THE CASE OF |
Sara Lucy Bagby A LATE GESTURE
by JOHN E. VACHA
Four southern states had seceded when John Goshorn and his son William S. Goshorn set out from Wheeling, Virginia, for Cleveland, Ohio, in January of 1861 for the purpose of reclaiming Sara Lucy Bagby, an escaped slave, who had found temporary refuge doing domestic work in Cleveland. Even though the nation was in the midst of its climactic crisis over the slavery issue, the Goshorns planned to invoke the invidious Fugitive Slave law in the heart of the North's reputedly most rabid antislavery district, the Western Reserve. Arriving in Cleveland on January 17, the Goshorns ascertained the run- away's whereabouts and reported to United States Commissioner Bushnell White the following evening. Next morning, Saturday, January 19, they led a group of United States deputy marshals to the home of L. A. Benton on Prospect Street, where Sara Lucy was currently employed. After break- ing down the door, they took her into custody without further interference. Benton forthwith informed W. E. Ambush, Negro chairman of the Cleve- land Fugitive Aid Society, of the incident and news of the seizure spread swiftly through the city.1 The Cleveland Leader reported that this was the city's first fugitive slave case in nineteen years.2 On the same day as Lucy's apprehension, Georgia became the fifth state to leave the Union, and in the midst of the insistent sectional crisis Cleveland found itself with a cause celebre of its own. This incident was indeed fraught with explosive potential. Only two years before, an attempt to reclaim a fugitive by federal authorities in nearby Oberlin had erupted in the "Oberlin-Wellington rescue," one of the most publicized incidents in the pre-war antislavery struggle. While the Negro in the case made good his escape, thirty-seven rescuers were brought be- fore the United States Circuit Court in Cleveland, forty miles away, to stand trial for violation of the Fugitive Slave law. Two received jail sen- tences and stiff fines, a decision later upheld three to two by the Ohio Su- preme Court after it issued a writ of habeas corpus to have the cases brought before it and judged on the basis of the constitutionality of the law. This
NOTES ON PAGE 273 |
action cost Chief Justice Swan, who
approved the penalties, his renom-
ination at the next Republican state
convention. A compromise, however,
finally settled the remaining cases
whereby the federal government agreed
to drop its cases against the other
rescuers in return for the cancellation of
kidnapping charges by Lorain County
against the slave catchers.3 One of
the state's most radical papers, the
Ashtabula Sentinel, claimed in 1859,
"It [the government's retreat] has
demonstrated that the execution of the
Fugitive Act is at an end on the Western
Reserve, and most likely in Ohio
and the free States."4
During the time between the Oberlin and
Bagby cases, other incidents
kept Ohioans' attention on the legal
ramifications of slavery. Early in 1860
Governor Dennison refused two
extradition requests from southern gover-
nors: one for two men wanted by Virginia
for participating in the John
Brown raid and another for a man wanted
in Kentucky for enticing a slave
to leave her owner.5 In June 1860
another fugitive incident occurred in
Cincinnati where a Negro named James
Waggoner was surreptitiously taken
across the river to Newport, Kentucky,
by two kidnappers. Although Wag-
goner was remanded to slavery despite
evidence of his free condition, the
abductors were excused because of lack
of evidence against them and Cin-
cinnati thus remained relatively calm.
"Instead of laying Newport in ashes,
they permitted the pirates of that city
to enslave a freeman of Cincinnati.
It was a dastardly submission,
disgraceful to our State," Joshua R. Gid-
dings had fulminated from the Western
Reserve.6
In 1861 the Sara Lucy Bagby case tested
the Fugitive Slave law again,
but this time the scene was directly
connected with the Western Reserve,
the nationally reputed "hotbed of
abolition." This was also a period when
the stability of the nation was
uncertain. Chief among the causes of se-
cession listed by South Carolina was the
nonenforcement of the Fugitive
Slave law in the North, a point which
was at issue in this case. The specific
matter under consideration cannot be
understood in its broader implica-
tions without a brief summary of the
background controversy over the fugi-
tive slave question. The Constitution
required that persons held to service
or labor in one state who escaped to
another should not be discharged
from such service but upon demand should
be returned to those to whom
their labor was due.7 Since
there had been some difference of opinion as
to whether the federal government or the
states should make this rendi-
tion effective, the Fugitive Slave law
of 1850 provided that such obligation
was in the hands of the federal
authorities and also established the ma-
chinery for the return of fugitives by
them. From time to time during the
fifties as many as eleven northern state
legislatures passed what were known
as "personal liberty" acts,
which tended to impede, in varying degrees,
the operation of the national legislation
of 1850. The federal enactment
was, however, upheld by the Supreme
Court of the United States in 1859.
