?Freedom in Their Hands is a Deadly Poison?: 
Print Culture, Legal Movements, and Slaveholding Resistance on the Eastern 
Shore of Maryland, 1850-61  
 
 
 
Masters Thesis 
 
Candidate: Jacob Chaires 
 
Advisor: Christopher Bonner 
 
Thesis Committee Members: 
Richard Bell 
Christopher Bonner 
Michael Ross 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1 
 
On February 25, 1860, the ?Easton Gazette? of Talbot County, Maryland published an 
article decrying recent ?extreme bills? that were before the Maryland Legislature.  ?There has 
scarcely been a bill,? the article read, so ?impregnated with the free negro mania which has? 
occupied the brain of some of the members.?1  The bills had been introduced by Curtis Jacobs of 
Worcester County, Maryland.  The language of the text called for banning free black meetings, 
intercepting ?incendiary? abolitionist publications, expelling free blacks from the state, 
re-enslaving those who do not leave voluntarily, and establishing a ?vigilant police.?2  In 
essence, their design was to harshly curtail the rights of free black persons who resided on the 
Eastern Shore of Maryland.  Why did a bill embodying ?free negro mania? take center stage 
during the 1860 term of the Maryland Legislature?  And why, on the cusp of a civil war about 
slaveholding? rights, were certain Marylanders so concerned about the free black question?  
The answer to these questions, and others, lie in the geographical region of Maryland 
known as the Eastern Shore.  Though slavery existed throughout the state of Maryland, the 
highest proportion of black slaves-to-white males was on the Eastern Shore.3  During the 
Revolutionary period and the early Republic, the Shore was home to large tobacco plantations 
which relied heavily on slave labor.  However, over the course of the Antebellum period, many 
farm owners became dependent on free black labor as Eastern Shore agricultural production 
shifted towards wheat and corn, and away from tobacco.  The population of free blacks on the 
Eastern Shore steadily grew during the Antebellum period, and in certain counties such as Kent 
and Caroline, the population of free blacks not only outpaced the population of slaves, it also 
1 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, February, 25, 1860, 2. 
2 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, February 11, 1860, 1. 
3 ?Maryland Colonization Journal?, (Baltimore: Maryland State Colonization Society, 1856), 246. 
 
 
 
2 
 
grew rather close to the number of white males in each county.4  Nonslaveholding whites became 
heavily dependent on this new labor force, and were successful at managing black freedom to 
benefit themselves.  This set up contentious debates between slaveholders and nonslaveholders. 
Which labor force was the Eastern Shore to depend on: sla?ve? s, free blacks, or both? 
Throughout most of the Antebellum period, slaveholders had been able to easily 
influence Maryland?s General Assembly to pass laws that regulated free black mobility, while 
simultaneously solidifying slavery as an institution.  However, in 1851 Maryland adopted a new 
state Constitution which effectively stripped the Eastern Shore of influence and power.  With 
Maryland slaveholders at a loss, Eastern Shore newspaper contributors and editors throughout 
the 1850s began to ramp up their attacks on free black labor while emphatically endorsing 
slavery as the only reliable labor system.  Eastern Shore newspapers repeatedly characterized 
free blacks in one of four ways: they absconded at high rates, helped slaves escape bondage, 
were violent, and were a burden on the body politic.  Slaveholders, rather than relinquishing their 
power, began to seize on these arguments, and organize politically.  Slaveholders devised both 
legal and extralegal movements designed to terrorize the free black population, as well as 
reconstitute slavery as the Eastern Shore?s primary labor system.  In each of these cases 
slaveholders sought to regain their authority as determiners of who was free and who was not. 
Sometimes they succeeded, most of the time they failed, but as each year passed they became 
more determined and organized. 
 The goal of this thesis is twofold: to explain the rise of slaveholding anxiety in relation 
to the growing free black question, as well as to articulate how slaveholders sought to regain 
4 Ibid. 
 
 
 
3 
 
their power.  I argue that slaveholders on the Eastern Shore politically organized around ideas 
and concepts produced in newspapers.  Slaveholders utilized new ideas about race and the law to 
organize, and call upon the General Assembly to enact tougher sanctions on free black mobility. 
Newspapers are not only a means by which to quote mine, but they are also living, breathing, 
cultural organisms.  They both reflect slaveholding anxieties, as well as play into them.  They 
both record local news events, as well as conspicuously pair those local stories with similar 
stories from other counties, states, and nations.  As Jeffrey Pasley argued in ?The Tyranny of 
Printers?, newspapers and editors during the Antebellum period were ?purposeful actors in the 
political process? pursuing specific political goals.?5  As such, newspapers and editors play an 
important role in the story I wish to tell. 
It is important to note that this paper primarily uses two newspapers, the ?Easton Gazette 
and ?The? ?Kent News?.  These two newspapers are interesting for a multitude of reasons.  For one, 
they are two of a select number of Eastern Shore newspapers that have almost completely 
survived from the Antebellum period.  Second, they stand out as purely local newspapers, 
whereas other Shore papers such as the ?Cecil Whig? contained mostly reprinted articles from 
around the country.  
The Eastern Shore also did not exist in a vacuum.  At the same time as slaveholders 
politically organized on the Shore, national events played out that ultimately led to the Civil 
War.  The Compromise of 1850, the passage of the federal Fugitive Slave Act, the Christiana 
Riot, the publication of Uncle Tom?s Cabin, Bleeding Kansas, and the raid on Harper?s Ferry 
were all major events that drove the national political discourse.  It is the goal of this paper to 
5 Jeffrey Pasley, ?The Tyranny of Printers: Newspaper Politics in the Early American Republic? (Virginia: 
University of Virginia Press, 2001), 3. 
 
 
 
4 
 
explain the ways in which local actions were interwoven with these larger events.  In what ways 
did they influence slaveholders on the Eastern Shore?  In what ways was the Eastern Shore 
unique when it came to slaveholding political organization? 
This thesis builds off of the work done by historians in developing the ?middle ground? 
thesis of Maryland, such as Barbara Fields, Carol Wilson, T. Stephen Whitman, Robert Brugger, 
and Ira Berlin.  However, rather than treat Maryland as a singular unit, I instead focus on the 
Eastern Shore as being unique when it comes to slaveholding organization and resistance.  In this 
effort, local studies of the region have played a major factor, such as Max Grivno?s ?Gleanings of 
Freedom a? nd Jennifer Dorsey?s ?Hirelings?.  My thesis also attempts to contribute to the 
historiography of legal ideas and movements.  Historians such as James Kettner and Ellen 
Eslinger do a good job of explaining the tenuous legal position free blacks found themselves in, 
and the long, arduous struggle for political bodies to try and regulate free blacks.  I add to this 
ongoing discussion by demonstrating how slaveholders formed political organizations to enact 
legal change in regards to the free black population.  Finally, and most importantly, this thesis 
reshapes how historians view print culture.  Newspapers were not only producing ideas on the 
Eastern Shore, but they also carefully influenced and promoted societal, cultural, and political 
action. 
 
 
Chapter I 
The eastern region of Maryland, known colloquially as the Eastern Shore, was constituted 
by eight counties up until 1867: Cecil, Kent, Queen Anne?s, Caroline, Talbot, Dorchester, 
 
 
 
5 
 
Somerset, and Worcester.6  The name Eastern Shore originated as the result of it being separated 
geographically from the mainland of Maryland by the Chesapeake Bay.  Throughout the 
Antebellum period the Eastern Shore experienced a great shift in terms of their traditional 
agricultural production.  During colonial times and the early Republic, Eastern Shore farmers 
mostly relied on tobacco cultivation.  However, tobacco was not only labor intensive, it also 
decimated the land.  These two factors led many Eastern Shoremen over the course of the 
Antebellum period to convert their fields to less labor intensive, and more seasonal crops, such 
as wheat, corn, and soybeans.7  
The original growth of tobacco on the Eastern Shore was brought about by the use of 
slaves.  This meant that a large number of slaveholders also resided on the Shore.  Tobacco 
cultivation required long hours over an extended period of months, and skilled hands to perform 
the harsh labor.  Slavery maximized tobacco production.  However, the decline of tobacco and 
the rise of seasonal crops led many slaveholders to sell their slave property in Southern markets 
through the interstate slave trade.  Simultaneously, the growth of seasonal crops in Maryland 
required less skilled (and therefore cheaper) labor over shorter periods of time.8  Newly freed 
slaves as well as black emigrants and fugitives from the South were hired on Maryland?s Eastern 
Shore to fill this labor void.  This group of laborers constituted a new class on the Eastern Shore: 
free blacks.  
6 Wicomico County was formed in 1867, taking parts from Somerset and Worcester counties. 
7 Jennifer Dorsey, ?Hirelings: African American Workers and Free Labor in Early Maryland? (New York: 
Cornell University Press, 2011), 8-10; also see Robert Brugger, ?Maryland, A Middle Temperament: 
1634-1980? (Maryland: John Hopkins University Press, 1988), Chapter 2, 240-241. 
8 Max Grivno, ?Gleanings of Freedom: Free and Slave Labor along the Mason-Dixon Line, 1790-1860 
(Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2011), 93. 
 
 
 
6 
 
The number of free blacks on the Eastern Shore gradually increased decade by decade 
throughout the Antebellum period while the population of slaves decreased.  In Queen Anne?s 
and Somerset counties, the slave population dropped by a third between 1790 and 1850.  In Cecil 
and Caroline counties during the same time period, the slave population dropped by 
three-fourths.  Meanwhile, in Kent County, the free black population grew from 655 to 3,143, 
whereas the white population of the county actually declined from 6,748 to 5,616.  A similar 
trend occurred in the other Eastern Shore counties as well.9  Slaveholders on the Eastern Shore 
were greatly concerned with these demographic trends.  The loss of slave property necessarily 
meant the loss slaveholding power, distinction, and influence.  Even some former slaveholders 
who had sold their slaves during the tobacco decline now became concerned that their actions 
had given rise to free black labor.  Reconstituting tobacco as the Eastern Shore?s main 
agricultural product was out of the question, but there were other ways to regain slaveholding 
power.  
The main avenue for this struggle was the Maryland General Assembly.  Slaveholders 
pressured the Assembly to pass a variety of laws throughout the Antebellum period that 
simultaneously kept the institution of slavery alive, while also harshly regulating the growing 
free black population.  For example, in regards to the slave population, the legislature passed a 
law in 1833 that required fugitive slaves who were caught running away to serve longer terms in 
bondage than previously proscribed.  In terms of the free black population, a law was passed in 
1825 by the legislature which fined ?free negroes? for ?idle [beha?v?ior] without any means of 
maintenance.?  If they could not pay the fine they had to challenge the case in court or lea?v?e the 
9 ?Maryland Colonization Journal? (Baltimore: Maryland State Colonization Society, 1852), 246. 
 
