of Garretson & Hoover, where I was sitting in conversation with J. F. Powers, Jesse Garretson and his wife, and having seized me by the arm proceeded to drag me toward the door, at the same time saying, 'You have got to leave town tonight. You have disturbed the peace of our citizens long enough.' Mrs. Garretson interfered, saying : 'If you take him, you must take me too' ; and about the same time a second ruffian, who entered just after Hughes, seized me by the other arm for the purpose of dragging me out, while Mrs. Garretson made an effort to close the door and shut out the remainder of the gang. But this was prevented by those without, who now joined in the effort for my abduction ; but for several minutes these were rendered unavailing, by the vigor and firmness of my friends, Mr. and Mrs. Garretson. During the struggle Hughes demanded of Mr. Garretson that he should dismiss me from his house. This was refused. They then pressed on with new vigor. They were requested to stop and reason the matter. 'No reason here' was the reply ; and so, indeed, we found it. Brute force was the order of the day, and it was exercised without respect of persons upon all who opposed, as was strikingly manifested in the treatment these chivalrous advocates of slavery were pleased to deal out to Mrs. Garretson in their zeal for the peace of the neighborhood. Hughes, who seemed to be dictator for the occasion, ordered her to desist ; assured her that she was 'acting very imprudently' ; that he 'would remember her for this' ; and once pushed her with some violence. Mrs. Garretson also received two blows, one on her arm, which sprained her wrist, and another on her breast which has since occasioned considerable pain and soreness. But notwithstanding their commands, threats and blows, she continued unremittingly her efforts until they had secured their prey by dragging ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 189 me into the street. The spirit with which the attack was made may be learned by the following fact : A citizen from Berlin, in conversation with two of the rioters, asked them how they would have felt had there been a corpse found in the store the next morning. One of them, William Ripley, Jr., a merchant of the place, replied : 'We went prepared to take him, let the consequences be what they would.' "After getting me into the street, they hurried me along with violence and rapidity, a mile or perhaps more—cursing, taunting, threatening as they went. I was dragged along by three men, one holding me by each wrist, another holding me by the collar. This last, who seemed to be more of a savage than the rest, frequently jerked me with violence towards him, and would then thrust his fist violently against my breast ; and once he struck me on the head. Hughes remonstrated against their hurting me, and they desisted from this species of violence. One started for a rail, but this measure was decided against. But in the infliction of tar and feathers they seemed to coincide. After the delay of some half hour or more for the purpose of procuring the means, they carried their measure into execution. After this outrage, one of their number went for a wagon, for the purpose of transporting me far from Berlin, that I should not be able to return in time for the meeting next day. During this interval, while being held fast by two men, I was made the subject of multiplied jeers and insults. I made several efforts to enter into conversation, and in one or two instances met with partial success. But Hughes, who was most surprisingly afraid of 'reason,' uniformly interfered and thwarted my purpose. "When the wagon arrived, I was placed in it with three men, one to drive and two to prevent my escape. After ascertaining by search of my pockets that I had neither dirk nor pistols, they concluded to relinquish their hold on my person and permit me to ride in the most comfortable method I could. I was carried by them about ten miles, and left about an hour before day, near the center of Canfield. I was here an entire stranger, not knowing even the name of a single inhabitant of the township, and in a situation as may well be imagined anything but agreeable. But that God, whose I am and whom I humbly endeavor to serve, guided my steps to the house of Mr. Wetmore, where all my wants were most amply supplied. From his son, Mr. William Wetmore, I received the most marked sympathy and kindness. Of him I borrowed a suit of clothes, my own having been entirely spoiled, attended meeting through the day, and although laboring under considerable pain and fever from the abuse of the previous night, I was permitted at 5 o'clock p. m. to open my mouth once more, for the dumb, and to search out the cause of those who, by the avarice and prejudice of the nation, are appointed unto death. * * * * * * * * * "I will only acid that I have since visited Berlin for the purpose of addressing a number of respectable citizens who were desirous of learning what this strange doctrine (abolition) was. But tar and feathers having proven ineffectual, other means were resorted to. I was now, together with my audience, subjected to other outrages, under the professed authority and sanction of law. The particulars of this transaction are worthy of record, and I will endeavor to furnish them next week. "Yours, "MARIUS R. ROBINSON. "Gillford, June 13, 1837." In the struggle to take