Despite the fact that a strong
constitutional argument could be presented
for the return of fugitive slaves and
that federal law and court decisions
upheld that policy, there were those
who, naturally averse to such action,
appealed to the "higher law"
principle, namely that their consciences would
224 OHIO HISTORY
not permit them to condone or assist in
implementing legal machinery so
much at variance with moral concepts.8
What of Sara Lucy Bagby, the center of
the storm? A reporter for the
Cleveland Herald found her in the
county jail shortly after her seizure
and described her as "a pretty dark
colored woman" of about twenty-eight
years of age. Lying face downward on a
bed, she spoke little, though cor-
rectly, and her questioner concluded
that she evinced "a decided taste
for freedom."9 As the
story unfolded in the Cleveland newspapers, it ap-
peared that Miss Lucy, as she became
popularly known in her brief moment
of fame, was in truth a very recent
addition to the city's population.
According to her own testimony, she once
had been the slave of William
S. Goshorn, but this status was changed
when Goshorn's daughter, Isabella,
took her on a short trip to
Pennsylvania. There she had been told that she
was in a free state and could do as she
pleased. Acting on this information,
Lucy ran away. She eventually had made
her way to Cleveland where,
answering to the name of Ann, she was
employed for a time as a domestic
in the household of A. G. Riddle, Republican
Congressman-elect from the
Nineteenth District. During the last few
weeks preceding her detection,
she had filled a similar position for L.
A. Benton. From the moment of her
capture, however, she made no attempt to
deny the claim of ownership
on the part of the younger Goshorn and
seemed resigned to her inevitable
remandment.10
Almost immediately after news of Lucy's
apprehension, the law partners
R. R. Spalding, A. G. Riddle and C. W.
Palmer volunteered to represent
her. A hearing before the United States
Commissioner was scheduled for
Monday, January 21, 1861. Though Lucy's
positive identification left her
lawyers scant material with which to
work, Spalding succeeded in getting
a writ of habeas corpus on the
morning of the capture. Probate Judge D. R.
Tilden, who issued the writ, set the
hearing for the same afternoon, and
the municipal courthouse immediately
became the focal point of public in-
terest. There a large crowd, including a
high proportion of colored said
to be armed with knives, had been gathering
since morning. Rumors of a
rescue attempt were rife. The Negroes of
the community were reported to
have organized a watch to prevent the
removal of the fugitive, and the
women were said to be especially
belligerent. Police cleared the jail yard
of spectators; while at the courthouse,
the doors were opened early to avoid
the pressure of the crowd. As a final
precaution, Spalding said that the
presence of Lucy would not be required, and so the
hearing proceeded with-
out her.11
Spalding decided not to contest the
seizure of the fugitive by federal
authorities, but to protest only against
her incarceration in the public jail,
since under an Ohio law of 1860 the use
of local jails by United States
agents was limited solely to persons who
had been charged with a crime.
After Spalding's presentation, Judge
Tilden, already aware of the poten-
tial political implications of the case,
stated that he wished to proceed
cautiously because of the excitement aroused.
"It has been said in all
SARA LUCY BAGBY
225
quarters of the country that this city
is disloyal to law and order," Tilden
warned. He enjoined all citizens, but
especially the Negroes, to remain
quiet and await the redress of the law,
setting down the theme which would
mold all ensuing discussion and even the
conduct of the case itself:
I don't believe there is a section of
this country where a feeling
against the Fugitive Slave Law prevails
to the extent it does here, where
so much regard is felt for the dignity
of the law. Let us in this instance
testify to the country that we are a
law-abiding as well as a liberty-
loving community.