 
 
7 
 
state within fifteen days.10  The movement towards strict laws concerning free blacks and slaves 
coincides with a broader Antebellum trend.  As historian Ira Berlin notes, laws and customs 
during the Antebellum period ?reinforced the identification of black with slavery and white with 
freedom.?11 
Slaveholders were successful throughout the Antebellum period at getting laws enacted 
through the General Assembly.  Enforcement however was another concern entirely.  For 
example, after Nat Turner?s uprising in Virginia in 1831, the General Assembly passed a law 
ordering ?the expulsion of slaves therefore freed.?  Free blacks were banned from entering the 
state, and from being employed.  Both free blacks and slaves were banned from navigating ships, 
carrying weapons, assembling, and selling goods.12  However, the law passed in 1831 lacked the 
proper enforcement mechanisms.13  This in part confirms the thesis articulated by historian Ellen 
Eslinger in her article ?Free Black Residency in Two Antebellum Virginia Counties,? which 
argued that Antebellum laws, in practice, ?deviated significantly from statute text.?14  Even if it 
was the case that some laws had a ?chilling effect on free blacks? mobility and by extension their 
employability,? the ?perception? of slaveholders was that enforcement mechanisms were lax at 
best.15  
10 Clement Dorsey, ?The general public statutory law and public local law of the State of Maryland: from 
the year 1692 to 1839?, Volume 141 (Baltimore: Printed by John B. Toy, 1840), 1121, 837. 
11 Ira Berlin, ?Slaves Without Masters: The Free Negro in the Antebellum South? (New York: The New 
Press, 2007), 37. 
12 ?Laws Made and Passed by the General Assembly of the State of Maryland, ?Volume 213 (Annapolis: J. 
Hughes, 1832), 445-451. 
13 Charles Lewis Wagandt, ?Mighty Revolution: Negro Emancipation in Maryland: 1862-1864? (Baltimore: 
John Hopkins University Press, 1964), 6. 
14 Ellen Eslinger, ?Free Black Residency in Two Antebellum Virginia Counties: How the Laws Functioned,? 
The Journal of Southern History?, 79, no. 2 (2013), 297. 
15 Grivno, ?Gleanings of Freedom?, 184. 
 
 
 
8 
 
The 1831 law was not an aberration, but rather a cycle in which slaveholders found 
themselves trapped.  Every time a crisis emerged involving free blacks or slaves, slaveholders 
successfully passed legislation through the General Assembly, only for the law not to be 
enforced.  One slaveholder was quoted in the ?Baltimore Sun? as saying that if something were not 
done there would be ?few slaves remaining on the Eastern Shore of Maryland in a few years.?16 
Without some enforcement mechanism slavery would erode away leaving free blacks as the only 
viable labor force on the Eastern Shore.  More importantly, slaveholders would lose their 
property, and their power. 
Organizing a solution to this problem was harder than it looked.  Throughout the 
Antebellum period, national politics enveloped Eastern Shore political society.  Slaveholders, 
just as nonslaveholders, were driven apart ideologically.  In the northern part of the Eastern 
Shore, a strong contingent of Whigs resided.  The region?s proximity to the North, as well as its 
geography, necessarily meant their politics was mired in discussions of railroads and canals.  The 
southern part of the Shore leaned more towards the Democratic Party as a result of its proximity 
to the South, and its geographical isolation from urbanization and internal improvements.   While 
these sectional differences were broadly true, the Eastern Shore was not populated by 
cookie-cutter counties.  The Whig Party as well as the Democratic Party was highly active in 
every county.  Newspapers in each county battled each other through their respective editorial 
pages: the ?Easton Star? versus the ?Easton Gazette?, the ?Chestertown Transcript ?versus ?The Kent 
News?, and the ?Cambridge Herald? versus the ?Cambridge Democrat? were but a few examples of 
political divisions within Eastern Shore print culture.17  
16 ?Wholesale Absconding of Slaves from Maryland,? ?Baltimore Sun?, Oct. 26, 1849. 
17 Brugger, ?Maryland, A Middle Temperament, ?226-229. 
 
 
 
9 
 
Though this strife had lasted since the advent of the two-party system, a moment in 1850 
provided the groundwork for potential Eastern Shore unification, and therefore the reclamation 
of slaveholding power.  Beginning in 1848, there were rumors throughout the state that a 
constitutional convention was being planned to rewrite the Maryland State Constitution.  The 
original state Constitution, written and adopted in 1776, apportioned delegates to the General 
Assembly based on the number of white males above the age of twenty-one, who also owned at 
least fifty acres of property.  However, the growth of Baltimore City and the Western Shore more 
generally in the seventy years since had led many to question the traditional apportionment of 
delegates which so clearly benefited the less populated Eastern Shore.  The original Constitution 
also contained within it a special provision that required a two-thirds vote of two ?successive 
General Assemblies in order to address anything concerning the Eastern Shore.18 
These designs to reform the state Constitution were particularly alarming to slaveholders 
on the Eastern Shore.  Not only were they unable to get the General Assembly to enforce laws 
related to free blacks and slaves, but now their power to simply get laws passed was being 
threatened.  Upon hearing that ?Representation according to population? was the ultimate goal of 
the convention, the residents on the Eastern Shore pushed their political differences aside and 
began to unite in opposition.  The first meetings held to discuss rewriting the Maryland 
Constitution were boycotted by almost the entirety of the Eastern Shore.  Editorials in Eastern 
Shore newspapers such as ?The Kent News? began to highlight the potential effects a new 
Constitution would have on the Eastern Shore as a whole.  The ?landed interest? on the Eastern 
Shore, according to one editorial, would be reduced to a ?mere cipher.?  Another editorial stated 
18 Maryland Constitution, 1776, Article 2, Article 59. 
 
 
 
10 
 
that the Eastern Shore would be ?the lamb at the mercy of the wolf,? the wolf being Baltimore 
City.19  
In the face of a potential onslaught what was the Eastern Shore to do?  One article 
entitled ?Constitutional Reform No. 5? called for the ?separation? of the Eastern Shore from the 
state if ?representation according to population? were present in the new Constitution.  In order 
to prevent this from happening, the author called for preliminary action: 
To prevent such a catastrophe, let the people of the Eastern Shore lay aside, all minor difference, 
and rally, as a band of brothers around our rights and Interest? let us - and let the friends of the 
landed and agricultural interests in the State, on both shores, forget, all differences of opinion on 
other subjects, and united with hearts and voices, and actuated by a single purpose, come to the 
rescue of the Eastern Shore?20 
 
While the author of this piece did not necessarily want the Eastern Shore to separate from the 
rest of Maryland, others were more forceful on the issue.  Future Governor of Maryland Thomas 
Holliday Hicks of Dorchester County proposed an amendment to the new Constitution that 
reserved the right for the Eastern Shore to secede at any time in the future.21  Although secession 
was never a realistic goal, the use of secessionist language in regards to the constitutional 
convention is important.  It implied that the Eastern Shore was united, rather than divided.  This 
would set the tone for the rest of the decade: only through unity could Eastern Shore slaveholders 
achieve their goals.22 
The results of the constitutional convention were what Eastern Shore slaveholders feared 
the most.  While the Senate in the General Assembly remained basically the same (one senator 
per county, one for Baltimore City), the House of Delegates, for the first time in the history of 
19 Untitled, T? he Kent News?,? ?Sept. 1, 1849, 2; Untitled, ?The Kent News,?  Sept. 8, 1849, 2. 
20 Untitled, ?The Kent News?, Sept. 29, 1849, 1. 
21 Fields, ?Slavery and Freedom on the Middle Ground?, 20. 
22 For a detailed discussion of the secession movement on the Eastern Shore, see Dickson Preston, 
Newspapers of Maryland?s Eastern Shore? (Maryland: Tidewater Publishers, 1986), 59-62. 
 
 
 
11 
 
Maryland, based its delegate count on total aggregate population (all whites, free blacks, and 
slaves).23  Even though the number of free blacks on the Eastern Shore had grown throughout the 
Antebellum period, it was nowhere near the population of free blacks on the Western Shore.  The 
number of slaves on the Eastern Shore had dramatically declined, and in some counties, the 
white population had as well.  All in all, the Eastern Shore was relegated to second class status. 
Their ability to pass laws without threat from an opposition was eroded as their number of 
delegates was significantly reduced.  
The constitutional convention of 1850 was the end of one era in Maryland, and the 
beginning of another.  Slaveholders? ability to influence policy and enforcement at the state level 
had been temporarily stymied.   The federal Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, passed in the same year 
as the convention was held, did promise greater protections for slaveholders.  However, decision 
making as it related to the appointment of marshals and deputies to arrest fugitive slaves was left 
up to federal courts and commissioners.24  The slave population would continue to decline, and 
the free black population would continue to expand.  Eastern Shore slaveholders did not take this 
fact lightly.  As Barbara Fields states in ?Slavery and Freedom on the Middle Ground?, slavery 
was dealt a ?defensive strain? in Maryland, and as a result, slaveholders were ?overbearing, 
arbitrary, and vindictive.?25  Over the course of the following decade, slaveholders began to 
pursue more active means in order to reclaim slave property as well as to halt the growth of the 
free black population.  National events in the 1850?s, such as Bleeding Kansas and the Dred 
23 James Warner Harry, ?The Maryland Constitution of 1851? (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 
1902), 101. 
24 Milt Diggins, S? tealing Freedom along the Mason-Dixon Line: Thomas McCreary, the Notorious Slave 
Catcher from Maryland? (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 2015), 59-61. 
25 Barbara Fields, ?Slavery and Freedom on the Middle Ground: Maryland During the Nineteenth Century 
(London: Yale University Press, 1985), 39. 
 
 
 
12 
 
Scott decision, likely enticed slaveholders to act urgently, but it was the efforts of Eastern Shore 
print culture to stoke and promote slaveholding anxiety that primarily affected change. 
 