Mr. Robinson from the store, he was dragged over a rack of scythes and an ugly gash was cut in one of his thighs. The tar applied was so hot that it burned the flesh on one of his arms. Before reaching Mr. Wetmore's home in Canfield, he called at another house, but the inmates were so frightened at his appearance that they would not admit him. In the sermon that he preached in Canfield 190 - HISTORY OF OHIO Sunday evening he did not speak of the ordeal through which he passed the previous night. Physical reaction followed, and he never fully recovered from the brutal treatment that he received at the hands of the mob, but he manifested no personal ill feeling toward his persecutors. Those who perpetrated this outrage were all well known. There was no attempt to conceal their identity neither was there any effort to bring them to justice for this lawless act. On the other hand, Mr. Robinson was himself arrested on the charge of "inciting a mob." He was successfully defended in court by R. W. Tayler, later auditor of state and father of R. W. Tayler, congressman and United States district judge. In these times there was plenty of law, but it was seldom invoked in behalf of abolitionists. In 1839, Mr. Robinson was delivering anti-slavery lectures in Licking County. At Granville he was confined to his room for some time by a severe illness. Taking advantage of this his opponents resorted to a novel device to rid the community of his presence. The overseers of the poor were influenced to use their authority in behalf of the local pro-slavery sympathizers. They sent by a constable the following order which was served on Mr. Robinson when he was unable to leave his bed : "Licking County, Granville Township, ss. "To H. C. Mead, Constable of Said Township, Greeting : "Whereas, We, the undersigned, overseers of the poor of Granville Township, have received information that there has lately come into said township, a certain poor man, named Robinson, who is not a legal resident thereof, and will likely become a township charge, you are therefore hereby commanded to warn the said Robinson, with his family, to depart out of said township. And of this warrant make service and return. Given under our hands this first day of March, 1839. "CHARLES GILMAN, "S. BANCROFT, "Overseers of the Poor." Although he was ill, Robinson was not frightened at this order and stood his ground until he was able and ready to leave. The influence and conspicuous service of Marius Robinson to the anti-slavery cause did not end with the incidents here related, as we shall see later. In this connection the statement should be made that the men who mobbed him in the summer of 1837 in after years regretted this action and a number of them became his supporters and staunch defenders of the Union when the shackles of the bondsman were broken in the Civil war. General Birney declares that the pro-slavery mob "though homicidal in intent made no martyrs." Englishmen recently from the home country were frequently men of pronounced anti-slavery convictions. Against them it was easy to incite mob violence. The hostility toward them was a heritage of the Revolution. It was easy to stir up among the unreflecting, especially in cities, demonstrations against British opponents to our institutions. In June, 1841, a riot of moderate dimensions was incited against an English confectioner by the name of Burnett in the City of Cincinnati. He was an outspoken abolitionist with a sharp tongue and the disposition to use it on small provocation. He is said to have rescued a slave girl and sent her to Canada. He made no denial of this when her master and a number of constables came to his place of business seeking the fugitive. Considerable excitement developed when he was placed under arrest. He had personal qualities that, in spite of his English nativity, had made him some staunch friends in the city. After his arrest he returned home awaiting trial. That night a mob again assembled at his home near Fifth and Market streets. According to Birney's account, the mob assembled on three successive evenings to take Burnett from his house and hang him. ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 191 He did not attempt to leave the city, but with twelve friends and two sons barricaded himself in his home against the mob. Assaults were frequently made against the beleagured abolitionists but the mob was driven off by volleys of lumps of coal from the upper windows. A good supply, stored in the basement for fuel, was now used by the defenders. Fire arms "were reserved for a last resort." This incident derives additional interest from the fact that one of the defenders was young Donn Piatt who afterwards acquired literary and martial fame. Failing to accomplish its purpose in three successive nights, the mob was finally quelled and dispersed by the mayor of the city. Birney declares that such a conflict never took place in any other city. The Cincinnati Gazette, no longer under the editorial direction of the able, independent and courageous Charles Hammond, gave a somewhat different story of the mob. The paper under its new editor was distinctly pro-slavery in sentiment and its reports of local occurrences that relate to slavery must be regarded with a liberal allowance. Riotous action against the negro race began in Ohio when the colored population was comparatively small. Most of the free