Fugitive Slave Laws
In U.S. history, the Federal acts of 1793 and 1850 providing for the
return between states of escaped black slaves. Similar laws
existing in both North and South in colonial days applied also to
white indentured servants and to Native American slaves. As
slavery was abolished in the Northern states, the 1793 law was
loosely enforced, to the great irritation of the South, and as
abolitionist sentiment developed, organized efforts to circumvent
the law took form in the Underground Railroad. Many Northern
states also passed personal-liberty laws that allowed fugitives a
jury trial, and others passed laws forbidding state officials to help
capture alleged fugitive slaves or to lodge them in state jails. As a
concession to the South a second and more rigorous fugitive slave
law was passed as part of the Compromise of 1850. By it “all
good citizens” were “commanded to aid and assist [Federal
marshals and their deputies] in the prompt and efficient execution
of this law,” and heavy penalties were imposed upon anyone who
assisted slaves to escape from bondage. When apprehended, an
alleged fugitive was taken before a Federal court or
commissioner. He was denied a jury trial and his testimony was
not admitted, while the statement of the master claiming
ownership, even though absent, was taken as the main evidence.
The law was so weighted against the fugitives that many
Northerners, formerly unconcerned, were now aroused to
opposition. New personal-liberty laws contradicting the legislation
of 1850 (and described, with some reason, by Southerners as
equivalent to South Carolina's notorious ordinance of nullification)
were passed in most of the Northern states. Abolitionists
fearlessly defied the 1850 act, often mobbing Federal officials in
attempts to rescue fugitives. In Boston, for instance, the “good
citizens,” including some of the foremost Brahmins, stormed the
Federal courthouse, but failed to free the escaped Virginia slave
Anthony Burns; moreover, it was thought expedient to have 1,100
soldiers guard him when he was marched aboard ship for his
return to bondage. In Lancaster co., Pa., a riot broke out when a
Federal official ordered Quaker bystanders to help catch a
runaway; the Quakers were prosecuted, but not convicted. Other
notable fugitive-slave cases arose in Northern courts, and the trials
further stirred up public opinion both North and South. The whole
dispute, combined with the question of the extension of slavery
into the territories, served to set the two sections at each other's
throats. The actions of Northern states in nullifying the fugitive
slave laws or rendering “useless any attempt to execute them”
were cited (Dec. 24, 1860) by South Carolina as one cause for
secession. Both acts were finally repealed by Congress on June
28, 1864.