He then deferred his decision until 9:00
A.M. on
Monday, exactly one hour
before the United States Commissioner
was slated to hear the case.12 It
was an astute move on the part of the
Judge, who thus kept the city's
agitation in a state of abeyance until
the last possible moment before the
trial.
Cleveland's three daily newspapers
agreed with Tilden's observation that
the city itself was on trial, though
they viewed the event in a vastly dif-
ferent manner. In a somber mood the Leader,
probably the most radical
Republican daily in the state, counselled
its readers that:
This fugitive case is made, at this time
and in this place, as a test
question. The issue to be tried is
whether the Fugitive Slave Law can
be enforced upon the Western Reserve,
which Southerners declare "the
hot-bed of Abolitionism." A rescue
from the officers of the law, would
be trumpeted the length and breadth of
the land. Secessionists would
seize upon it, as proof that the North
and the Republican party are
wilful nullifiers of the laws. The
disunion flame would be fanned with
the assertion that all the law-abiding
declarations of Republicans were
false and of no effect; and the hopes of
all who yet look to a peace-
ful Union, would be cast down by such an
untimely move.
On the other hand, should the people of
the City of Cleveland, in the
Western Reserve -- whose bitter
hostility to the system of slavery is pro-
verbial, and whose every sympathy is
roused in favor of the escaped bond-
man -- if this people, by their acts
today, proclaim to the country and
the world that they can set aside their
feelings and their sympathies;
that they will submit to the power of
the Federal Laws, even though
those laws be totally repugnant and
unjust; that they have a calm
judgment which outbalances the impulses
of the moment, and brings
the latter in subjection to the former,
then the effect of the act for
good at this particular crisis, will be
felt through all the country.13
Acutely aware of the complete turnabout
which this advice represented
from the past attitude of the Reserve to
the Fugitive Slave law, the Leader
attempted to assuage the tempers of its
fellow Republicans. It voiced its
trust that "What we say ... will
not be misunderstood as any concession
of principle or of faith, but as what we
consider our duty to say in this
crisis." It asserted its own
feeling that the law was "unjust, oppressive,
infamous and unconstitutional," and
should be changed. Its belief was that
"The people of Ohio and the Western
Reserve ... hate and detest the Fugi-
tive Slave Laws, with all the power of
their honest souls." But the Leader
also believed these same people were
"law-abiding," and "when it is clearly
set before them that they must submit,
for the time being, to that law,
226 OHIO HISTORY
we believe they will do it." The
city's humiliation would be only temporary,
and the newspaper exhorted its readers
to "await the hour, when, with the
legislative power in our hands, we can
sweep the infamous law from the
statute books, and have no law that we
cannot with a clean conscience
obey."14
Contrasting the pre-election militancy
of the Republicans with their pres-
ent submissiveness, the Democratic Plain
Dealer was positively gleeful over
"what a change two short months
have produced."15 Its headlines on the
same day of the Leader's abnegation
heralded:
THE FUGITIVE SLAVE CASE.
CLEVELAND NO LONGER A CONGO CITY.
THE HIGHER LAW COMING DOWN.
NO ABOLITIONISTS TO BE FOUND.
THE RESERVE TO BE REDEEMED.
The accompanying editorial alleged that:
Black Republicans have all fled and
there are no Abolitionists to be
found. The negroes themselves have had a
Meeting and resolved to
obey the laws, and even the Leader avows
itself a conservative paper....
The bleaching process is working wonders
and white men are found
largely in the majority. A white man
could be elected Mayor to-day,
and if the revolution goes on, a white
man may yet go to Congress
from this old Giddings district.
Gazing back upon the comparatively
recent outpourings of sympathy by
the city for the Oberlin rescuers and
John Brown, the Plain Dealer con-
gratulated the citizenry on the change
toward a more conservative posi-
tion. "As things are tending, the
country may yet be saved," it stated. "As
goes Cleveland so goes the Reserve, and
as goes the Reserve so goes RIDDLE;
GIDDINGS, the WADES, and the great and glorious conservative Republican
party of these UNITED STATES."16
A more dispassionate view of the
proceedings was taken by the moderate
Republican Cleveland Herald, which
calmly compared the present affair with
the Oberlin rescue. It saw the chief
difference between the two cases as
marked by the attitudes of the
claimants. Instead of sneaking into town
and attempting to whisk away their prey
from under the noses of the in-
habitants, the Goshorns had openly
complied with all the forms of the law.
