|
Indiana
State History
A project of
Genealogy Trails
|
ORGANIZATION OF INDIANA TERRITORY
(From the Book Pioneer History Of Indiana Published 1907)
(Transcribed by Barbara Ziegenmeyer)
On the division of the territory of the United
States northwest of the River Ohio, by an act
of Congress, May the 7th, 1800, Indiana Territory comprised all of the
northwest territory except that which soon
became the state of Ohio. The people retained all the laws and rights
that were given to them by the Ordinance
of 1787, that had been in force in the Northwest Territory. On the 13th
of May. 1800. William
Henry Harrison (who was a
native of Virginia and at that time a member
of Congress from the Northwest Territory) was appointed governor of
Indiana Territory. General
John Gibson, who had fought through the Revolution from the
commencement to the close and had come out of
the war with the rank of a General, was appointed secretary. The
secretary arrived at Vincennes, which had been
selected for the seat of government for the Indiana Territory, in July
and in the absence of the Governor he appointed
military and civil officers. It was not until January, 1801, that
Harrison came to Vincennes where, by proclamation
he called the Judges William Clark,
Henry Vanderburg and John
Griffith, who had been appointed Territorial Judges, to meet at
the new territorial capital. Vincennes,
for the purpose of adopting such laws as were required for the
government of the territory and and for the performance
of other acts conformable to the laws and ordinance of Congress.
The governor and the judges, accordingly, met at
Vincennes on the 12th of January, 1801, and
continued to hold session from day to day until the 36th of the same
month, when they adjourned after having adopted
and published seven laws and three resolutions as follows:
1. A law
supplemental to a law to regulate county levies.
2. A
resolution concerning attorneys and counselors-at-law.
3. A law to
regulate practice of the general court upon
appeals and writs of errors.
4. A law
respecting amendments and jeofail.
5. A law
establishing courts of general quarter session
of the peace in the counties of Knox, Randolph and St. Clair.
6. An act
repealing certain acts.
7. A law
appointing a territorial treasurer.
8. A
resolution for the establishment of ferries.
9. A law
concerning the fees of officers.
10. A
resolution concerning the compensation of the clerk
of the legislature.
The territorial judges held their first session of
court of the Indiana Territory at Vincennes,
the 3d day of March, 1801. The first grand jury impaneled in the
Indiana Territory was
composed of nineteen person: Lube
Decker, Antoine Marshal, Joseph - Baird, Patrick
Simpson, Antoine Petit, Andre Montplaisure, John Ockilpree, Johnathan
Marney,
Jacon Trevebang, Alexander Valley,
Francis Turpin. Fr. Compagnoitte, Charles Languedoc,
Louis Severe, Fr. Languedoc, George Catt, John B. P. Barois, Abraham
Decker
and Phillip Catt.
The law machinery of the territory being
constructed, the questions that came principally before
the courts and which attracted more attention than any other subject
during the first years of the Indiana Territory;
were land speculation, the adjustment and settling of land titles and
the perplexing question of slavery that had
been in existence in the Territory for sixty-five years before the
ordinance of 1787 was adopted and was one of
the most stubbornly contested questions before the courts. The courts,
unfortunately for those interested in having
the wise provisions of the ordinance of 1787 carried out, were in
sympathy with the slaveholding element. Governor Harrison, after assuming
control of the affairs of the territory, exerted
his energies in trying to ac quire lands from the Indians by treaty.
(A history of these treaties is found in
the chapter on Harrison in the Tippecanoe Campaign. )
When the Indiana Territory was formed, Vincennes was
the town of the most importance. At that
lime there, was a small settlement where the town of Lawrenceburge.
Dearborn county, now stands. At Armstrong station
on the Ohio there was a small settlement and at Clarksville, opposite
the Falls of the Ohio, there was another
small one. Outside of this, in what is now the state of Indiana, there
were no other settlements by the white people
except an occasional adventurer who had been a prisoner or raised among
the Indians, settling in some section near
an Indian town. The only mode of communication between the stations of
Indiana Territory was by the Ohio, Mississippi
or Wabash rivers. Detroit was a town of considerable importance but had
been destroyed by fire in 1798. It was
so remote from the sections bordering on the Ohio river that
intelligence from that section was only obtained probably,
once a year. The mode of communication between the Ohio Falls,
Vincennes and the farther western stations was along
the old Indian trace connecting these places, which had been there from
time immemorial.