Chapter II 
Eastern Shore newspapers, and print culture more generally, actively participated in 
promoting anxiety amongst slaveholders.  As historian Dickson Preston points out, Eastern Shore 
papers were ?county newspapers, pure and simple.?  They were published largely by ?homebred, 
homegrown owner-editors whose viewpoints? were those of the communities in which they had 
their roots.?26  This meant that what editors chose to print was at least partially reflective of 
preexisting sentiments within Eastern Shore society.  However, because editors had a local 
background, they were able to use their knowledge to exploit and intensify slaveholding angst 
going into the future.  Their motives for doing so were likely rooted in capitalistic impulses: to 
sell more newspapers.  
An unintended consequence of this effort was that slaveholders would seize arguments in 
newspapers to actively challenge free black mobility, and argue for the reconstitution of slavery. 
With their influence in the General Assembly limited by the new Constitution, slaveholders 
needed new arguments, and new channels to achieve their goals.  Eastern Shore newspapers 
amplified slaveholders? angst through two means: literature and news.  The first promoted ?ideas 
about free blacks and slavery as an institution.  The latter then reinforced the ideas implied in the 
literature sections.  
26 Preston, ?Newspapers of Maryland?s Eastern Shore?, Preface, xiii. 
 
 
 
13 
 
Literature itself can be broken down into three categories: black minstrelsy, stories using 
the term ?nigger,? and scientific racism.  Black minstrelsy during the 1850?s, although written 
down, was not unlike latter incarnations performed on stage by actors using blackface.  The 
supposed design of black minstrelsy was to provide entertainment to the reader while 
simultaneously promoting a moral lesson.  In reality, these stories reflected the biases and 
anxieties of slaveholders, as well as enhanced them.  William Mahar, in his article ?Black 
English in Early Blackface Minstrelsy,? argued that Antebellum literary minstrelsy acted as a 
?photographer?s negative.?   According to Mahar, black minstrelsy was not only about 
perpetuating white prejudice, but it was also reflective of the ?differences between American life 
and its social or cultural ideals.?27  In effect, black minstrelsy tells us less about black people, and 
more about mastery, and slave ownership. 
Although Eastern Shore newspapers certainly deployed black minstrelsy, that is not to 
say that they were the only papers in the country to do so.  By the 1850s, black minstrelsy and 
other forms of racial and cultural minstrelsy were prevalent in American popular culture. 
Minstrel halls were prevalent in cities where theatrical shows were performed in blackface. 
Show tunes from those plays were converted into sheet music and joke books.  The publication 
of ?Uncle Tom?s Cabin? in 1852 expanded the reach of black minstrelsy outside of the minstrel 
halls in cities to the broader countryside.28  By using black minstrelsy, Eastern Shore newspapers 
were engaging with an expansive popular culture, while simultaneously deploying stereotypes 
for their own self-interest.  Editors wanted to sell more newspapers, so using familiar minstrel 
27 William Mahar, ?Black English in Early Blackface Minstrelsy: A New Interpretation of the Sources of 
Minstrel Show Dialect,? ?American Quarterly?, 37, no. 2 (Summer, 1985), 284. 
28 Sarah Meer, ?Uncle Tom Mania: Slavery, Minstrelsy, and Transatlantic Culture in the 1850?s? (Athens, 
Ga.: The University of Georgia Press, 2005), 23. 
 
 
 
14 
 
characters in storytelling made sense.  However, by printing these stories editors of Shore 
newspapers, wittingly or not, were engaged in a project that stoked fear and angst in the hearts 
and minds of slaveholders. 
A stereotypical example of literary black minstrelsy was printed in the E? aston Gazette? in 
1858.  The entirety of the story was written in dialogue.  ?Where is the hoe, Sambo?? asked the 
white master to the black slave. ?Wid de rake, Massa.? the slave replied.  ?Well, where is the 
rake?? the master inquired.  ?Wid de hoe.? the slave answered shortly.  ?But where are both?? 
the master exclaimed.  The slave responded: ?Why, ?bof togeder, massa you ?pears to be berry 
?ticular dis morning.?29  What initially comes across as simple bickering between master and 
slave is actually a story which emphasizes certain characteristics about black people, and slaves 
in particular.  ?Sambo? was one of many recurring characters in literary black minstrelsy.  They 
were typically portrayed as lazy, but also extremely cunning.30  Slaveholders who read this story 
would not have come away with a flattering picture of black people's? ability to respond to 
simple inquiries.  The author of the story showcased the calculated elusiveness and sarcasm of 
the minstrel character, thereby reveling in and heightening slaveholders? angsts.  
An article published in ?The? ?Kent News ? in 1849 deployed a similar form of black 
minstrelsy.  The story began by setting the scene: ?We often hear of Irish gallantry, but Africa is 
equal to Ireland.?  Of course, slaveholders would not have thought this the case, and that is why 
it is so striking.  The author was playing off of slaveholders? fears that maybe tomorrow, or in 
the near future, Africa would be seen in the same light as Western Europe.  The anecdote goes on 
29 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, June 26, 1858, 1. 
30 Frances Foster, ?Witnessing Slavery: The Development of Ante-bellum Slave Narratives? (Madison: 
University of Wisconsin Press, 1979), 72.  My discussion of ?Sambo? is focused on the ?perception? of the 
literary character by slaveholders, not whether ?Sambo? is representative of actual black behavior (see 
Elkins, Blassingame).  
 
 
 
15 
 
to describe a ?negro driver of a coach in Texas? who stopped to get some water for the white 
ladies in the carriage.  When asked what he was doing, the driver responded, ?I am watering my 
flowers!?  The article proclaimed that ?A more delicate comment could not have been made.?31 
A black man flirting with white women would have certainly struck slaveholders the wrong way. 
The quick witted response of the black driver is also characteristic of black minstrelsy.  Black 
characters in these stories were very bright, and ingenious at getting out of trouble, while whites 
often fell victim to black people?s verbal gymnastics. 
Similar to literary black minstrelsy was that of fictionalized news stories.  Black 
characters were taken out of the sometimes nondescript world of minstrelsy and instead placed in 
real life circumstances.  One prominent example of this was an 1849 ?Kent News? article entitled 
?Fidelity of a Negro Boy.?  In this short-story the author described a black man named Cuffy 
who was put in charge of two white infant children on a ship.  Unfortunately, a storm capsized 
the ship and the one available lifeboat had room for only two passengers.  The ?faithful negro? 
placed the two infant children on the boat, and told the children to ?Tell Massa that cuffy done 
his duty.?  According to the author, Queen Charlotte, impressed by this tale, asked famous poet 
Hannah Moore to write a poem extolling the black man?s ?devoted and heroic conduct,? but 
Moore declined, remarking, ?That no art could embellish an act so noble!?32  On its face, this 
story extols the loyalty of a black man to his master?s family.  On a deeper level, it speaks to 
slaveholders? assumptions about what black servants or slaves were supposed to do.  Black 
people were to sacrifice themselves for the continuation of white family lineage.  This minstrel 
character embodied the supposed natural order in the minds of slaveholders. 
31 Untitled, ?The Kent News?, July 28, 1849, 1. 
32 ?Fidelity of a Negro Boy,? ?The Kent News?, April 21, 1849, 1. 
 
 
 
16 
 
Fictionalized news stories were also vehicles for comedy.  In 1859, an article which had 
originally appeared in the ?Ouchita? H? erald ?(La.) was reprinted in the? Easton Gazette?.  At a circus, 
a black man came across an elephant and noticed ?the colossal proportions of the animal.?  He 
became terribly frightened at the sight of the animal, and made ?a herculean effort? to escape. 
While running away, the man tripped, fell, and began to cry out loud.  Unable to rise, he was 
taken up and carried to his house where he later died, ?the doctors say from no other cause than 
fright.?  The author of the story argued that this should not be considered ?elephantcide,? but 
instead ?negrocide,? as it was the black man, not the elephant, that was scared to death.33  Black 
characters in this story and others were sometimes easily frightened, a common trope that was 
understood by slaveholders.  Only black minstrels could die of fright, unlike their white 
counterparts in fictionalized news stories.  The use of the term ?negrocide? emphasized the 
humour of the story, and suggested that readers should take this man?s death lightly.  After all, a 
black man dying of fright was hardly something slaveholders should worry themselves over.  
Minstrels, whether in surreal or realistic universes, represented what slaveholders? 
expected of black people, as well as what they feared about them.  Some stories emphasized the 
cunning and deceit of black minstrels, while others emphasized nobility and humour.  The 
underlying sentiment of these stories was that only through proper mastery could black people be 
controlled.  Black minstrels were black people that needed to be ?turned from unruly subjects 
into perfect symbols of their owner?s will.?34  In effect, by using black minstrelsy, Eastern Shore 
newspapers were actively engaged in promoting slavery as the? ?mechanism to control black 
33 ?A Negro Scared to Death by an Elephant,? ?Easton Gazette?, June 11, 1859, 2. 
34 Walter Johnson, ?Soul By Soul: Life Inside the Antebellum Slave Market ?(Cambridge: Harvard University 
Press, 1999), 107. 
 
 
 
17 
 
behavior.35  Most of the time, these types of stories littered the front pages of Eastern Shore 
newspapers.  These stories acted as an entrance to the rest of the paper: only those who 
emotionally and intellectually engaged with these characters were advised to read further.  While 
not a physical barrier to entry, it was a barrier nonetheless. 
Also found in the literature sections of Eastern Shore newspapers were stories which 
actively deployed the use of the term ?nigger.?  Some stories that used ?nigger? also contained 
minstrel characters, but the use of such terminology clearly distinguished them.  According to 
historian Elizabeth Pryor, the term ?nigger? was originally interchangeable with the word slave. 
However, over the course of the Antebellum period, as some black people gained their freedom, 
the term ?nigger? began to be associated almost entirely with free blacks.  The word ?captured 
the magnitude of anti-black feeling,? and latched onto free blacks ?like a shackle.?  ?Nigger? 
branded free black people as ?foul smelling, unproductive, licentious, and unfit for self-rule.?36  
For example, one story in T? he Kent News? detailed an event that involved ?negro servant 
Tony? who served at the hand of Old Captain Stick.  The Captain used racialized language 
throughout the story when referring to Tony, such as ?nigger,? ?rascal,? and ?black scamp.?  The 
crazed Captain was about to give Tony lashes when the servant convinced Stick to stop.  Tony 
ended the short-story by yelling, ?Bress God, nigger mus? KEEP OUT DE OLD STABLE, or I 
35 For more examples of literary black minstrelsy in Eastern Shore newspapers see: Untitled, ?Easton 
Gazette?, June 12, 1858, 1; Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, June 19, 1858, 1; ?Big Feet,? ?Easton Gazette?, 
January 8, 1859, 1; Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, July 16, 1859, 2; Untitled, E? aston Gazette,?  February 12, 
1859, 4; ?A Negro With the Blues,? ?Easton Gazette?, January 15, 1859, 3; ?Long Disputed Point Fully 
Settled,? ?Easton Gazette?, April 23, 1859, 1; ?Negro Philosophy,? ?The Kent News?, March 10, 1849, 4; 
Untitled, T? he Kent News?, August 25, 1849, 1; ?Negroes in Desert,? ?The Kent News?, November 3, 1849, 2; 
Untitled, ?The Kent News,?  July 7, 1849, 1; Untitled, T? he Kent News?, August 25 1849, 1; Untitled, ?The Kent 
News,?  June 21, 1856, 1; ?A Good Joke,? ?The Kent News,?  August 23, 1856, 1. 
36 Elizabeth Pryor, ?The Etymology of Nigger: Resistance, Language, and the Politics of Freedom in the 
Antebellum North,? J? ournal of the Early Republic,?  36, no. 2 (Summer 2016), 205. 
 