As a result, the people of Cleveland had
decided on their part to comply
also with the law, "not that they
hate slavery less, but because they love
obedience to law more."17
But Lucy's case was far from over, and
Monday's sessions brought new
threats of an uprising. Crowds again
gathered about the courthouse before
the opening hour of nine. United States
Marshal Matthew Johnson had
appointed a special force of deputies to
maintain order, and even requested
the Cleveland Grays to remain in readiness
in their armory. Lucy's counsel,
R. R. Spalding, appealed to the crowd
from the courthouse steps to refrain
from any rescue attempts. Lucy was
brought before Judge Tilden without
difficulty, however, and Tilden then
rendered his decision that the prisoner
SARA LUCY BAGBY
227
could not be held in the jail, though
she could be kept in custody in an-
other place.18
Lucy was then due to appear before the
United States Commissioner, and
in transferring her from the municipal
court to the United States court in
the post office building, her guards had
their closest brush with the mob.
The appearance of the prisoner triggered
a surge which had to be beaten
back by the policemen with clubs.19
Negro John Malvin, an eyewitness,
later described two incidents in that
surly crowd: one, a stunning blow
on a colored man's head seemingly the
result of a misunderstanding, and
the other a very deliberate attempt by
an Irishman to cudgel another
Negro with a club.20 The Leader,
which viewed the marshal's special deputy
corps as "a gross insult to
Cleveland," accused the men of striking at every
Negro they passed on the way to the
courthouse.21 In the Plain Dealer,
however, one reads of razors, bowie
knives, loaded pistols, stones, and brick-
bats taken from the persons of arrested
Negroes, and of one Negro woman
arrested for throwing pepper into the
eyes of a deputy marshal.22
Despite the incidents, Lucy reached the
courtroom, and the actual fugi-
tive slave hearing began -- although
not, according to Malvin, before the
ubiquitous Cleveland Negro, W. E.
Ambush, had "some words" with the
younger Goshorn which resulted in both
contestants drawing pistols right
in the courtroom.23 In the
ensuing proceedings it was apparent that even
the defense realized that it did not
have much of a case. The law precluded
Lucy's testimony in her own behalf, and
John Goshorn testified that his
granddaughter Isabella had never made
the alleged trip to Pennsylvania
with Lucy. Goshorn indicated that Lucy
made her escape from his son's
house in Wheeling on the evening of
October 3, 1860.24 Spalding requested
an adjournment to permit him to go to
Wheeling and question witnesses
regarding the purpose of the trip to
Pennsylvania. In expressing his
approval of the request, Commissioner
White gave the first recorded
intimation that the affair was viewed by
the plaintiff primarily as a test
case.
"These gentlemen," White said,
referring to the Goshorns, "want to know
if Cleveland will enforce the fugitive
law." He thought Cleveland had
reacted commendably to the challenge:
"The citizens have shown a disposi-
tion to maintain order, and if we wait,
I think this disposition will be in-
creased.... I wish to show to the South
that a law as distasteful to us, as
a law against the slave trade is to
them, can be carried out here; and that
though they have mobbed and maltreated
our citizens when found among
them, that we are true and loyal to the
Constitution."25 Acceding to the
wish of both sides, the court granted a
recess of two days, until Wednesday.
In deference to Tilden's decision, Lucy
was confined in a special room
fitted out for her in the post office
building.26
As the fugitive's fate thus hung in the
balance, interest increased in the
motives and intentions of her masters.
An article from a correspondent in
Wheeling appearing in the Plain
Dealer a few days later filled in more de-
tails on the background of the Goshorns.