negroes in the state were in the County of Hamilton and the City of Cincinnati. The local officials became alarmed at their increasing numbers. In 1829 a proclamation was issued requiring that all colored persons who could not furnish evidence of their freedom and the bonds legally required to entitle them to remain in the city should leave at once. The laws applying to the colored people, enumerated in another chapter among the "Black laws," had not been rigidly enforced and consternation now seized the resident negroes when they learned, many of them for the first time, just what was required before they would be legally privileged to remain. They petitioned for an extension of time in which to meet the legal requirements. This was granted them. In the meantime they had sent representatives to Canada to arrange for emigration from Ohio. Before these representatives returned the extension of time granted by the authorities had expired, and steps were taken for the forcible expulsion of the negro. This precipitated a riot that lasted three days and nights. The colored people appealed in vain to the authorities for protection, and at last barricaded their homes and defended themselves. A number of their assailants were killed and wounded and the mob retired. A little later the committee returned from Canada with the cheering news that the governor of Upper Canada had said that he would extend to them a cordial welcome. "Tell the republicans on your side of the line," he said, "that we royalists do not know men by their color. Should you come to us you will be entitled to all the privileges of the rest of His Majesty's subjects." On receipt of this intelligence it is estimated that one-half of the colored population of Cincinnati, numbering about 2,200, left the city and founded a settlement in Canada, which they called Wilberforce. 1 Negroes escaping from slavery, without education and previous experience in providing for their needs, were not naturally the most desirable class of citizens. They lacked thrift, ambition and enterprise. It must be said, however, that they were not inclined to acts of violent lawlessness. They frequently objected to the work of white abolitionists in their behalf, because it made them the objects of the hatred of the dominant pro-slavery element. In the riot of July, 1836, of which mention has already been made, the free colored people of Cincinnati met and passed resolutions asking Birney and his anti-slavery friends to cease their agitation because it was endangering the peace and lives of the colored population of Cincinnati. This action was without result. It did not prevent the mob from wreaking their wrath upon the colored quarter of the city. Early in September, 1841, occurred a race riot in Cincinnati that in 1 - Ohio Anti-Slavery Convention Proceedings, 1835, pp. 19-20. 192 - HISTORY OF OHIO some respects surpassed all previous outbreaks of this character in that State of Ohio. An extended account of this is found in the Cincinnati Gazette of September 6, 1841. This riot had its small beginning about one week previous, on August 31st. It started with a quarrel between a few negroes and some Irish laborers. It gradually grew in violence and extent, reaching its climax on Saturday night, September 4. The printing office of the Philanthropist was again entered, the types, printing materials and furniture completely destroyed and the printing presses broken and thrown into the river. On Friday evening the mob in added numbers and violent mood started for the colored quarter. J. W. Piatt, the mayor .and one or two other prominent citizens, tried in vain to stay the rioters by appeals in behalf of the good name of the city. Their voices were drowned in shouts and curses of derision. Soon the fight was on in all its fury. Attacked in their homes, nothing was left to the negroes except to defend themselves as best they could. Many who escaped the bludgeons of the mob fled to the hills. The mob finally got possession of a cannon and its roar added to the tumult and horror of the night. There were meetings of citizens on Saturday at which resolutions were passed deploring the sad plight of the city and expressing disapprobation of abolotionists and the sources of the trouble that confronted them. An effort was made by the military, which had been called out to preserve order, to protect the panic-stricken negroes. About 300 of them were finally gotten into the jail in order that they might escape the fury of the mob. The disorder that prevailed was so serious that Governor Corwin issued a proclamation calling upon all good citizens to aid in preserving the peace and placing the local militia of the state at the command of the city authorities. When the colored men were disarmed and placed in prison for protection, they were assured that their wives and children would not be further molested. This assurance was made in good faith but it did not prevent the mob from renewing its attack and brutally abusing the helpless negro women and children. The mob finally desisted after it had accomplished its purpose and wearied itself with riotous excess. And the city once more for a period resumed its normal peaceful condition. The race question, though related to the slavery question in the years of our history prior to the Civil war, constitutes a separate and distinct problem that still remains with our