For many years before the capture of the Northwest
Territory from the British by General
Clark, the French inhabitants of the settled stations Vincennes,
Kaskaskia, Detroit and, other places, held
slaves and dealt in them as they became wealthy in the fur trade. Some
of these traders made annual trips down
the Mississippi to New Orleans and brought back slaves, men and women.
It is safe to say that at the time Vincennes
was captured in 1779, the different posts in the Northwest Territory
had more than 200 negro slaves. Adding to
this the increase from natural cause and from those brought in from
Virginia, Kentucky and the Carolinas, up to
the time that Indiana Territory was formed and William Henry Harrison was
made its governor, there were more than three hundred slaves in the
Northwest Territory, leaving out what soon
became the state of Ohio. There was little notice taken of slavery. Harrison
was from Virginia and favored slavery yet he issued a proclamation
prohibiting the removal of indentured negroes
from the Territory.
The United States judges appointed were owners of
slaves. In the summer of 1794 Judge
Turner, under Governor St. Clair
s administration of the Northwest Territory was at Vincennes holding
court. During that term he had a serious misunderstanding
with Judge Vandaburgh who was
the Probate Judge of Knox county, Northwest
Territory. In the midst of the controversy a negro and his wife held as
slaves by Vandaburgh
applied to Judge Turner
s court for emancipation by writ of habeas corpus. The evidence was all
in and
Judge Turner would have given them their freedom but the night
before the decision was to be given the negroes
were kidnapped, carried south and sold.
The author here gives a specimen of a decision by the three federal
judges, Vandaburgh,
Clark and Griffin,
during Harrison
s administration. There were proceedings brought for the
emancipation of a negro and negress that had been brought into Indiana
Territory from Kentucky and held without
compliance with the formalities of the indenture laws. Influential
people aided these negroes in making a habeas corpus proceedings by
which they were released, on a technical insufficiency
of evidence for the claimant. The full court made a
ruling that the Negroes were not fugitive from slavery.
After this decision the party claiming the negroes
attempted to carry them out of the Territory
and back to Kentucky. When new proceedings were instituted, which was
tried in 1806, the judges heard the case
and decided that the negroes were neither fugitives from justice nor
slavery and released them. They further said,
in giving their opinion, that this order was not to impair the rights
of the defendants or any other person who
should hare them for slaves provided the defendant or any other person
could prove them to be slaves.
After this the two negroes built a cabin on the
banks of the Wabash river near Vincennes from
which place they were kidnapped by a Frenchman hired for that purpose,
carried to New Orleans and sold into slavery.
With such a trio of judges as those making this decision was there any
wonder that slavery was in full force in
many places in Indiana Territory at the time the state was admitted to
the union?
In 1803 the United States purchased from France for
the sum of fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000)
the territory that has since been divided into the states of Louisiana,
Arkansas,
Missouri, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, Montana,
Wyoming, Indian Territory, Colorado, and that
part of Minnesota west of the Mississippi river During the year
of 1504 all that country north of the thirty-third degree was attached
to Indiana Territory by Congress and was
under the control of Governor
Harrison. The next year this Louisiana
Territory was detached and organized into a separate territory.
On the 22d of November, 1802, Governor Harrison, in
compliance with the wishes of many citizens of the territory, issued a
proclamation notifying them that there would
be an election held in the several counties of the territory on the
11th day of December, 1802, for the purpose
of choosing delegates to meet in convention at Vincennes on the 20th of
December, 1502. The number of delegates
from Knox county was four; from Randolph county, three; from St. Clair
county, three; Clark county, two. The main
object of those who favored the calling of the convention was to take
into consideration the expediency of repealing
or suspending article sixth of the ordinance of 1787 which prohibited
the holding of slaves in all the territory
that at that time was in the Northwest Territory.
The convention assembled, Governor Harrison presiding.
There was a document prepared in which the delegates in behalf of the
people of the Indiana Territory gave their
consent that the sixth article of the ordinance of 1787 might be
suspended. This document together with the memorial
from the delegates and a number of slave-holding inhabitants of the
territory was laid before Congress and in the
House of Representatives on the 2d of March, 1803. Mr. Randolph, of Virginia,
chairman of the committee that this resolution and report were referred
to, makes this report The rapidly increasing
population of the state of Ohio is sufficient evidence to your
committee that the labor of slaves L not necessary
to prompt the growth of settlements of the colonies in that section.