It revealed that Goshorn (pre-
sumably the elder) was a man of $300,000
worth who "came purely as a
228 OHIO HISTORY
representative man from Virginia to test
the Chicago platform under the
new declarations of fidelity to law and
order." He was not at all interested
in the value of the slave, then, but in
maintaining a legal principle. It was
hinted that other parties in Virginia
and Kentucky were preparing to re-
claim slave property in Ohio, "even
in Oberlin."27 The Leader, committed
to the due process of law which seemed
destined to remand Lucy to slavery,
was interested in finding out whether
her freedom could be purchased. Al-
though it first conveyed the information
that Goshorn refused to sell the
slave until she was legally delivered to
him and taken to Virginia,28 it later
stated that a "most
extravagant" price of $1,200 was asked, and announced
that contributions would be received at
the Leader counting room.29
Both newspapers also used the
adjournment to develop the political angle
of the case. The Plain Dealer pointed
out that if Lucy had been from a cot-
ton state, she would be "Scott
free," as those seceded states had renounced
their rights to the protection of the
Fugitive Slave law. In a few months
Virginia and Kentucky would also be out
of the Union, it continued, and
then fugitives could flock to Ohio
without fear of reclamation.30 The Leader,
pointing to this latest northern
submission to the law, renewed the Repub-
lican condition for a reciprocal
southern guarantee of protection for northern
citizens, and added the demand that the
southern traitors be tried and
hanged according to law.31
When the hearing reopened on Wednesday,
January 23, Spalding an-
nounced his failure to turn up the
desired evidence. "Nothing now remains
that may impede the performance of your
painful duty," he told the court,
and summed up the attendant emotions of
a large part of the city:
We are this day offering to the majesty
of constitutional law a homage
that takes with it a virtual surrender
of the finest feelings of our na-
tures; the vanquishing of many of our
strictest resolutions; the mortifi-
cation of a freeman's pride, and, I
almost said, the contravention of a
Christian's duty to his God.
While we do this, in the City of
Cleveland, in the Connecticut Western
Reserve, and permit this poor piece of
humanity to be taken peaceably,
through our streets, and upon our
railways, back to the land of bondage,
will not the frantic South stay its
parricidal arm? Will not our com-
promising legislators cry, "Hold,
enough!"32
The failure of Spalding's Wheeling
excursion, plus proof of ownership by
the claimant, sealed the verdict.
Commissioner White carried out his "un-
pleasant duty" of remanding the slave
to her rightful owners, at the same
time offering $100 himself towards her
purchase.33 United States Marshal
Johnson, designated as the one to return
the fugitive, referred to his as-
signment as "the most unpleasant
duty of his life." Replying for the Goshorns,
Mr. Barlow asserted that the question
did not involve the right or wrong of
slavery or the constitutionality of the
Fugitive Slave law, but simply the
disposition of the North towards the
obedience of that law. He concluded,
"Cleveland has come up to the work
manfully, and no citizen has laid a
single straw in the way, and these
gentlemen from Virginia thank you for
it, and it will satisfy them more than
all else."34
SARA LUCY BAGBY
229
So Lucy was returned to "Wheeling
where she was placed in jail and
severely punished."35 She
was possibly the last fugitive to be surrendered
by the North under the Fugitive Slave
law. A rumor that Negroes were
planning to uncouple the railroad car in
which she was traveling caused the
engineer to speed past a waiting crowd
at Lima, Ohio.36 "Thus was the
law executed with entire justice to the
slave, and with as little shock to
the sensibilities of a liberty-loving
community as is possible in the nature
of the case," commented the Herald.37
The Leader praised the
manner in
which the people of Cleveland had
received the decision, declaring, "The
test question has been tried and the law
has been submitted to. We have
done our share. Will the South do
hers?"38
Not so disposed to magnanimity was the
Ashtabula Sentinel, which found
the case concluded before it had a
chance to comment. As could be expected,
its remarks were no less truculent for
their belatedness:
So it would seem that Messrs. Goshorn
did not really want the poor
human being they called their slave, but
they wished to see if they could
make the Western Reserve eat dirt, and
swallow all the resolutions
they had ever passed on the subject of
this damnable Fugitive Slave
Law. It must be very pleasant to the
citizens of Cleveland to be thus
made the dirt eaters for the whole
Reserve.... He [Goshorn, Sr.] not
only made them eat dirt, but rubbed it
in.39
Reporting to the Sentinel directly
from Cleveland in that same issue. Gid-
dings echoed the same attitude he had
struck towards Cincinnati's Wag-
goner case of the previous summer:
She [Lucy] had heard of Cleveland as the
citadel of freedom; she
had been told that a christian community
resided there.... In open
day, in the midst of civilized people,
she was seized; the cold iron was
placed upon her limbs, and she was
hurried to a fate far worse than
death. Men and women looked on, for they
were present, consenting
to her moral death. Persons of her own
complexion were told they must
not interfere to save this helpless,
this friendless woman. In Africa,
they would have done it; but in
Cleveland, barbarism was protected
by their public men.