republic. The institution of slavery was overthrown by force of arms, never to rise again. Since the Civil war there have been race riots that surpassed in destructive violence anything experienced in the period of anti-slavery agitation. The mitigation of these occasional reversions to barbarism demands the best thought and united effort of the leaders of both races. DIVISION IN ANTI-SLAVERY RANKS In 1840 and 1844 James G. Birney was the candidate of the liberty party for President of the United States. He ran on a platform pledged to the abolition of slavery, and abolitionists of all shades of opinion supported him. The radical wing of the party, the followers of William Lloyd Garrison, grew restive under the leadership of those who sought to liberate the slave and at the same time to preserve the Union. The abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia and in the territories of the United States they considered good so far as it went, but not sufficient to justify continued union with the South, where slavery existed under the sanction of the Constitution of the United States. The prospect of changing the Constitution seemed to them discouragingly remote. In the South the pro-slavery party was supreme and its influence was extending. They could not see how, for generations to ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 193 come at least, it would be possible to secure the sanction of three-fourths of the states to an anti-slavery amendment to the Constitution. Rather than continue under a government that legalized human slavery they would rend the Union asunder. They adopted as their battle cry, "No Union With Slaveholders." In other words, they were disunion abolitionists. They sought a peaceful existence in a free North without the annoyance of a dominating slaveholding South. The practical impossibility of their plan was then apparent to many as it is now to everyone. With the Underground Railroad, other devices to encourage runaway slaves and violent differences in regard to the "peculiar institution of the South" there could have been no peace along the borders of a dissevered Union. The disunion abolitionists did not look so far ahead and some of their advocates denounced the Constitution as "a league with death and a covenant with hell." Naturally there were many who opposed slavery but were not prepared to go to such extremes. The division in the anti-slavery ranks, which had been growing for some time, reached a crisis in the meeting of the Western Anti-Slavery Society which assembled in the Disciple Church at New Lisbon, June 5, 1845. Abby Kelley Foster, the aggressive and eloquent Quakeress and radical abolitionist, assailed the citadel of conservatism in this convention and ultimately carried everything by storm. She declared that "Washington and Jefferson were slaveholding thieves, living by the unpaid labor of robbed women and children." At this outburst a delegate stepped on the platform and declared, "This is a slander upon Jefferson, who said in his warning against slavery, 'I tremble for my country when I remember that God is just and that His justice can not sleep forever.' " Almost pushing the speaker from the stand, Abby Kelley Foster shouted, "Ah, devils fear and tremble when the Almighty is thundering out his wrath upon them—but are they the less devils ?" In the midst of the excitement a prominent citizen arose and said, "She is proving it all, but it will lead to war and bloodshed." At this point, oil was poured on the troubled waters by someone who led the great audience in singing the familiar lines : "We have a weapon firmer set And better than the bayonet ; A weapon that comes down as still As snowflakes fall upon the sod, But executes a freeman's will As lightning does the will of God." The abolitionists of the Garrisonian School now having complete control in this stronghold of anti-slavery sentiment in the West, took prompt steps to establish a newspaper for the promulgation of their views. This was to be to this section in a measure what the Liberator was to the East and the entire country. It was not to supersede but to supplement Garrison's great organ, and to give due prominence to the anti-slavery movement in Ohio and the Northwest. THE ANTI-SLAVERY BUGLE On June 29, 1845, the Anti-Slavery Bugle was launched. The first issue was published in the office of the Aurora at New Lisbon, Ohio, and bore at its masthead, "No Union With Slaveholders." After the sixth issue it was moved to Salem, Ohio, where it was published until Abraham Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclamation. At first the Bugle carried the name of no editor, but it did not lack bold and vigorous editorial expression. Some of the ablest writers of the abolition school in the United States were on the ground ready and 194 - HISTORY OF OHIO eager to pen their fervid thoughts for publication. The seventh issue was published in Salem, September 5, 1845. In this paper the names of the following publishing committee : Samuel Brook, George Garret-son, James Barnaby, Jr., David L. Galbreath and Lot Holmes. Barnaby was also general agent for the paper and the names of the editors were Benjamin S. Jones and J. Elizabeth Hitchcock. The editors were later married. In the issue of October 23, 1846, the name of George Garretson appears for the last time on the publishing committee. The names of the