That slave labor, the dearest that can be
employed, is only advantageous in the cultivation of products more
valuable than any known in that quarter of the
United States. The committee deems it highly dangerous and inexpedient
to impair provisions wisely calculated to
promote the happiness and prosperity of the northwest country and to
give strength and security to their extensive
frontiers. In the salutary operation of this sagacious and benevolent
restraint, it is believed that the inhabitants
of Indiana will at no distant day find ample remuneration for, a
temporary privation of labor and of immigration.
Congress refused to suspend the sixth article of the
ordinance of 1787 in opposition to the
views and wishes which were afterward expressed in several petitions,
resolutions and
memorial, by the legislative authority and many people of Indiana
territory, the decision of Congress remained
unchanged.
The principal reasons which were assigned by the
memorials in favor of the suspension of the
sixth article of the ordinance of 1787, were that such a suspension
would be highly advantageous to the territory,
that it would meet the approbation of nine-tenths of the citizens of
the territory; that the abstract question
of liberty and slavery was not considered as involved in the suspension
of the article as the number of slaves
in the United States would not be increased by the measure and the
suspension of the article would be equally advantageous
to the territory, to the slave-holding states and to the slaves
themselves: that at the time of the adoption of
the ordinance slavery had existed in the territory; that it was made to
apply to for a great many years before
and that the ordinance was passed by Congress without consulting the
interests of the citizens of the territory,
who were in no wise represented in that body and the number of slaves
would never bear such a proportion to the
white population as would endanger the peace and prosperity of the
country. The views of those citizens of Indiana
Territory who were not in favor of the proposed suspension of the sixth
article of the ordinance of 1787, were
at different times sent to the committees at Congress having that
matter in charge, in the shape of memorials and
remonstrance's. A largely attended meeting of the citizens of Clark
county was held at Springville; John
Beggs being elected president and David Floyd secretary. A committee
was raised consisting of Charles
Beggs, Abraham Little, Robert Robertson, John
Owens and James Beggs.
They prepared a memorial which was adopted
by the meeting and laid before Congress on the 7th of November, 1807.
The memorial of the citizens of Clark county
show that great anxiety has been and still is evinced by some of the
citizens of this territory on the subject
of the introduction of slavery into it. In no case has the voice of the
citizens been unanimous. In 1802 at a special
convention of delegates from the several counties a petition was
forwarded to Congress to repeal the sixth article of the ordinance of
1787.
At that convention the representatives in the
eastern part of the territory who were at Vincennes
were decidedly opposed to the petition. Again in the year 1805 the
subject was taken up and discussed in the general
assembly, a majority of the members of the House d Representatives
voted against the memorial and it was rejected as is shown by the
journal of that house, but a
number of the citizens thought it proper to sign the same. Among those
who fraudulently attempted to force this
memorial on Congress as the declared expression of the majority of the
representatives of that assembly were the
speaker of the House of Representatives and the president of the
council. Afterward the president of the council
was charged with this duplicity when he denied having ever signed the
same, History gives the following account
of this paper:
<>This fraudulent paper was
forwarded to the Congress of the
United
States as the expressed wish of the legislators
of this territory. In the present year of 1807 this subject was taken
up by the legislature of this territory again
and a majority of both houses passed the resolution to suspend the
sixth article in a proportion of two to one
and it is presumed, this action
is before you. Let it be understood
that when this action was taken,
that there were but three members of the assembly
present, beside the speaker, who, for certain reasons, positively
refused to sign the resolution. As a last substitute
after the bill was passed, they prevailed- on the president to vacate
his seat and appoint one of the other members
speaker pro tern. for the purpose of signing the resolution. This
doubtful conduct of a small minority of the representatives
of this territory will be convincing to your honorable committee in
Congress that those in this territory are driven
to a desperate strait in .order to unlawfully hold their slaves.
It is contended
by the pro-slavery element that a
majority of the voters of this territory
are in favor of annulling the sixth article in the ordinance of 1787,
while those opposed to slavery being in the
territory feel sure that a majority of all the voters are opposed in
any way, disapproving any of the provision
in the ordinance of 1787, believing that such an action would be an
insult offered to the Congress of the United
States.
