Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126
Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127
In her article for Slavery and Abolition, Patricia Reid looks at the how fugitive slaves and free African-Americans were treated under the law in Maryland and Pennsylvania. Specifically, she looks at the story of Margaret Morgan, a free slave who was at the centerpiece of the Supreme Court case that essentially invalidated laws requiring slaveholders to show definitive proof of the freedom status of a black person accused of being a fugitive slave. Reid begins by outlining how border states like Maryland and Pennsylvania were important because of the large numbers of free and enslaved African-Americans living in the same areas. Reid points out that a significant number of slave owners in Maryland voluntarily freed their slaves due to abolitionist sentiments. (361) However, at the same time, the state passed laws restricting the movements of all people of color due to a fear that having so many free blacks around would encourage escape attempts and enable fugitive slaves to hide.
Unlike Maryland, Pennsylvania was a free state, also with high abolitionist sentiments. Reid cites Pennsylvania’s 1826 personal liberty laws, which put the burden of proof on the claimant slaveholder attempting to recapture a fugitive slave. (368) However, these laws were weakened by the fact that Pennsylvania did not keep records of free African-Americans, and also because the personal liberty laws put final decisions in the hands of white authority figures rather than in the hands of a jury. Morgan’s case of disputed freedom went all the way to the Supreme Court, who decided that Pennsylvania’s personal liberty laws were unconstitutional as they interfered with a slave owner’s constitutionally guaranteed right to escaped slaves who fled to free states. That finding made slave owner’s claims to their human property preeminent to blacks’ claims to the constitutionally guaranteed right of a fair trial, legally implying that blacks were not protected under the Constitution, which was enumerated explicitly years later in the Dred Scott case.
Reid convincingly argues for everything I discussed in the above paragraphs. She cites primary sources and countless laws and amendments to make clear the progression of laws restricting African-Americans’ rights in Maryland and Pennsylvania, regardless of their freedom status. She also makes a good case that those restrictive laws were bright on by legislators’ concerns that having so many free blacks in a slave state or a border state brought on enough ambiguity to structurally threaten slavery, as it provided slaves with more escape mechanisms. She also acknowledges the role of railroads and ships, both of which were large methods of transportation on the coasts of those states, as escape methods and therefore further threats to slavery.
However, I believe her argument begs the question of why, if Maryland and Pennsylvania had such abolitionist populations, were those sentiments not more reflected in legislation? If so many people in those states were against slavery, or at least in Maryland’s case in favor of freeing their own slaves personally, why were they not electing officials who would legislate more explicit protection for freed slaves? Reid cites the citizens of Pennsylvania’s York County as “disgusted” at what happened to Margaret Morgan, and also that a York County jury found the slave catcher in the case guilty of kidnapping (372). If so many people held those views, then why did Pennsylvania not have laws recording free African-Americans as such? My guess is that perhaps outright abolitionism was still a relatively radical view. Perhaps most people felt that they themselves did not want to own slaves, but were alright with it happening in the South and thus alright with laws to bring back fugitive slaves. However, it would have been nice for Reid to spend some time on this.