other members of this committee were published without change until the issue of October 8, 1847. At this time the members of the publishing committee were transferred to the executive committee of the Western Anti-Slavery Society. In the issue of June 15, 1849, appears the valedictory of Benjamin S. Jones and J. Elizabeth Jones, the joint editors. Two weeks later "Words of Introduction," present Oliver Johnson, the famous anti-slavery advocate, as the new editor. He came expecting to remain only one year until a permanent editor could be found, but the work was so congenial to him that he consented to remain almost two years. His "Parting Words" are found in the issue of April 26, 1851. Marius R. Robinson was then persuaded to undertake the editorial work. His salutatory in the issue of May 24, 1851, shows that he did this reluctantly and with misgivings as to his qualifications for the new position. He remained editor, however, until the cause for which the Bugle was established had triumphed and publication ceased. The Bugle was a four-page, six-column paper, that increased its size by increasing the width of its columns. Its space was given up almost entirely to the anti-slavery cause. There were few advertisements. The speeches of friends of the cause in Congress and on the platform were frequently reproduced in their entirety or extended quotations. There were letters of generous length from speakers in the field. Anti-slavery meetings and conventions were ably reported and local clashes with pro-slavery sympathizers were given considerable prominence. In short, this was an organ of agitation and propaganda. An editorial in the first issue sets forth pretty clearly the purpose of the publication. It reads as follows : OUR PAPER In extending to our readers our first greeting, we by no means intend to disparage ourselves that they may exalt us. Though you may consider our garb rather home-spun, and our style somewhat homely, yet we come before you with no humble pretensions. Our mission is a great and glorious one. It is to "Preach deliverance to the captive, and the opening of the prison door to them that are bound," to hasten in the day when "Liberty shall be proclaimed throughout all the land, unto all the inhabitants thereof." Though in view of the magnitude of this enterprise, we feel that the intellect and power of an angel would be but as a drop in the ocean of Truth, by which the vilest system of oppression the sun ever shone upon is to be swept away, yet knowing as we do that our influence is cast with justice and Humanity, with Truth and the God of Truth, our pretensions are far from humble, though our talents may be justly so considered. He who professes to plead for man degraded and imbruted, and to strive for the elevation of the crushed millions of his race ; he who professes to labor for the restoration of manhood to man, and for the recognition of his divine nature, makes no humble pretensions. It is true our Bugle blast may not fall upon your ear with all the sweetness and softness which so well becomes the orchestra of an Italian or French opera company, but we intend that it shall give no uncertain sound, and God aiding us, we will blow a blast that shall be clear and startling as a hunting horn or battle charge, and we trust that its peals ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 195 shall play around the hill-tops, and shall roll over the plains and down the valleys of our state, until from the waters of the Ohio to those of the mighty lakes, from Pennsylvania on the east to Indiana on the west, the land shell echo and re-echo to the soul-stirring cry of "No UNION WITH SLAVEHOLDERS." The Bugle was not devoted entirely to the anti-slavery cause. Incidentally it favored temperance, the abolition of capital punishment and woman suffrage. The first call for an Ohio woman suffrage convention appeared in this paper April 13, 1850. This convention was held in Salem on the nineteenth day of April of that year. It may, therefore, be truthfully said that the Bugle was potent in starting this reform which only recently has been fully accomplished, not only in this state, but in the United States. The promoters of the Bugle seem to have been inspired with a high degree of state patriotism. They made the appeal for the paper not only in the name of its cause, but in the name of Ohio. In the second issue appears a lengthy editorial from which we quote as follows : Unpopular than as may be the doctrine of "No Union with Slave-holders," yet believing it to be true, the committee have inscribed it upon their sheet. No other paper west of the mountains bears that motto. The abolitionists of Eastern Pennsylvania, of New York, and of New England have unfurled their banners and written it upon the folds. Yonder, upon the soil of Bunker's Height, beneath the very shadow of time-honored and venerated Faneuil Hall, the "Liberator" has long since been given to the breeze ; and towering above the crowded metropolis of New York, where the hurry of commerce, the din of business, and the conflict of selfish interests have almost drowned the voice of truth, floats the National "Standard" of American Abolitionists. In the Quaker City of Pennsylvania, whose name once synonomous with brotherly love, has lost its beautiful signification, there are enough to sustain that banner which is the glory of the true "Freeman" ; and from