There is a large
emigration coming into the section
of the country around the Falls of the
Ohio and your committee thinks it best for all concerned to allow the
present condition of things to remain undisturbed
until there is sufficient number in different sections of the said
territory to form into states and to adopt state
constitutions. Then all questions for the well being and happiness of
the people to be governed by the constitutions
can be adjusted in accordance with the wishes of the majority
. When it became
evident to the slave holders of the
territory that Congress would not make
any provision for nullifying the sixth article of the ordinance of
1787. in order that they might hold the slaves
that were then in the territory, the obnoxious indenture laws were
passed by the legislature in 1807. The provisions
of that act are herein given." The laws of the Indiana Territory
concerning slaves and negro or mulatto servants.
An act concerning the introduction of negroes and mulattos into this
Territory."
Sec. 1. It shall and may be
lawful for any person being the owner or
possessor of any negroes or mulattos of any age above the age of
fifteen years and owing service or labor as slaves,
in any of the states or territories of the United States, or for
any citizen of the said states or territories
of the United States purchasing the same; to bring the said negroes or
mulattos into this Territory.
" Sec 2. The owner or possessor
of any negroes or mulattos, as aforesaid,
and bringing the same into this territory, shall within thirty days
after such removal go with the same before
the clerk of the court of common pleas of the proper county; and, in
the presence of said clerk, the said owner
or possessor shall determine and agree to with his or her negro or
mulatto, upon the terms of years which the said
negro or mulatto will and shall serve his or her owner or possessor and
the said clerk is hereby authorized and
required to make a record thereof in a book which he shall keep for
that purpose.
" Sec. 3. If any negro or
mulatto removed into this territory as aforesaid
shall refuse to serve his or her owner as aforesaid, it shall and may
be lawful for such persons, within sixty
days thereafter to remove the said negro or mulatto to any place by the
laws of the United States or territory
from whence such owner or possessor may or shall be authorized to
remove the same.
" Sec. 4. If any person or
persons shall neglect or refuse to perform
the duty required in the second or to take advantage of the benfit of
the preceding section, hereof, within the
time there respectively
prescribed, such person or persons
shall forfeit all claims and rights
whatever to the service and labor of such
negroes or mulattos.
Sec. 5. Any person removing
into this territory and being the owner or
possessor of any negro or mulatto as aforesaid, under the age of
fifteen years; or if any person shall hereafter
acquire property in any negro or mulatto under the age of said. and
shall bring them into this territory, it shall
and may be law ul for such person or persons, owners or possessors. to
hold the said negro or mulatto to service
or labor, the male until they arrive at the age of thirty-five years,
the female until they arrive at the age of
thirty-two years.
" Sec 6. Any person removing
any negro or mulatto into this territory
under the authority of the preceding section, it shall be incumbent
upon such persons within thirty days thereafter
to register the name and age of such negro or mulatto with the clerk of
the court of common pleas for the proper
county.
Sec. 7. If any person shall
remove any negro or mulatto from one county
to another county, within this territory who may or shall be brought
into the same under the authority of either
the first or fifth section hereof, it shall be incumbent upon such
person to register the name and also the age
of said negro or mulatto which the said clerk of the county from whence
and to which said negro or mulatto may
be removed, within thirty days after such removal.
Sec. 8. if any person shall
neglect or refuse to perform the duty required
by the two p receding sections hereof, such persons, for such offense
shall be fined in the sum of fifty dollars
to be recovered be indictment or information and for the use of the
proper county.
Sec. 9.. If any person shall
neglect or refuse to perform the duty and
service herein required, he shall, for every such neglect or refusal,
be fined in the sum of fifty dollars to The
recovered by information or indictment and for use of the county.
" Sec. 10. It shall be the duty
of the clerk of the court of common
pleas, aforesaid, when any person shall apply to him to register any
negro or mulatto, agreeable to the preceding
section, to demand and receive the said applicant s bond with
sufficient security in the penalty of five hundred
dollars, payable to the governor or his successors in office,
conditioned that the negro or mulatto, negroes or
mulattos, as the case may be, shall not, a after the expiration of his
or her service, become a county charge which
bond shall be lodged with the county treasurers, respectively, for the
use of the said counties, provided always
that no such bond shall be required in the case of time of service of
such negro or mulatto, shall expire before
he or she arrives at the age of forty years, if such negro or mulatto
be at that time capable to support him or
herself by his or her own labor.