 
 
18 
 
tell you what, dat judgmen? for coss make de back feel mighty warm for true!.?37  Although 
Tony is not entirely free in this story, he is also not a slave.  Like many free blacks in 
Antebellum America, his status existed somewhere in between the two poles of slave and free. 
The use of the term ?nigger? by Captain Stick was designed to ?obstruct independent black 
movement,? thereby keeping Tony from straying too close to freedom.  It is also important to 
note Tony?s use of the term ?nigger.?  If this story were true, it is likely that Tony would have 
used the term ?nigger? as a way to escape punishment, and maintain his status as a free person, 
however limited that status might be.  Because this story is fictional, it is necessary to probe the 
author?s motives.  It is much more likely that the author was showcasing ?African American 
backwardness,? rather than Tony?s ability to carefully maneuver and maintain his social position.
38 
A semi-fictionalized story published in the ?Easton Gazette? 1858 described a ?certain 
?nigger? who was keen-witted enough? to outsmart the High Constable of Baltimore.  The jailed 
black man bargained with the constable: if the constable were to bail him out of jail, he would 
point out a house where ?notorious thieves resorted, and where a large quantity - ?whole lots? - 
of stolen goods could be found.?  The constable agreed to this deal, and took the black man with 
him to point out the house.  ?The nigger? told the constable that ?you and dese two gemmen stay 
out here and I?ll go into de house, and when I whistle den you run in dere quick, and you cotch 
em nice.?  After waiting a while, the black man did not whistle, and the constable entered the 
house.  What he discovered certainly surprised him: ?The ?shrewd cid? darkey was gone, and the 
Warden was debtor to the State of Maryland in the amount of the bail bond.?39 
37 ?A Judgement for Costs,? ?The Kent News?, May 12, 1849, 1. 
38 Pryor, ?The Etymology of Nigger,? 242, 227. 
39 ?The Independent Candidate and the Whistling Nigger,? ?Easton Gazette?, October 2, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
19 
 
Like Tony in the previous story, this black man also existed somewhere between slave 
and free.  The character exhibited similar characteristics to literary black minstrels in that he was 
both elusive and cunning.  The white constable did not stand a chance against the verbal 
gymnastics deployed by the jailed man.  This would have been a great worry to slaveholders. 
Even when free blacks were jailed, like the man in this story, their deceit in pursuit of freedom 
never ended.  The use of the term ?nigger? by the author is not simply a derogatory term, but a 
critique of black freedom writ large: if restraints around black mobility were not maintained, 
black people would most assuredly run rampant.40 
Literary black minstrelsy and the term ?nigger? defined the boundaries of slavery and 
freedom in mostly fictional, yet familiar worlds.  Black minstrelsy argued for the necessity of 
slavery as an institution, while ?nigger? castigated free black mobility.  What underwrote both of 
these ideas was a uniform notion of blackness as articulated by pseudoscientific racism. 
Historian Stephanie Camp wrote in her article ?Black Is Beautiful: An American History? that 
during the Antebellum period, ?Black writers agreed that slavery was the source from which 
sprang the widespread contempt for black bodies.?41  However, slaveholders at the time 
suggested the opposite.  Slaveholders argued that black bodies were naturally degraded, and that 
slavery was solely responsible for the advancement of black people out of their naturalistic state.  
This particular argument by slaveholders squared nicely with the radical shift that 
occurred amongst the scientific community during the nineteenth century.  Michel Foucault 
40 For more stories in Eastern Shore newspapers using the term ?nigger? see: ?A Discovery,? ?Easton 
Gazette?, August 2, 1851, 2; ?Dan Marble?s Monkey,? ?Easton Gazette?, November 29, 1851, 1; ?Negro 
Philosophy,? ?The Kent News?, March 10, 1849, 4; ?A Good Joke,? ?The Kent News?, August 23, 1856, 1. 
41 Stephanie Camp, ?Black Is Beautiful: An American History,? J? ournal of Southern History?, 81, no. 3 
(2015), 683; also see Patrick Rael, ?Black Identity and Black Protest in the Antebellum North? (Chapel Hill: 
University of North Carolina Press, 2002). 
 
 
 
20 
 
argued in ?The Order of Things? that natural science during this period went from focusing on the 
grammar of naturalistic classification to instead focusing on how the ?analysis of comparative 
anatomy? informed such classifications.  The classification no longer described the natural order, 
but rather the natural order, the ?elements most hidden from view,? informed the classification.42 
In terms of race, this meant that ?white? and ?black? were no longer simply labels describing 
skin color.  Instead, ?white? and ?black? were terms that embodied certain inherent 
characteristics and behaviors.  This new way of thinking was hardly relegated to certain portions 
of the Western European scientific community.  American scientists such as Samuel George 
Morton actively promoted this new science, sometimes by publishing, and at other times by 
touring Antebellum America in roadshow fashion in order to teach and inform the broader 
public.  Even when scientific studies were published in Europe, their reach was ?thoroughly 
transatlantic.?43  Eastern Shore newspapers were quick to publicize this scientific revolution, not 
only because it attracted readers, but also because it informed, expanded, and enhanced the 
slaveholders? worldview. 
In December of 1855, ?The? ?Kent News? published Johann Friedrich Blumenbach?s ?The 
Races of Men.?  Blumenbach was a famous German anthropologist, naturalist, and physiologist. 
Like his contemporaries Georges-Louis Leclerc and Comte de Buffon, Blumenbach espoused the 
degenerative hypothesis: that Adam and Eve were caucasian while other races were degraded 
due to environmental factors.  The ?Caucasian Race,? according to ?The Races of Men,? was 
?the leading branch of the human family,? having developed both ?personal beauty, and 
42 Michel Foucault, ?The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences?, Reprint (New York: 
Routledge, 2005), 292. 
43 Britt Rusert, ?The Science of Freedom: Counterarchives of Racial Science on the Antebellum Stage,? 
African American Review,? 45, no. 3 (Fall 2012), 293. 
 
 
 
21 
 
intellectual superiority.?  Its progress in literature, the arts, and science had ?left all the other 
races far behind.?  The ?Caucasian Race? sharply contrasted with the ?Ethiopic Race? which was 
?easy, indolent, cheerful, sympathetic, confiding? fond of sensual pleasure and gaudy attire, 
and exceedingly improvident.?  A majority of the ?Ethiopic Race? ranked ?very low? in intellect, 
while a few ?exceptional individuals have occasionally exhibited a good deal of talent.?  This 
article espousing Blumenbach?s ideas brought together free blacks and slaves under the blanket 
of blackness.44 
Another article, ?Dow, Jr., on Negroes,? also expressed a universal notion of blackness. 
Published in ?The? ?Kent News? in May of 1857, the piece was likely written by Elbridge Paige, a 
magazine essayist who went by the pseudonym ?Dow Jr.?45  Paige began the article by stating 
his argument: ?the nigger was made for the climate.?  The piece detailed how black people had 
?adapted? to a hot environment.  This included developing a ?downy fleece,? a ?[flattened] 
nose,? and ?an upper lip capable of seating out-side a tobacco quid.?  Paige went on to argue that 
black people had been enslaved for a reason: 
The brush of nature has painted him black - the prevailing color of all animals that inhabit the 
torrid zone ? of a truth, nigger can stand heat almost equal to a salamander, and it is this that 
renders him so useful a [biped], in the burning field of the South where a white skin if put to hard 
labor, would find little of nothing left of him to take home to supper at the close of the first day.46 
 
?The brush of nature,? according to Paige, made a diverse group of people singularly black. 
Although black people came from various tribes, villages, countries, and continents, the color of 
their skin united them as a whole.  This is not unlike Johann Blumenbach?s physiologist 
44 ?The Races of Men,? ?The Kent News?, December 15, 1855, 1.  For a larger discussion of Blumenbach?s 
theories, see Naomi Zach, ?Philosophy of Science and Race ? (New York: Routledge, 2002), 29-35. 
45 John Bryant, M? elville and Repose: The Rhetoric of Humor in the American Renaissance,?  (New York: 
Oxford University Press, 1993),? ?127. 
46 ?Dow, Jr. On Negroes,? ?The Kent News?, May 16, 1857, 1. 
 