the hills of New England—from the White Mountains of New Hampshire is heard the voice of a "Herald of Freedom" cheering the handful who have rallied around the mountain standard and successfully defended it from the attacks of open foes and professed friends. "Westward the star of Empire takes its way !" Ohio has heard the call and responded to it. Her flag has been unfurled—the echo of Freedom's song has fallen upon her ear, she has caught up the notes and her Bugle is even now sounding throughout the land. Shall it be said that the Buckeye State is content to remain behind her older sisters in this glorious enterprise? God forbid ! Let those of us who profess to love the cause of freedom, show at this time that our love for it is not an empty name. The non-resistant attitude of Garrison was pleasing to the antislavery forces of Eastern Ohio, where the influence of the Quakers was especially strong. Their agitation often provoked blows and mob violence of which they were the victims. In remarkably few instances did they defend themselves by physical force against insult and personal violence. Their meekness and persistence, as one of their foes once expressed it, "were infernally exasperating." They serenely refused to get angry or excited. Their only weapon was argument, and it is not recorded that they ever ran out of ammunition in the war of words. The industry with which they spread their propaganda and devoted themselves to the overthrow of the slave power was truly wonderful. At night they traveled far to help fugitive slaves along the Underground Railroad toward the goal of freedom ; in daytime they went long distances to hear their speakers, and they gave freely of their time and meager means to a cause that would bring them neither wealth nor fame—a cause that was to them an educating influence, an inspiration to unselfish endeavor and, in some instances, the master passion of their 196 - HISTORY OF OHIO lives. They found a genuine enjoyment in this work and were ever cheered by an unwavering faith that it would ultimately triumph. By the standards of their time they were narrow-minded and fanatical, but they saw in straight and prophetic lines and the "visionary" and "impractical" reforms that they advocated in their day became the triumphant realities of a succeeding generation. The anti-slavery speakers whose itineraries radiated from Salem very frequently had difficulty in finding rooms in which to conduct their meetings. Public buildings and churches were usually closed against them. Even the Quakers who freely bore testimony against slavery sometimes hesitated to open their meeting houses to the anti-slavery agents. There were, however, some halls and churches that were always open to them. Among the latter was the church near Cool Spring, or Unionville, as the village was later called. This was a favorite meeting place not only because the use of the church was freely granted, but because it was located almost equi-distant from a number of villages and conveniently accessible to many people in this section. On Sunday, July 14, 1850, a meeting of unusual interest was held here. An account is quoted because it was somewhat typical of meetings held in other sections of the state. The following is from a full report as it appeared in the Bugle of July 20, 1850: "As we anticipated, the meeting at Cool Spring on Sunday last was attended by a large concourse of people from the surrounding country, most of them doubtless attracted by the prospect of listening to the fervid eloquence of Abby Kelley Foster. The meeting house being too small to accommodate even one-half the throng, the windows on the north side were removed, and the speaker taking her place at one of the apertures, was heard with great ease as well by those on the outside as by those within the walls. "Mrs. Foster's subject in the forenoon was the popular religion of the land—the spuriousness of its worship and forms, contrasted with the pure and undefiled Christianity of the New Testament. She spoke with great power, and with an unction proceeding from the heart and from a deep sympathy with struggling humanity. The large audience listened as if spellbound for upwards of two hours, and we are confident that a deep and abiding impression was made on many minds. At the conclusion of her address, several questions were put by Doctor Evans and De Lorma Brooks, Esq., of New Lisbon, which, for want of time before adjournment, were not fully answered. After a few remarks by Henry C. Wright, the meeting adjourned until 2 o'clock p. m. "The friends of the cause having reason to believe that a concerted effort would be made to throw the meeting into confusion, determined to organize at the commencement of the afternoon session by the appointment of a chairman to keep order. Five or ten minutes, however, before the hour appointed for the opening of the meeting, a vagrant buffoon and rowdy, calling himself Dr. 0. C. Evans, took his place near the stand and commenced a characteristic speech. When the hour of 2 o'clock had arrived, Samuel Myers mildly requested him to desist, but he refused to do so in the most insulting manner, and proceeded with his harangue, being encouraged in that outrageous course by a few rowdies as vulgar as himself. Of course, he had no more right to speak at that time, in defiance of all order and of the wishes of those who had called the meeting, than he had to pick the pockets of those assembled ; but all appeals to his sense of justice and his regard for decency were alike vain ; he had come to the meeting resolved that his voice should be heard, not in a peaceable and orderly manner, but in such a way to produce all possible confusion. He was told that, if he would suffer the meeting to become organized, he should have the floor at once ; but it was of no use. ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 197 "Seeing that remonstrance was vain, the anti-slavery friends appointed their chairman, quietly removed their speakers' stand to the south side of the house, and left the brawler and his congenial spirits to themselves. The creature then played the buffoon for an hour or more for the amusement of his cronies, who enveloped in the smoke of burning tobacco doubtless thought they had achieved a victory over the abolitionists and saved the Union and the church from destruction ! That the noise of the rowdy doctor—for he roared like a 'bull of Bashan'—and the loud jeers of his boon companions, did not annoy the friends of order, it would be too much to say but the disturbance was not such as to interrupt the progress of the meeting. Able addresses were made by H. C. Wright and A. K. Foster. William D. Ewing of New Lisbon, a sort of amateur free-soiler, came forward in a manly way to vindicate the Constitution and the Union, but we cannot honestly say that he helped the cause he sought to defend. De Lorma Brooks, an out-and-out whig, who believes that the 'self-evident truth' of the Declaration of Independence are a transparent lie—whose highest rule of morality is that 'Power gives Right,' and wouldn't mind holding slaves and raising them for market if the law only allowed it—controverted alike the views of the abolitionists and of Mr. Ewing. He admitted, however, that the former were consistent in opposing the Union and Constitution believing, as they did, that slavery was a sin and that it was a crime to aid in upholding it. They were both pretty effectually 'used up' by Abby Kelley Foster. "The meeting on the whole was a grand one, and we believe that the good seed so freely sown will produce an abundant harvest." The newspapers of the two leading political parties at the county seat of Columbiana County were hostile to anti-slavery movements in general and to the work of the Western Anti-Slavery Society and the work of its agents especially. The New Lisbon Palladium, the whig organ of the county, manifested its spirit in the following editorial expression in regard to the speaking campaign of Abby Kelley Foster, including the meeting at Cool Spring : "Abby Kelley Foster is again upon the stump ministering to the depraved appetites of her fanatical followers. She spoke in this place Saturday last and at Cool Spring, about seven miles north of here, on Sunday. The people of New Lisbon showed their good sense by staying from the meeting, letting her rave her blasphemies in the ears of those who have just wit enough to believe in the doctrine that 'the Bible's a farce and Jesus Christ's an imposter.' We sincerely trust that even to those poor witless fools who are blinded by her eloquence to the dangerous tendencies of her doctrines the poison may be of so malignant a nature as to carry with it its own antidote." The Town of Salem was well chosen as the western citadel of the anti-slavery forces. It was settled by Quakers, and traditions of hostility to the slave power extended back to the earliest settlement there in 1806. The Bugle was safe in this stronghold. James G. Birney's Philanthropist might be mobbed and his press and type might be thrown into the river at Cincinnati, but there was no time when it would have been safe for a party of lawless and desperate men to make an attack on the office of the Bugle in Salem. There had grown up in the town a sturdy generation of young men who in such an emergency would have forgotten their "non-resistant" creed. Their long war of words was preparatory to action at a later period. The anti-slavery sentiment of Salem and the immediate vicinity was manifest in the other local paper published there. Although it was not an anti-slavery organ, whenever editorial expression was given on the subject it was almost invariably favorable to the anti-slavery cause. For some years before the outbreak of the Civil war the Salem Republican edited by J. K. Rukenbrod was outspoken in frequent arraignment of the slave power. 198 - HISTORY OF OHIO Considerable space has here been given to the Anti-Slavery Bugle because its importance seems to have been hitherto somewhat overlooked. After the removal of the Philanthropist from Cincinnati to Washington, District of Columbia, in 1847 the Bugle continued to be the only anti-slavery newspaper published in Ohio. For twelve years Marius R. Robinson was its editor. In closing this sketch we may appropriately quote the tribute paid him by Oliver Johnson whom he succeeded : "Mr. Robinson was a man of great sweetness and purity of life, and an earnest and eloquent champion of every principle and measure which he thought beneficial to his fellow-men. He combined great courage with great discretion, winning the respect and confidence even of those whose views differed most widely from his own. Of pure and undefiled religion, as defined by the apostle James, he was at once a defender and