Sec. 11. Any person who shall
take or forcibly carry out of this territory
or who shall be aiding or assisting therein any person or persons owing
or having owed service for labor, without
the consent of such person or persons, previously obtained before any
judge of the court of common pleas of the
county where such persons owing or having owed such service or labor
resides, which consent shall be certified
by said judge of the common pleas to the clerk of the court of common
pleas where he resides at or before the next
court. An person so offending, upon conviction thereof, shall forfeit
and pay one thousand dollars, one third to
be used by the county, two thirds to be used by the person taken or
carried away. To be recovered by action of
debt, provided there shall be nothing in the section so construed as to
prevent any master or mistress from removing
any person owing service or labor from this territory as described in
the third section of this act.
Sec. 12. The said clerk for
every register made in the manner aforesaid
shall receive seventy-five cents from the applicant therefor.
Sec. 13.
The children born in this territory of a parent
of color owing service or labor by indenture, according to the law,
shall serve the master or mistress of such
parent, the male until the age of thirty and the female until the age
of twenty-eight years.
Sec 14. The provisions
contained in a law of this territory respecting
apprentices, emit , " an act respecting apprentices shall be enforced
as to such children in case of misbehavior
of the master or mistress or for cruelty or ill usage. Approved
September 17, 1807.
The first laws for
the indenture of slaves were made
by the board of control in Indiana Territory
the governor and the three federal judges in 1803. They provided that "
persons coming into the territory
under a contract to serve a stated period at any kind of labor shall
serve that term.
This contract was
assignable to any person in the
territory if the slaves consented. This law
was made so that persons coming to the territory from slave states
before starting could indenture their slaves
for as long a period as they would be of service to them; in most cases
for thirty years.
The next attempt
to clinch slavery in the territory
was by an act of the Territorial Legislature
in 1805. An act for the introduction of negroes and mulattos into the
territory was passed. It provided that any
slave holder in the United States could bring any slave over fifteen
years old into the territory and within thirty
days after coming, might enter into an agreement with such slaves
before the clerk of a court of common pleas as
to the number of years such slaves would serve their masters, If the
slaves should refuse to agree, the master
had sixty days in which to send him to a slave state.
The laws of the
Indiana Territory concerning slaves
and negro or mulatto servants passed in
1807 were the same as those in 1803. Neither of these laws had any
validity as they were in direct opposition to
laws passed by the Congress of the United States for the government of
their Northwest Territory. But notwithstanding
all that the indented negroes were compelled to serve their masters for
the time specified in the indentures and
in many cases those so indentured were by one means and another taken
into slave states where they are sold into
slavery for life. Unfortunately the clear cut laws prohibiting slavery
in the territory did not have much force
with those interested with the administration of the laws. There was no
secret about holding slaves in all the
counties of the, territory.
In 1820, four
years after the state was admitted
into the Union, there were one hundred and
ninety slaves in servitude in Indiana as shown by census report. Knox
county had one hundred and eighteen; Gibson
county, thirty-one; Posey county. eleven: Vanderburg, ten; the other
twenty-one were held in Spencer, Warrick,
Owen, Sullivan, Scott and Pike counties. The other twenty-four counties
that were in the state at that time had
no slaves. Slavery in Indiana did not disappear from the census report
until 1850. Most of the negroes who were
emancipated by their owners or by legal process were afterwards
kidnapped and sold into slavery in the south.
Below is given a
few specimens of the way the poor,
unsuspecting negroes were fooled. Being
made to believe they were signing their emancipation papers. when in
fact, they were signing an indenture that
gave the control of their labor for a long period of years to their
so-called masters who, in many cases, pretended
to be liberating them. Since writing this article it has been thought
best to withhold the names of those making
these pretended emancipation papers and use fictitious ones for the
reason that many of the descendants are still
living and are among the best people of the stare and who would scorn
any such dishonest action.
On the 27th day of July. 1813, I, Joseph
Barton, have this day set free my slave, Thomas Turner, and I hereby
make and acknowledge the emancipation paper
for his complete
freedom. The said
Thomas Turner for
the privilege of being known as a free man,
has agreed to indenture his services to me for a period of thirty years
from date.
(SEAL.) Joseph Barton.
I. Thomas
Turner, do hereby accept the emancipation papers
for which I sincerely thank my former master and do cheerfully agree to
indenture myself to the said Joseph Barton
as per the above
agreement. Thomas Turner July 27,
1813.
X My-own mark.
On the 30th day of
August this generous hearted Joseph Barton
sold this negro to a person for five hundred and thirty-five dollars
who smuggled him across the Ohio river where
he was sold into slavery in the south.