 
 
22 
 
argument, that all black people were defined by certain characteristics.  The fact that the editors 
of ?The? ?Kent News? published Paige?s and Blumenbach?s articles suggest that both they and their 
readers were interested and engaged with the supposed scientific linkage between blackness and 
certain behaviors.  
Similarly, the ?Easton Gazette? also related ?scientific? ideas about blackness.  For 
example, in 1859, the newspaper published an article about the discovery of a new primate.  In 
the article, the author discussed some of his supposed observations in the field: ?...Sometimes 
when a negro is passing unawares under a tree, in which a Gorilla is seated, it will reach down its 
arms and snatch the man up by the throat and hold him till he is strangled.?47  This sentence in 
particular promoted the idea that all black people were similar, and that a gorilla could easily 
mistake a black person for one of their own species.48  Within the context of purportedly 
scientific article, this sentence is transformed from an author?s quip to observable fact.  More 
importantly, when placed in a ?naturalistic? environment, black people, no matter free or 
enslaved, would move backwards in evolutionary time.  According to this logic, slavery was not 
a barrier to black people?s advancement, but rather the guardian of black freedom and 
achievement.  If not for the forced migration slavery brought about, black people would be stuck 
in Africa, and separated from the achievements of Western civilization. 
Articles in Eastern Shore newspapers linking science and blackness together were 
essentially creating a narrative: black people?s development as both humans and citizens was 
inherently limited.  Shackled by race, black people would never be able to achieve the status of 
white men.  More importantly, without slavery keeping black people in check, they would revert 
47 ?The New Man Monkey,? ?Easton Gazette?, April 30, 1859, 1. 
48 For another example of biological construction of race, see ?A Negro Turning White,? ?Easton Gazette?, 
July 10, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
23 
 
back to naturalistic impulses.  The horridness of slavery that abolitionists spoke of was instead 
portrayed by Shore print culture as a societal advancement, and therefore a necessity.  Slavery 
propelled black people forward, freedom cast black people back into Africa?s dark den. 
The literature sections of Eastern Shore newspapers used ?scientific? ideas about race to 
bolster their claims that slavery was a necessity and that black freedom was an oxymoron.  These 
ideas were a gateway into the actual news articles that populated the bulk of Shore papers.  They 
brought like minded readers in, enhanced their racist thoughts, and then propelled readers to 
continue reading and observe these ideas in action.  What readers found on those next few pages 
of Eastern Shore newspapers were a plethora of articles utilizing and repackaging racial ideas 
into ?news.?  The news articles tended to exhibit a single purpose: stoke, amplify, and exploit 
slaveholding angst.  Newspapers published stories that described slaves and free blacks escaping 
jail, breaking labor contracts, engaging in criminal activity, and much more.  It is no surprise that 
newspaper editors sought to publish outlandish articles in order to sell more newspapers. 
However, the result of that effort on the Eastern Shore was in effect an ideological gift to 
slaveholders, one which both confirmed the supposed necessity of slavery as a labor system, as 
well as derided the non-slaveholding labor system of hiring free blacks. 
Black mobility was a primary focus of Eastern Shore newspaper editors as they sought to 
amplify and exploit slaveholding angst.  If slaveholders were no longer the arbiters of where, 
when, and how black bodies moved through space and time, their power in society was 
effectively gone.  One aspect of black mobility that particularly frightened slaveholders was the 
ability of free black people to quit their jobs and seek to be hired elsewhere.  Slaveholders were 
used to year round, forced, always available labor, and yet what proliferated in Eastern Shore 
 
 
 
24 
 
newspapers was a cacophony of stories about ?negro men? who voluntarily left their term of 
service.  For instance, in 1850 the ?Easton Gazette? published an article about a ?negro? named 
Adam Gibson who escaped the service of William Knight in Cecil County.49  Another article in 
The Kent News ? warned its readers that ?Abe Brown, negro man? had escaped from the premises 
of Samuel S. Chambers.50 
As the 1850?s wore on, Eastern Shore newspapers made it seem as if black absconsion 
was drastically increasing.  Between 1857-1858, the ?Easton Gazette? published three separate 
instances of ?Negro Stampedes? which plagued the Eastern Shore.51  Elsewhere, stories detailed 
the growing extent of vagrancy.  For instance, a large article titled ?More Runaways? relayed 
that ?Fifteen negroes? had escaped three different persons.  The article went on to describe an 
apparent trend: ?This makes about forty, says the Cambridge Democrat, that have left this 
immediate neighborhood in the past three weeks.?52  It is almost impossible to discern whether or 
not the number of black vagrants increased throughout the 1850?s.  However, what we can draw 
from these sources is that Eastern Shore newspapers were actively engaged in constructing a 
narrative about the supposed surge in black flight.  Even though Maryland?s government during 
the Antebellum period participated in the ?application of labor controls for the benefit of the 
employers,? Shore papers presented a much different story.53 
49 ?Another Arrest,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 28, 1850, 2. 
50 ?To All Whom It May Concern,? ?The Kent News?, June 21, 1856, 2.  However, these were rare articles, 
as oftentimes the names of the alleged vagrants were not mentioned.  See: ?Caught,? E? aston Gazette?, 
August 30, 1851, 2; ?Runaway,? ?Easton Gazette,?  February 1, 1851, 2; ?Runaways,? ?Easton Gazette?, 
September 27, 1851, 2. 
51 ?Stampede,? ?Easton Gazette?,October 24, 1857, 2; ?Negro Stampede,? July 10, 1858, ?Easton Gazette?, 
2; ?Negro Stampede,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 31, 1858,? ?2; ?More Runaways from Dorchester,? ?Easton 
Gazette?, January 9, 1858, 2; also see ?Runaway Negroes and Their Capture,? ?Easton Gazette?, August 
28, 1858, 2. 
52 ?More Runaways,? ?Easton Gazette?, October 31, 1857, 2. 
53 Richard Morris, ?Labor Controls in Maryland in the Nineteenth Century,? ?The Journal of Southern 
History?, 14, no. 3 (1948), 400. 
 
 
 
25 
 
In ?The Kent News?, there were multiple stories written about free black absconsion from 
the perspective of hirers.  One concern was voiced by a farmer who wrote in 1850 that ?We have 
never known laborers so scarce as they are at the present time.?  Why was this the case?  The 
farmer had an answer: ?this in a great measure, is owing to free negroes who have been in the 
habit of hiring out, now refuses to do so.?54  This same idea was embodied in an editorial 
published in 1852 which stated that a number of ?free negroes? had ?left their employers, in the 
midst of pitching an important crop.?  The editorial went on to propose a remedy to this crisis: 
pass a law that demands the arrest of ?free negroes? who break labor contracts.  The law would 
also make the ?free negroes? liable to ?pay cost of arrest, imprisonment and trial.?55  The ability 
of black people to quit and sell their skills elsewhere was being linked by ?The? ?Kent News? to the 
destruction of the agricultural economy on the Eastern Shore.  Of course this was not the case, as 
many farmers had successfully transitioned over the Antebellum period not only from long-term 
to seasonal agriculture, but also from slavery to the hiring of free blacks.  ?The Kent News 
presented a narrative slaveholders would have found more recognizable, if less truthful.  More 
importantly, the author of the latter article suggested criminal punishment when it came to hiring 
free blacks, a subject which will be addressed in Chapter III.  
While slaveholders were certainly fearful of free black movement among the Eastern 
Shore labor market, what scared them even more was that free blacks were actively engaged in 
helping fugitive slaves escape.  Not only was slavery experiencing a decline on the Eastern 
Shore, but free blacks were aiding its demise.  For example, in 1851, Isaac Gibson, a ?free 
negro,? was convicted in Caroline County of ?enticing a servant belonging to Mr. D. Knoths to 
54 ?Laborers,? ?The Kent News?, January 12, 1850, 2. 
55 ?Hired Servants,? ?The Kent News?, May 15, 1852, 2. 
 
 
 
26 
 
run away.?56  A year later a black man named Moses was confined to the Denton jail ?for 
enticing away a slave belonging to James H. Fountain.?57  A most fascinating story appeared in 
the E? aston Gazette ? in 1853, which described the escape of slaves near Kent Island.  In the article, 
the writer described how the slaves might have accomplished such a feat: ?There is a suspicion 
that they were induced to run off by a colored man, who recently appeared on the island, and 
stated he had been landed from a packet running between Baltimore and Annapolis.?58  Not only 
did slaveholders have to combat local free blacks enticing slaves to runaway, but also free blacks 
who traveled from the Western Shore. 
Elsewhere, Eastern Shore newspapers were quick to highlight the interconnectedness 
between abolitionist thoughts and ideas (and therefore fugitive slave activity) to the presence of 
free blacks in society.  Samuel Greene, a free black pastor, was arrested in 1857 on account of 
owning a copy of ?Uncle Tom?s Cabin?.  Charles Dixon was arrested in 1859 ?on the charge of 
circulating abolition documents and papers seditious and incendiary in their character.?59  These 
stories alone would have served the editors? purpose, but when paired with other local news 
stories about the underground railroad and runaway slaves, these became all the more 
frightening.  For instance, one article claimed that a ?general stampede of negroes from Dover, 
Delaware, [escaped] by the underground railroad.  Capt. Hugh Martin, Mr. John Chipman, Mr. 
Phillips, and Mr. Horsey have each lost valuable negro men??60  The close geographical 
proximity of Philadelphia to Delaware, and therefore the Eastern Shore, made the entire 
56 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, March 22, 1851, 3. 
57 ?Escape From Jail,? ?Easton Gazette?, April 3, 1852,? ?2. 
58 ?Escape and Recapture of Sla?v?es,? ?Easton Gazette?, May 28, 1853, 2. 
59 ?Arrested,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 10, 1859, 2. 
60 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, September 5, 1857, 2. 
 
 
 
27 
 
Delmarva region susceptible to fugitive slave activity.61  The evidence presented itself everyday 
in Eastern Shore print culture as newspapers filled up their back page advertisement space with 
runaway slave ads.  Free blacks were not simply engaged with abolitionist thought, but they in 
fact succeeded in helping many slaves escape bondage.  Slave property being highly valuable, it 
would not have been lost on slaveholders that free blacks were engaged in highly organized theft. 
Another area in which black mobility supposedly threatened slaveholders was the 
massive amounts of alleged crimes free blacks and fugitive slaves committed.  For instance, 
Eastern Shore newspaper editors made sure to exploit the fear that white women were being 
raped at high rates by black males.  The ?Easton Gazette? published an article in 1851 that 
described the execution of ?negro? Amon Green for having committed an ?atrocious crime upon 
the person of Mrs. Josephine Peepe.?62  Later that same year, the ?Gazette? published the gruesome 
details of a widow in Denton, Maryland who was supposedly raped by a ?free negro?: ?he 
followed after, overtook her, grasped her violently by the throat and accomplished his hellish 
purpose.?63  The stories of rape were reinforced with similar stories reprinted in the Eastern 
Shore newspapers from states such as Mississippi and Delaware.64  These articles no doubt 
bothered slaveholders because, like slaves, female sexuality was ?property that they owned.?65 
61 Two great studies of Delaware during the Antebellum period are: Patience Essah, A?  House Divided: 
Slavery and Emancipation in Delaware, 1638-1865? (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 1996); 
and William H. Williams, S? lavery and Freedom in Delaware, 1639-1865? (Wilmington: Scholarly Resources 
Inc., 1996). 
62 ?Execution for Rape,? ?Easton Gazette?, April 12, 1851, 3. 
63 ?Infamous Outrage,? E? aston Gazette,?  August 9, 1851, 2. 
64 Untitled, E? aston Gazette?, July 31, 1858, 2; ?Broke Jail,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 1, 1860, 1; 
?Hanged,? ?The Kent News?, February 10, 1849, 2. 
65 Peter Bardaglio, ?Rape and the Law in the Old South: ?Calculated to excite Indignation in every heart,?? 
The Journal of Southern History?, 60, no. 4 (1994), 754.  For a broader discussion of women as ?property? 
see Stephanie McCurry, M? asters of Small Worlds: Yeoman Households, Gender Relations, and the 
Political Culture of the Antebellum South Carolina Low Country? (New York: Oxford University Press, 
1995). 
 