The city's Republican leaders were
deluded in believing that they were
obeying the law, said Giddings, because
"The Fugitive Slave Act is not law
according to the definition of that term
given by any approved writer of the
last century." When future
generations looked back on what was done "here
on the Western Reserve in this afternoon
of the nineteenth century," Gid-
dings forecast, "they will wonder,
but will be unable to account for such
moral phenomenon."40 Replying
to the sharp criticism in the Sentinel and
in the Lorain News toward its
stand on the fugitive slave question, the
Leader answered, "Nothing would have given more 'aid and
comfort' to
seceding traitors of the South than a
rescue here in Cleveland. That aid
and comfort we did not care to give, and
could do no less than advise
non-resistance in this case."41
Other abolitionist organs, even later in
their appraisal of the case, were
indisposed to let the matter rest.
Writing in the Oberlin Evangelist, the
230 OHIO HISTORY
Rev. James A. Thome related how a
"prominent Republican citizen" had
told "the lady of a leading German
republican" that the city's capitulation
had been "a necessity of the
crisis; Lucy could not have been returned three
months before, nor three months after
this time!" Thome wondered whether
in the light of this state of opinion
the South would be appeased by the
sacrifice. He did not argue so much
against "the necessity of the crisis"
as against the "needlessly
officious" manner in which the Cleveland Repub-
licans had succumbed.42
Evidently they had not stopped to consider that
the future generations of Lucy's issue
would be potentially condemned to
enslavement as a result of their
actions.
It was March before William Lloyd
Garrison's Liberator pieced together
an account of the case. This radical
organ spread Lucy's cause before the
North in a four-column, page one layout
headed: "THE HUMAN SACRI-
FICE!" The Liberator criticized
the Republicans' conduct of the case as
"A Legal Farce," despite the
antislavery reputations of the defense counsel,
and pointed out that the sole question
which the Clevelanders could think
of testing in their habeas corpus writ
was "whether the Sheriff and jailor
could hold Lucy in durance inside the
walls of the jail as well as outside,"
whereas in Wisconsin writs had been
issued for the purpose of testing the
constitutionality of the Fugitive Slave
law itself. Cleveland Republicans
had been complaining about the
unconstitutionality of that despised law
for ten years, said The Liberator. But
when the chance had come to put
their principle to the test -- not only
for Lucy's benefit, but for that of all
fugitives in Cleveland -- they had let
it pass untried.43
The city of Cleveland came in also for
its share of The Liberator's con-
tempt. Perhaps taking its cue from the
comments of the Ashtabula Sentinel,
this abolition publication viewed the
whole case as a deliberate plot to
humble the "very Fort Sumter of the
anti-slavery garrison." "The Western
Reserve has, or had, perhaps we
should say, a terribly anti-slavery character
in the South." The calculated
course of the Goshorns in pursuing their claim
in Cleveland "ought to have raised
up Abolitionists by the thousand, and
made every drop of Yankee blood boil to
hurl back the insulting defiance."
Instead, the city could not have acted
more in Goshorn's interest if he
had penned the script himself. The
Liberator even went so far as to sur-
mise that perhaps Goshorn had arranged
Lucy's escape in order to humiliate
the city.44 Even in obeying
the law, the Clevelanders might have behaved
with "sullen obstinacy,"
making the Virginian feel the thinness of their
welcome; instead, they had chosen the
way "recommended by Daniel Web-
ster ... to obey with alacrity."
Their surrender did not merely affect them-
selves, for it "gave the South new
power to trample upon the rights of
the North, new vantage ground upon which
to rest the lever of oppres-
sion."45 The following
week The Liberator printed without comment a reso-
lution passed by the Wheeling Council,
thanking Marshal Johnson and
"all other citizens of Ohio who
have ... given proof of their good will towards
this State, and their fidelity to the
Constitution which binds the States
together."46
SARA LUCY BAGBY
231
That was the end of the Bagby fugitive
slave case, although the corpse,
like John Brown's body, was to emit a
few more groans. The comparative
absence of violence in the case, along
with its incontrovertible result, prac-
tically assured it of a dearth of
publicity outside of its immediate locale,
except in the abolitionist press.47
Furthermore, it was not the Fugitive Slave
law, but the territorial issue, which
events proved to be the main stumbling
block to peace.