an exemplar. As a speaker he was full of what is usually called magnetic power, by which he was able to command the attention and sway the sympathies of his hearers. For many years he was editor of the Ohio Anti-Slavery Bugle, the files of which are a memorial of his power as a writer as well as of his unswerving devotion to the cause of freedom." After the Emancipation Proclamation had been issued the Anti-Slavery Bugle ceased publication. Its cause had at last triumphed. The anti-slavery advocates who had taken up the campaign cry "No union with slaveholders" found a way to unite with the friends of freedom in the reestablishment of a union without slaveholders. Mr. Robinson laid aside his editorial pen, united himself with the business interests of Salem and became president of the Ohio Mutual Fire Insurance Company, a position that he held for the remainder of his life. He died in Salem December 8, 1878, highly respected by citizens without regard to creed or party. THE BLACK LAWS Early in the legislative history of Ohio a law was enacted flagrantly discriminating against the negro inhabitants of the state. This act bears the date of January 5, 1804. Its leading provisions were as follows : 1. No negro was permitted after the following June to settle or reside in the state unless he first produced a certificate from some court attesting his freedom. 2. Every negro residing within the state was required, on or before the first day of the following June, to record his name in the county clerk's office and receive a certificate of his freedom. 3. No person was permitted to employ a negro unless such negro had the legal certificate attesting his freedom. A fine of from $10 to $50 was imposed for a failure to comply with this provision, one-half of which fine was to go to the informer and the other half to the state. An additional fine of 50 cents a day was imposed if the negro employed or secreted was a fugitive slave. 4. Any person harboring or secreting a fugitive slave or preventing the lawful owner from retaking the same was subject to a fine of not less than $10 nor more than $50, one-half of which was to go to the informer and the other half to the state. 5. A negro coming into the state with the required certificate must within two years record the same in the clerk's office in the county where he meant to reside and receive a certificate of such record. 6. Associate judges and justices of the peace were authorized and required to direct the sheriff or constable to arrest negroes escaping into the state and deliver them to their masters. 7. Any person aiding a negro without his certificate of freedom to move out of the state was subjected to a fine of $1,000, one-half of which was to go to the informer and the other half to the state. ANTI-SLAVERY AND OTHER MOVEMENTS - 199 When it is remembered that even the free negroes coming into Ohio were illiterate and that the number of people in the state who were willing to vouch for them was comparatively small, it can readily he seen that the foregoing provisions of the law imposed very difficult conditions. The purpose of the act was evidently to keep free negroes 500 Dollars Reward. RAN AWAY, FROM the Subscribers, in Clarksburg, Virginia, on the 6th of the present month, the following negro men, viz. MARTIN & SAM MARTIN is a very handsome negro, about 5 feet 6 or 3 inches high, compactly built, of a light black complexion, his teeth usually yellow from the chewing of tobacco, not talk alive, erect in his appearance, and about 20, years of age. Had on when he absconded, a I new fur hat, black cloth coatee, white woolen pantaloons, Rae. SAM is very black. 5 feet 9 or 10 inches; high. about 30 years of age, stoops in walking, has large white eyes, free and easy to talk, and while talking, blows much, from a phthisical complaint, laughs readily, took a quantity of cloathing with hint, and wore a white fur bat, blue and white roundabout and pantaloons. They have made their way into the state of Ohio, at the mouth of Fishing Creek, and perhaps will be found in the direction of Woodville, Barnsville, Mount Pleasant, St., Clairsville, Freeport, Cadiz and Cleaveland or they will turn through Cambridge, by Coshocton, Mount Vernon. Upper Sandusky. by the way of Crogensville, to Canada ; or from Sandusky to Perrysville and Detroit, into Canada. The above reward of five hundred dollars will be paid to any person, who will appre bend and deliver said slaves to Us, at Clarksburg, or three hundred dollars will be given if they are secured in jail, so that we may get them again—or two hundred dollars will be given to any rerson who will particularly inform us, by letter or otherwise, where they are, so that we get them again ; which information shall by us he deemed confidential. In the event of but one of them being recovered, one half of the above reward, upon the terms above mentioned, will be given. EDWARD B. JACKSON, JONATHAN JACKSON. April 10th. 1820, 30-3w FACSIMILE OF AD FOR RUNAWAY SLAVES out of the state, to prevent slaves from coming into the state and to impose heavy penalties upon any one who would aid them to escape to Canada. It appears, however, that these restrictions were not considered sufficient to accomplish the purposes of the General Assembly. On January 25, 1807, a supplemental act was passed providing- 1. That no negro should be allowed to settle in Ohio unless within