 
 
28 
 
Anything that interfered with this propertied relationship was something to be angry about, and 
to be acted against. 
News articles detailing the rape of white women by black males are particularly notable 
because they countered Antebellum assumptions about femininity, gender, and rape.  Before 
Emancipation, rape and ?blackness? were not inextricably linked terms.  Historian Peter 
Bardaglio argued in ?Rape and the Law in the Old South? that Southern courts were actually 
more favorable to slaves and free blacks when they were accused of rape than when they were 
accused of other crimes.  The gendered assumption, that in order to substantiate a charge of rape 
women had to ?exhibit overt resistance to the violent behavior? of the attacker, was very much a 
prevalent idea in Antebellum America.66  Similarly, historian Diane Somerville in her book ?Rape 
and Race in the Nineteenth Century South? challenged the assumption long held by many 
historians that ?white southerners throughout their entire history have been preoccupied? with 
rape.?  Somerville acutely labeled this the ?rape myth.?67  
With this in mind, news reports about the rape of white women by black males read 
differently.  For example, an article in ?The Kent News? entitled ?Daring Outrage? claimed that 
?free negro Isaiah Hawkins? insulted a white girl named Elizabeth Piper while she was 
attempting to get water from a well.  Piper responded by throwing a bucket of water on Hawkins, 
who himself then proceeded to knock her down, gag her, and pursue a ?hellish design.?68  The 
added detail that Piper resisted Hawkins is critical, because without it, slaveholders would not 
have necessarily assumed that Piper did not welcome Hawkins? advances.  Newspaper editors 
66 Ibid., 769. 
67 Diane Somerville, ?Rape and Race in the Nineteenth Century South? (N.C.: University of North Carolina 
Press, 2004), 3. 
68 ?Daring Outrage,? ?The Kent News?, February 2, 1856, 2; ?Court,? ?The Kent News?, April 26, 1856, 2; 
?State vs. Isaiah Hawkins fn.,? ?The Kent News?, May 10, 1856, 2. 
 
 
 
29 
 
most assuredly knew this.  They also knew that only one article describing the rape of a white 
woman was not going to be perceived as an epidemic.  The only way to create the latter was to 
publish articles detailing similar stories, which they did frequently throughout the 1850?s.  The 
gendered structure of Antebellum society was not easily overcome, but it was something Eastern 
Shore newspapers tried to act against.  Their primary objective was to speak to slaveholders on 
the most pressing issue in their minds: the survival of slavery in the wake of the rise of free black 
labor. 
Stories about free blacks engaged in theft also filled up Eastern Shore newspaper 
columns.  One article stated that ?A Negro? with a companion, concluded to take a stolen 
ride? they harnessed Mr. H?s horse to his carriage and started off? ?69  Another printed the 
court proceedings of the trial of ?negro Andrew John,? who was convicted for stealing chickens, 
and ?sentenced to be sold for three years? was disposed of at public sale? for $200.?70  Other 
articles presented editorial comments on the entire class of free blacks and their supposed 
tendency to steal.  ?Those free ones,? a column began, ?who have been permitted to live, 
probably a dozen in a small hut, all crammed in a ten by twelve room, depending on pilfering 
from their neighbors for a livelihood.?71  A separate editorial argued that ?negroes cannot be 
induced to work so long as they can support themselves by their midnight visits to the 
meat-houses, granaries and chicken roosts of the farmers.?72  News reports of free blacks stealing 
paired with editorials turned individual criminal acts into an crime wave.  Their freedom from 
slavery unleashed a wave of alleged criminal activity that could hardly be contained.  
69 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, December 20, 1851, 2. 
70 ?Sold,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 3, 1858, 2. 
71 ?The News Again,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 24, 1858, 2. 
72 ?A Voice from Maryland,? ?Easton Gazette?, May 7, 1859, 1. 
 
 
 
30 
 
While rape and theft by black people were highlighted by Eastern Shore newspapers, no 
crime was propagated more than murder.  Not only did papers simply report murders committed 
by black people, they also made sure to include all the gruesome details.  One story described an 
attack by ?Four negro men? on a Mr. Harrison, ?a most respectable and worthy citizen.?  They 
attacked him ?with sticks and beat and margled him in such a manner that he was left as dead 
before his door.?73  In another instance, a black man named Samuel Ward was arrested for 
stealing.  After his arrest, the ?Easton Gazette? reported that he ?managed to free his hands, which 
were tied, and instantly plunged a Spanish dirk knife in the shoulder of Mr. Davidson, which he 
followed up with another stab, which severed the arteries and sinews of the left arm.?74  
A most horrific murder was recounted in the ?Easton Gazette?, committed by a ?desperate, 
dangerous negro.?   Attempting to pass himself off as partially deranged, he encountered a white 
woman ?whom he attacked, cut open her bowels, strewed them by the roadside, and otherwise 
mutilated the body.  He also cut off the right hand, at the wrist, which has been found.?75  There 
has been a large body of historical research into conceptions of the black body.  However, in 
Eastern Shore newspapers, much of the focus was on portraying white bodies being 
disemboweled, maimed, sliced, and torn apart at the hands of mobile free blacks.  Similarly, a 
story was reported in ?The Kent News? that four ?negro men? went to the house of N. Connelly 
Harrison where they ?beat and mangled him in such a manner that he was left as dead.?  The 
article went on to describe the ?15 or 16 violent gashes on his skull? as a result of the stick or 
73 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, August 16, 1851, 2. 
74 ?Murder of an Officer in Delaware,? ?Easton Gazette?, May 15, 1852, 2. 
75 ?Horrible Murder,? ?Easton Gazette?, October 17, 1857, 2. 
 
 
 
31 
 
club used by the four black men.76  The perception in Eastern Shore newspapers was that white 
bodies were being torn apart, mangled, and destroyed at the hands of free black men. 
Editors of these newspapers made sure to specifically amplify the murders of hirers, 
police officers, and high profile community members.  One article detailed the murder of hirer 
Samuel Martin by the ?negro named John Horsey.?  Horsey was helping Martin kill hogs, when 
a quarrel arose as to when the hired man would be paid.  When Martin ordered Horsey out of his 
house, Horsey ?snatched [Martin?s] gun and inflicted several blows upon the head of Martin, 
from the effects of which he died in a few hours.?77  Slaveholders who read this piece would 
have been confronted with a staggering assertion: free black labor negotiations lead to 
cold-blooded murder.   Elsewhere, slaveholders might have read another story which detailed the 
murder of a police officer for simply trying to arrest ?some Negroes...for the purpose of 
gambling, drinking, &c.?78  Or they might have seen the article that described the murder of a 
grocery store owner who was killed while sleeping in his chair.79  These stories not only detailed 
well-known white community members getting murdered at the hands of free blacks, they also 
suggested that it was impossible for free blacks to engage with white people without becoming 
violent. 
In the latter part of the 1850?s, particularly around the time of the raid at Harpers Ferry, 
Eastern Shore newspapers began to print stories relating the threat of free blacks to entire white 
population, rather than just individual white citizens.  One article titled ?Negro Insurrections? 
stated that ?the Negro population is beginning to plot schemes of insurrection and murder of the 
76 ?Cowardly Assault by Four Negroes,? ?The Kent News?, August 23, 1851, 1. 
77 ?A White Man Killed by a Free Negro,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 24, 1859, 2. 
78 ?Unfortunate Affair,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 17, 1852, 2. 
79 ?Murder,? ?Easton Gazette?, February 6, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
32 
 
whites? These schemes and conspiracies are supposed to be instigated and formed by designing 
and unprincipled abolitionists from the North, or by some like monster in their own midst.?80  In 
late 1859, the ?Easton Gazette? reported that in Snow Hill, Maryland, Mrs. Dennis, a large 
slaveholder, received an anonymous letter ?informing her that the negroes of the Eastern Shore 
of Maryland and Virginia had fixed upon this (Friday) night for a general rising against the 
whites.?81  Free blacks? mobility to organize would have already frightened slaveholders, but 
now their supposed violence was targeted at every white person on the Eastern Shore. 
These schemes of local insurrection were then paired with stories from other states and 
nations that seemingly confirmed the breadth of the problem.  For instance, one piece detailed 
the ?Horrible butchery of the whites? in Venezuela.82  The Easton Gazette also published a story 
out of Detroit, Michigan, where a ?gang of negroes? supposedly ?took possession of the school 
houses? and refused to allow the white teachers to enter.?  The black persons who took control 
of the school demanded that entry to the school ?should be open to them, [and] that they should 
be allowed to participate in their management.?83  White people everywhere, not just on the 
Eastern Shore, were supposedly being threatened by free black people.  They threatened 
institutions, and used violence as a means of political, social, and economic ends.  Eastern Shore 
newspapers transformed random stories into a larger narrative of free black violence.84  
Even when violence occurred, there was not always a guarantee that the perpetrators 
would be kept securely in jail.  Repeatedly, Eastern Shore newspapers made sure to print stories 
80 ?Negro Insurrections,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 13, 1856, 2. 
81 ?Another Excited Rumor,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 3, 1859, 2. 
82 ?Negro Insurrection in Venezuela,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 23, 1859, 2. 
83 ?The Negro Outrages in Canada West,? E? aston Gazette?, January 28, 1860,? ?2. 
84 For a larger discussion of the rumors of black insurrection after the raid on Harper?s Ferry, see James 
McPherson, ?Battle Cry of Freedom: The Civil War Era? (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 
207-209. 
 