Abolition criticism notwithstanding, the
outcome of this case did pro-
duce tangible evidence that, even on the
Western Reserve, Ohio Repub-
licans would tolerate the Fugitive Slave
law to preserve the Union. It
added fuel to a conservative reaction
produced in the state by the crisis,
which bore fruit in the passage of an
anti-miscegenation law, Democratic
victories in the spring elections, and
ratification of the Corwin amendment
guaranteeing slavery in the states
against interference on the part of Con-
gress. It goes without saying that the
Bagby case, as well as the much
better publicized Corwin amendment,
failed to exert an influence towards
a peaceable settlement of the sectional
quarrel. Yet the gesture was there
and is deserving of the notice of
posterity. In the months that followed,
until the formation of the Union party
provided more political ammunition,
the Ohio radicals used the Bagby case as
the prime example of the futility
of a moderate course.
On a more personal plane, the story
appears to have resolved itself on
an ironic note. Early in June, the Sentinel
related that Goshorn had been
one of the few Wheelingers to vote for
secession in a late election, claiming
thereby that Cleveland and the Reserve
had been duped by the southerner.48
Even the Plain Dealer was
"chagrined and mortified ... to learn that the
Goshorns are rank rebels, and have forfeited
all respect and consideration of
the Clevelanders, at whose hands they
received such marked courtesy."49
Lucy would seem to have had the last
laugh, however, for when the Union
army arrived in Wheeling, she was
liberated and Goshorn was impounded
as a prisoner of war in the same jail in
which he had placed his errant
slave.50 Thus, the Civil War, which Miss
Lucy's reenslavement was supposed
to help prevent, proved to be the agent
which finally returned her to freedom.
THE AUTHOR: John E. Vacha is a
former graduate student at Western Re-
serve University and is now teaching at
West High Schol, Cleveland.
THE CASE OF |
Sara Lucy Bagby A LATE GESTURE
by JOHN E. VACHA
Four southern states had seceded when John Goshorn and his son William S. Goshorn set out from Wheeling, Virginia, for Cleveland, Ohio, in January of 1861 for the purpose of reclaiming Sara Lucy Bagby, an escaped slave, who had found temporary refuge doing domestic work in Cleveland. Even though the nation was in the midst of its climactic crisis over the slavery issue, the Goshorns planned to invoke the invidious Fugitive Slave law in the heart of the North's reputedly most rabid antislavery district, the Western Reserve. Arriving in Cleveland on January 17, the Goshorns ascertained the run- away's whereabouts and reported to United States Commissioner Bushnell White the following evening. Next morning, Saturday, January 19, they led a group of United States deputy marshals to the home of L. A. Benton on Prospect Street, where Sara Lucy was currently employed. After break- ing down the door, they took her into custody without further interference. Benton forthwith informed W. E. Ambush, Negro chairman of the Cleve- land Fugitive Aid Society, of the incident and news of the seizure spread swiftly through the city.1 The Cleveland Leader reported that this was the city's first fugitive slave case in nineteen years.2 On the same day as Lucy's apprehension, Georgia became the fifth state to leave the Union, and in the midst of the insistent sectional crisis Cleveland found itself with a cause celebre of its own. This incident was indeed fraught with explosive potential. Only two years before, an attempt to reclaim a fugitive by federal authorities in nearby Oberlin had erupted in the "Oberlin-Wellington rescue," one of the most publicized incidents in the pre-war antislavery struggle. While the Negro in the case made good his escape, thirty-seven rescuers were brought be- fore the United States Circuit Court in Cleveland, forty miles away, to stand trial for violation of the Fugitive Slave law. Two received jail sen- tences and stiff fines, a decision later upheld three to two by the Ohio Su- preme Court after it issued a writ of habeas corpus to have the cases brought before it and judged on the basis of the constitutionality of the law. This
NOTES ON PAGE 273 |