I. George Endicutt, have decided to emancipate
my slave, Job Boyce, and I hereby certify that I this day give him his
freedom and it affords me the greatest pleasure
to bear witness that he has always been an obedient, faithful and
honest servant. By an agreement of the said Job
Boyce he agrees to indenture himself to me for twenty-three years, or
until he is sixty years old.
George Endicutt
(SEAL) August 30th,
1813.
"I, Job Boyce, of
my own free will do hereby accept my
freedom papers from my former master, George Endicutt, and have agreed
to indenture myself to him for the time
specified in the agreement,
August 20.
1813.
Job Boyce. X My own mark.
SEAL) Witness, James Boswell
September 26th,
1813. I, Noah Freeman, of Indiana Territory,
on this date. do hereby emancipate my slave, Mary Ann to enjoy all the
rights of freedom that a negro and an
uneducated woman
can. It affords me
great satisfaction to testify that she has
been a most faithful and obedient servant. This paper and her freedom
to be in force and effect
after the 26th
day of September.
1833. Until that time she has indentured her
service to me and my family. Noah Freeman.
I, Mary Ann, the
former slave of my master, Noah Freeman,
accept my emancipation papers and do agree to faithfully work for my
former master and mistress until the 20th
day of
September. one
thousand, eight
hundred and thirty-three. Mary Ann X My mark.
(SEAL) Witness, Jason Brown.
This is to
certify that I, James Hartwell of my own free
will and accord. do this day emancipate and give freedom to a negro
slave, named Charles Hope. brought by me from
North Carolina. In making these papers I want to bear testimony to the
painstaking and careful way he has done
his work, and that he is a quiet and most obedient servant and has
always been very easily managed. For these good
qualities it affords me great pleasure to be able to give him his
rightly earned freedom. For some necessary expenses
that has to be incurred before he can leave the home he has so long
lived at and for the love he has for me and
my family, he hereby agrees to indenture his services to me for
twenty-nine years from the 18th of October, 1809,
which is the date of this agreement. James Hartwell.(SEAL)
I, Charles Hope,
do hereby acknowledge my thankfulness to
my master for the kindness he has shown in setting me free and I
cheerfully accept the conditions in my freedom
papers and agree
to serve the time
specified, or until death.
Charles Hope
X
His mark.
Note the
meanness of this hypocrite who made
the
great show of giving this negro pretended freedom
with such a good certificate of character, which would make the negro
more saleable when he had an opportunity
to sell him; and on the fifteenth day of the next November he did sell
him to a neighbor for four head of horses,
ten head of cattle and one hundred acres of military donation land and
a promissory note for three hundred dollars.
The next year this negro went with his master down the Wabash river on
a pretended trip to the Saline country of
Illinois, but was carried farther south and was sold into slavery for
life.
In 1805 the Kukendal
family, by their agent, Samuel
Vannorsdell, had two negroes
arrested and were attempting to
carry them out of the territory when Governor
Harrison issued a proclamation
forbidding their removal, as Vannorsdell
did not have the consent of
the negroes to remove them. This
brought on a spirited law-suit, Governor
Harrison and others becoming
bondsmen for the negroes, The case
went over to the next term of court. At
that term the two negroes were produced in court but in the meantime Governor
Harrison had indentured one
of them for a period of eleven
years.
In 1854 the author
was visiting a family in an old
settled portion of southern Indiana. During
that visit it became known to a young lady of that family that he was
gathering data of incidents concerning the
early settlers and of anything that would be of interest about Ye
Olden Tymes. This young lady informed
him that they had the emancipation and indenture papers of Old Tome,
who was their slave and friend, which papers
she thought would be of real worth to one gathering such data. She said
she would show the papers and he might
copy them provided he would not use their names. This was readily
agreed to.
To All Whom it
May Concern: May 26, 1815.
This is to
certify that this day I
have set free and by these presents do give
emancipation papers to my faithful servant Thomas
Agnew, and
from this date he
shall be known as a free man. Given under
my hand and seal. Thomas
Truman.
(SEAL) Witness, Joseph
Forth
This is to
certify that I have this
day received. my emancipation papers from
my former master. As I don't know any other home but the one I have
always lived at, I do hereby indenture
myself to my master, John Trueman, for thirty years from- this date, he
agreeing to feed and clothe me during that
time. Thomas
Agnew.
May 26th, 1815. X His mark.