 
 
33 
 
of black people escaping their jail cells.  The most detailed story of this type described the escape 
of Charles Bromwell, a ?free negro,? and four others from the Easton jail.  The article reported 
that Bromwell escaped using a canoe he had stolen, and made his way to St. Michaels.  There he 
sold the canoe and hired himself to one of the bay schooners.  Whilst working, a Mr. Edward 
Hubbard, ?who knew the darkey, and was aware that he was a fugitive from justice? arrested 
him? and took him to the nearby jail.85  Even when free blacks were confined in jail cells, there 
was no guarantee they would stay secured.  
 Sometimes, rather than directly associating black people with violence, absconsion, or 
fugitive slave activity, Eastern Shore newspapers printed articles that simply argued black people 
were a burden on society.86  A noteworthy example of this is a story printed in 1851, detailing an 
incident where a ?negro girl? died as a result of her clothes accidentally catching fire.  Rather 
than sympathize with the girl, the story instead leveled a scathing rebuke of her decisions in the 
moment: ?Her imprudence in rushing into the street after discovering the accident, no doubt 
hastened its fatal termination, as it tended to spread the fire more rapidly than one would 
otherwise have been the case, had she remained in the house - she was presently enveloped in 
flames.?87  A woman, in a life or death moment, was being criticized by the local paper for 
rushing out of the house, probably looking for help.  This article was analyzing her decision as 
both a danger to herself as well as a danger to the surrounding community.  Free blacks, left to 
their own devices, not only harmed themselves with ill-decision making, but their decisions were 
a potential burden upon the entire society. 
85 ?A Fugitive Captured,? ?Easton Gazette?, October 9, 1858, 2; Also see: ?Escaped,? ?Easton Gazette?, 
November 19, 1853, 2; ?Negro Convicts,? ?Easton Gazette?, April 30, 1859,? ?1. 
86 Rael, ?Black Identity and Black Protest in the Antebellum North, ?Chapter Five. 
87 ?Horrible Death,? ?Easton Gazette?, April 12, 1851, 2. 
 
 
 
34 
 
Other articles, rather than aiming their ire at individual black persons, instead turned their 
focus to the presence of blacks in society more generally.  In 1857, ?twenty-five hundred? free 
black people showed up on the shores of Kent County in the steamers ?Georgia?, ?Express?, and 
Champion?.  It was reported in ?The Kent News? that the newly arrived visitors ?gave to our 
beautiful little town rather a dark appearance.?  These ?negro excursions? were objectionable to 
the writer, who hoped that the citizens of Kent would take some steps to ?prevent them landing 
in the future.?88  A year later, the same thing happened again.  This time, ?1,500 negroes? 
en-route for the camp meeting? arrived at Chestertown in Kent County.  ?The Kent News 
described these people as ?nuisances? and called upon the authorities to put a stop to a ?like 
invasion in the future.?89 The ?negroes,? according to each of these articles, were up to no good. 
Their presence in Kent County, and particularly their ?excursions,? were unwanted.  The articles 
also embody Elbridge Paige?s aforementioned ?paintbrush? thesis: just as black people were 
?painted? black, so too could the arrival of black people ?paint? a white town.  In these instances, 
the presence of black bodies within society was a problem promulgated by newspaper editors. 
Black people were a burden on society simply because they existed within society. 
It is clear then that print culture on the Eastern Shore was actively engaged in 
constructing a certain idea about free black people.  According to newspapers, free black people 
absconded at high rates, engaged in criminal activity, helped to free slaves, and were a burden on 
society.  However, these articles were not only about portraying black people in a particular way, 
but also stoking the fear that slaveholders already had about the rise in the free black population. 
The rise in number of the free black population necessarily meant the loss of slaveholders? 
88 ?Excursions,? ?The Kent News?, August 30, 1856, 2. 
89 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, September 5, 1857, 2. 
 
 
 
35 
 
power, distinction, control, and self-worth.  Indeed, as Stephanie Camp argues in ?Closer to 
Freedom?, the closer enslaved people got to freedom, ?the further removed some of their owners 
felt from their own liberty.?90  Even with this leveling against the free black population, 
newspapers still had to contend with the other labor system: slavery.  Slaveholders would have 
certainly welcomed free black labor being ridiculed, but was free labor really worse than 
slavery?  As it will become clear, Eastern Shore newspapers were very creative in response to 
this question.  Hoping to appeal to slaveholding subscribers, editors crafted a defense of slavery 
that both justified the system of labor as well as promoted it. 
In 1858, a newspaper challenged the editorial board of the ?Easton Gazette ?to answer one 
simple question: ?Is human slavery as it exists on this Peninsula a divine institution??  What was 
important about their response was that they defined slavery and free labor as polar opposites. 
Slaves had been ?trained to industry,? while free blacks relied on ?pilfering from their 
neighbors.?  Slaves were doing ?twice as well as the free negroes? because they were ?under the 
exclusive control of a white master,? while free blacks were ?lazy, roguish,? and repeatedly 
came within the scope of the vagrant law.91  Slavery and free labor were not distant cousins of 
one another, but rather directly counter to one another.  At least, this was the vision the ?Easton 
Gazette? sought to propagate.  
A similar idea was promoted in an article published in 1859 in the ?Easton Gazette?.  The 
author began the piece by stating that Maryland ?contains from 80,000 to 90,000 free colored 
people? A very great difference when we compare the states.  Can anything bear stronger 
evidence of the good treatment they receive there than these facts.?  The idea that free blacks 
90 Stephanie Camp, ?Closer to Freedom: Enslaved Women and Everyday Resistance in the Plantation 
South? (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004), 127. 
91 ?The News Again,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 24, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
36 
 
were treated well as evidenced by the large population of free blacks in the state is hardly 
convincing.   A large number of free blacks resided in Maryland as a result of many black 
persons escaping from the South.  Maryland was less a permanent home and more a passageway 
to the North.  Elsewhere, the author characterized free blacks as ?idle, ignorant, and criminal in 
the extreme.?  Farmers on the Eastern Shore were ?compelled to procure laborers from the cities 
at enormous expense of time and money; for these negroes cannot be induced to work.?  Free 
blacks also committed ?another injury suffered by farmers,? which was that they interfered ?with 
the domestic relations of master and servant.?92  By chastising black freedom, the author was 
inherently making the case for freedom?s opposite: slavery.  If all blacks were enslaved, they 
could be forced to work.  If all blacks were enslaved, the number of fugitives from slavery would 
most assuredly decline.  If all blacks were enslaved, black people would no longer live in 
?degradation and misery.?  
The author went on to sympathize with the struggles of Marylanders in their dealings 
with free blacks.  They were ?burdened by very heavy taxes to support almshouses and prisons, 
which, for the most part, are filled by this class of people.?  No state, according to the author, 
?has done more for negroes of all classes than Maryland.?  The author was essentially arguing 
that free blacks should be grateful they lived in Maryland.  Free blacks were lazy, violent, and 
roguish, even though they were ?graciously? treated by Marylanders.  According to the author, 
?if this free colored population did not live so easy at home, they would quickly embrace the 
chance to flee from oppression if oppression there was.?93  This stark contrast between the way 
free blacks were treated and the way they supposedly behaved promoted the idea that slavery 
92 ?A Voice From Maryland,? ?Easton Gazette?, May 7, 1859, 1. 
93 Ibid. 
 
 
 
37 
 
was a preferable labor institution.  Marylanders treated free blacks kindly, and all they received 
in return was horrific behavior.  At least with slavery, slaveholders thought, there was a 
significant return on investment. 
Elsewhere, newspaper columns were dedicated solely to defending slavery as an 
institution on the Eastern Shore, no matter how many lies needed to be told.  For instance, one 
article in 1852 began by declaring that ?the labor in this section of the state is mostly performed 
by slaves.?  This was, at best, stretching the truth.  In Caroline, Cecil, and Kent counties, the 
number of free blacks was far greater than the number of slaves, according to the 1850 Census. 
In Dorchester and Worcester counties, the ratio of free blacks to slaves was about 50:50.  Only in 
four of the Eastern Shore?s nine counties, Queen Anne?s, Saint Mary?s, Somerset, and Talbot, 
did the number of slaves outpace the number of free blacks in the 1850 Census. 
The author of this article went on to describe the system of slavery on the Eastern Shore 
in intimate detail.  According to the author, a slave was usually given ten to fifteen dollars to 
?secure his assent,? but, ?if he refuses to do so he is not compelled to go.?  This mutual exchange 
induced a slave to ?be profitable to his employer as well as useful to himself.?  The author 
finished by proclaiming that slaves were able to ?accumulate considerable property,? and are 
lucky enough to enjoy Christmas and Easter off.  They were thus enabled to ?secure many little 
comforts for themselves and families.?94  This is a rather different idea of slavery than most 
would recognize.  While many black people on the Eastern Shore were able to obtain property, 
most of them were free from bondage, not slaves.  One such free person, James Jones, 
accumulated $5,000 in real estate, and sold it to forty-four black men during the Civil War so 
94 ?Agriculture, Eastern Shore of Maryland,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 18, 1852, 1. 
 
 
 
38 
 
that they could meet Chestertown?s (Kent County) land qualification in order to vote.  The idea 
that some black people ?were not compelled to go? into slavery is simply counterfactual.  One 
great example of this was when Sheriff John Poole of Cecil County in 1857 lured a free black 
man out of jail and sold him into slavery.  This happened repeatedly throughout the 1850?s.  And 
while some slaves might have had Christmas and Easter off, it is not a credit to Eastern Shore 
slavery. 
Though this defense of slavery is hardly credible, that did not matter to the editors of 
Eastern Shore newspapers.  They were in business to sell newspapers to a slaveholding clientele. 
In fact, print culture went further than simply defining slavery in a positive light.  Editors sought 
out critics of slavery on the Eastern Shore and shamed them publicly in their newspapers. 
Attacking abolitionist books and pamphlets was not unique to the Eastern Shore.  When ?Uncle 
Tom?s Cabin? was initially published, almost every Southern newspaper contained critiques of the 
book ranging from simple fact-checking, to furious condemnation and contempt.95  However, in 
Eastern Shore newspapers, most book reviews focused on local abolitionist publications that had 
specifically critiqued Shore slaveholding.  The most prominent example of this was when a book 
was published by John Long in 1857 entitled ?Pictures of Slavery in Church and State.?   The book 
was both a critique of Eastern Shore slavery, as well as a condemnation of the Methodist 
Episcopal Church?s involvement with the slave trade.  This did not sit well with slaveholders, 
and newspapers made sure to exploit their aggravations.  
One review of the book charged that while Long was visiting plantations in order to write 
his book ?he was eating and wearing the product of slave labor, and making a dyspeptic of 
95 Meer, ?Uncle Tom Mania?, Chapter Three. 
 