After the
papers were copied this intelligent
young
lady related this interesting story of Tom's
life:
Just before the
state of Indiana was admitted into
the Union my father moved here from a slave
state and brought with him, Tom. whom he had owned from his infancy. He
had no thought that there would be any
trouble about it as Tom was a fixture in the family. A friend one day
told my father that parties were preparing
to bring habeas corpus proceedings and emancipate Tom. The only thing
my father could do was to emancipate him
and have him indenture his time after he was a freeman. This was done
as shown above and Tom went on faithfully
with his work as before. This was nearly twenty years before I was born.
The good old
faithful slave worked on the farm with
my father for nearly twenty-seven years
after the indenture was made, when my father sickened and died. Tom
then kept on. On settling up the estate, it was found that my
father was more in debt than had been supposed
and there would be but little left. A cousin of my father who lived in
a slave state
where he had moved from, held a mortgage
on our farm. This cousin was a Shylock and demanded the last cent which
would take everything, farm
and all at a forced sale. He, however, made this
proposition to my mother: that if Tom would go home with him and work
for him as long as he lived, he would release
the mortgage. This, my mother would not consent to as Tom had less than
two years of his indenture term to put
in and he was so faithful to the family that she would not listen to
such a transaction.
Tom had learned
the condition of things as nothing
was kept from him and he had planned with
this cousin to give his life service for the family's comfort. He would
not consent to anything but that
he must go to save the farm and the family from want. The agreement was
made, the mortgage was canceled and Tom
went to the home of his new master, now a slave in fact.
Some time after
this an uncle of my mother died and
left her several thousand dollars. This
made us independent and my mother's first thoughts were of Tom. She
went to hunt for him and found him faithfully
working away. She went to his master, told him that she wanted to take
Tom back with her and that she was prepared
to pay him in full for his mortgage, interest and trouble. This he
refused, saying that Tom was priceless and that
no money could buy him. She tried in every way to have him agree to let
Tom go with her but he was obdurate. Tom
told her not to mind him, that there would be but a few more years for
him to serve as age was creeping on and he would soon be in another
country where no trouble
could come.
My mother was a
nervy woman. and she determined to
liberate Tom if it could be done.
She was advised to go to Evansville and see a lawyer by the name of Conrad Baker.
My mother explained to Mr. Baker
Tom
s situation and gave him a statement of the evidence that could be
obtained. She also gave him the emancipation
and indenture papers. Mr. Baker
told her there was no doubt about Tom being
legally free and if he could be gotten into a free state there would be
no further need of legal proceedings. It
was found that this could not be done so proceedings were brought in
the county where Tom was held in slavery,
to liberate him. The facts with affidavits to back them up were filed
with the case. The court, after hearing all
the evidence, decided that since Tom had been given emancipation papers
which made him free and since he had indentured
himself for thirty years and had put in over time on that agreement, he
was now free.
Tom came back to
Indiana with my mother and lived
with our family during the rest of his life
and when he died we gave him a royal funeral, feeling that we had lost
our best friend and one of nature's noblemen.
After Colonel Baker
was elected governor of Indiana,
the author wrote him about this case and sent him a copy of the
emancipation and indenture papers with a pretty
full history of the case. His reply is here given in full:
EXECUTIVE OFFICE.
Indianapolis, Ind., Sept. 20, 1870.
Colonel W. M. Cockrum Oakland City, Indiana.
I am in receipt of your letter together
with the enclosure of the
15th inst. It affords me great pleasure to say that no case in my whole
practice as a lawyer was so gratifying
to me as the liberation from bondage of that true-hearted old.Nubian,
Tom Agnew.
I well recollect the lady, Mrs. Trueman, who was my client in the case.
She was so well pleased with the good deed
she had been instrumental in bringing a out that she wanted to pay me
three or four times my rightful fee.
Allow me. my dear Colonel, to congratulate you on the loving task that
you have assigned yourself of perpetuating
the history of the Pioneer and the thrilling events that occurred
during that early period. There will never be
another time in this country's women will live as those who cleared the
way for the great civilization that will
come to our state.
Very Truly
Conrad Baker
The author has access to much more data or indentures made by those
having negroes in control at an early day in
Indiana. That which has already been given is evidence to
the readers of the way the pro slavery
people of Indiana intended to
perpetuate slavery and that the head of
the territorial government was in sympathy with the slavery partisans.
When the Constitution for our state was
being framed in
1816 the slavery clause was defeated by only two votes.