 
 
39 
 
himself by enjoying too fully the hospitality of slave-holders.?  In fact, the review went on to 
accuse Long of never actually observing a slave on his entire trek.  Long?s final product, ?Pictures 
of Slavery?, was a mere representation of ?the hobgoblins he is trying to fight, [that] exist only in 
an addled intellect.?96  Similar criticisms were leveled against Long in another review, which 
argued that while slaveholders were gracious enough to let Long visit their plantations, Long was 
busy ?secretly stabbing those benevolents to the very heart.?  While Long was ?living off of 
these slaveholders meat and bread? he was busy writing a book which described those people ?as 
being cruel, hard-hearted, and brutish.?  The review went so far as to say that the slaveholders 
Long made mention of ?reared their slaves to such a higher degree of honor that Mr. Long ever 
did, or ever can attain to??97  While these criticisms certainly focused on Long as a 
documentarian, they were more pointedly focused on defending slavery as an institution on the 
Eastern Shore.  The authors made sure to both promote the supposed hospitality of slaveholders 
as well as the industriousness of slaves raised ?by their master?s hands.?  
All in all, the project of Eastern Shore newspapers was twofold: change the perception of 
free blacks so that they were seen as violent criminals while simultaneously defending and 
promoting slavery.  However, these two goals were not necessarily unique to Shore print culture. 
For instance, Andrew Diemer argued in ?The Politics of Black Citizenship ?that the legal status of 
African Americans in Philadelphia and Baltimore was highly contested.  Debates surrounding 
their legal status ?played out in books, pamphlets, and newspapers and were reprinted in 
publications across the nation and beyond.?98  Similarly, historians Harold Tallant and Lynda 
96 ?The Rev. John D. Long,? ?Easton Gazette?, June 20, 1857, 2. 
97 ?The Peninsula News and Jno. D. Long,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 10, 1858,? 2? . 
98 Andrew Diemer, ?The Politics of Black Citizenship: Free African Americans in the Mid-Atlantic 
Borderland, 1817-1863 (? Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2016), 5. 
 
 
 
40 
 
Morgan have written about the larger border region, Kentucky and Virginia respectively. 
Though these states had a higher ratio of slaves-to-free blacks than the Eastern Shore, they were 
still home to fierce debates regarding the concept of black citizen.99  Even in non-border states, 
print culture was the vehicle in which people made arguments as to whether slavery or free black 
labor was the better labor system. 
While there are similarities to the broader Antebellum print culture, the Eastern Shore 
was unique in two ways.  One, there was remarkable consistency among Shore newspapers as to 
the advantages of slavery and the dangers of free black labor.  Though newspapers throughout 
the region engaged in fierce political debates, the question of labor had a more uniform answer. 
Second, unlike in other border states, slaveholders on the Eastern Shore actually used arguments 
in print culture to politically organize on a large scale.  
During a time period when transportation and communication were limited, it makes 
sense that newspapers (specifically articles reprinted) aided the consolidation of pro-slavery 
hostility.  Newspapers propagated negative stereotypes about free blacks that most assuredly 
inflamed the attitudes of slaveholders from Cecil to Worcester.  Slaveholders in the one part of 
the Eastern Shore would have thought their ?free black problem? was merely a local one, but 
with the aid of newspapers ideas were able to spread rapidly.  A slaveholder in the northern part 
of the Eastern Shore would have viewed himself as in a similar circumstance to that of a 
slaveholder in the southern part.  So too did newspapers aid in the spread of pro-slavery ideology 
throughout the Eastern Shore, at a time when slavery was appearing to die a slow death. 
Newspapers on the Eastern Shore did not set out to organize slaveholders, but in an effort to 
99 Harold Tallant, ?Evil Necessity: Slavery and Political Culture in Antebellum Kentucky ?(Lexington: 
University Press of Kentucky, 2003); Lynda Morgan, ?Emancipation in Virginia's Tobacco Belt, 1850-1870 
(Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1992). 
 
 
 
41 
 
appeal to their audience these papers in fact united previously disparate parties.  Slaveholders up 
and down the Eastern Shore now had the ideological tools to combat free black labor as well as 
to promote slavery.  
So if print culture was indeed effective in convincing slaveholders that free blacks were a 
threat to society and that slavery should be reimposed, what did slaveholders do with these 
newfound ideas?  The short way of answering this question is that slaveholders began to engage 
in politics in a way they had not before the 1850?s.  Slaveholders started to organize locally, 
on-the-ground, to effect change and achieve their desired goals.  At certain times slaveholders 
sought to effect change extralegally, at other times legally.  As was often the case, slaveholders 
operated somewhere between these two extreme poles.  No matter the means, the end desire was 
to reimpose slavery on the Eastern Shore, and eradicate the free black population. 
 
Chapter III 
The intellectual ideas about race and the law that were created and promoted in Eastern 
Shore newspapers were not isolated from the national political scene.  The events of the 1850?s 
that ultimately led to the Civil War were actively reported on in Shore print culture.  For 
instance, the Compromise of 1850 made headlines in the state of Maryland for two of its major 
components: the ending of the D.C. slave trade, as well as the Fugitive Slave Act.  In regards to 
the first, Maryland had always maintained the position that D.C. had been ceded to the United 
States government under terms that still leant Maryland some control where their interests were 
concerned.  The death of the slave trade in D.C. particularly riled slaveholders who viewed the 
 
 
 
42 
 
move as an encroachment of abolitionism, and ultimately the death of slavery in Maryland.100 
The Fugitive Slave Act was also worrisome to slaveholders because it placed enforcement 
mechanisms in the hands of federal marshals, rather than state governments.  Slaveholders 
already had a problem getting their local and state governments to enforce the law, better yet the 
federal government. 
The effectiveness of the Fugitive Slave Act was initially tested soon after the law?s 
passage.  During the mid-Antebellum period William Parker, a slave from Maryland, escaped 
across the Mason-Dixon line into Pennsylvania and made his way to Christiana.  It was there that 
he resided for many years on a farm which served as a passageway on the Underground 
Railroad.  In 1851, the Maryland slaveholder Edward Gorsuch made his way to Christiana, 
accompanied by federal marshals and other slaveholders to retrieve their fugitive slaves.  When 
Gorsuch and his men arrived at the Parker farm they were shot at.  Gorsuch was killed in the 
incident and other members of the party were wounded.  Parker managed to escape through the 
Underground Railroad into Canada, while the others who fired upon Gorsuch were not so lucky. 
Thirty-two people were indicted, while only one man, Castner Hanway was actually brought to 
trial on charges of treason.  
This created a firestorm in both Pennsylvania and Maryland.  Riots broke out in 
Christiana where pro and antislavery activists targeted one another.  Thaddeus Stevens was 
brought in to craft a defense for the murderer, while other national political figures and reporters 
flooded to the scene of the trial.  Newspaper columns on the Eastern Shore were filled with 
100 ?Maryland Resolutions on SLAVERY,? ?The Kent News?, January 26, 1850, page 2. 
 
 
 
43 
 
lengthy discussions of both the trial and the riots.  Eventually, the murderer was acquitted of all 
charges.  This stoked anger amongst slaveholders even more.101  
Similar to the Christiana incident were multiple reports in 1851 in Eastern Shore 
newspapers that seemed to confirm the limits of the Fugitive Slave Act.  For example, in Cecil 
County a slave named Emory Rice escaped from the farm owned by William Knight and made 
his way to Pennsylvania.  It was there that federal marshals caught Rice, and the fugitive slave 
was subsequently sent back to Knight?s farm.  When Knight looked upon the fugitive, he 
declared ?this is not my slave.?  It turns out that the federal marshals had misidentified Rice, and 
instead had arrested a free black man named Adam Gibson.102  In February of 1851, T? he Kent 
News? reported on another case out of Pennsylvania where a ?negro woman? named Tamor 
Williams, claimed as the slave of W. J. Purnell, was brought before Judge Kane.  The judge 
decided that the testimony on behalf of the claimant as it related to the identity of the alleged 
fugitive was insufficient, so Kane ordered the prisoner to be discharged.103  These high profile 
incidents that showcased the failures of the Fugitive Slave Act were paired with stories 
emanating out of Boston where ?hundreds of negroes? were armed to the teeth? in a 
coordinated effort to resist the enforcement of the Act at all costs.104  The new Fugitive Slave 
Act, for all its political salience, appeared to be dead on arrival. 
 Against this national political backdrop, and armed with new racial ideas, it is no wonder 
that some slaveholders and like-minded citizens on the Eastern Shore began to take the law into 
101 For an excellent documentary history of the Christiana Riot and subsequent trial, see: W. U. Hensel, 
The Christiana Riot and the Treason Trials of 1851: An Historical Sketch? (Lancaster, Pa.: The New Era 
Printing Company, 1911). 
102 ?Fugitive Slave Case,? ?The Kent News?, December 28, 1850, page 2. 
103 ?Discharged,? ?The Kent News?, February 18, 1851, page 3. 
104 ?The Boston Press on the Fugitive Mob,? ?The Kent News?, February 15, 1851, page 2. 
 
 
 
44 
 
their own hands.  For instance, in 1851, a slave escaped bondage in Easton, Maryland.  Upon 
learning this fact a deputy and a marshall in Easton accompanied the slaveholder to recover the 
fugitive.  They stopped in front of a household occupied by free blacks they thought were 
harboring the fugitive and pretended that their vehicle was broken down.   The two officers then 
?roused the inmates by asking for a light to mend the traces of their vehicle.?  When a black 
woman opened the door, the officers ?rushed into the house and commenced the search.? 
According to the article reporting on this incident, ?the owner recognized his slave, but the other 
colored persons in the house interfered, and, arming themselves with axes and firearms, 
succeeded in enabling the fugitive to escape.?  They then began to assault the officers, when, ?in 
self defence,? the officers were ?forced to use their pistols, and it is believed several of the 
colored persons were wounded.?105 
The marshall in this case was likely a federal marshall enforcing the Fugitive Slave Act. 
However, the details of the story are important to note.  This was not simply a case of retrieval. 
This was instead a case of manipulation, intrusion, and police brutality.  The deputy and the 
marshall, rather than weighing the facts of the case, apparently sided wholly with the slaveholder 
and proceeded to escort him on a recovery mission.  Instead of simply asking the free blacks in 
the household whether or not they could search the house for the fugitive, the officers instead 
decided to play a trick, and bust into the house the second the door was opened.  This fact in 
particular gives the impression that the officers were not acting under legal authority, but rather 
out of retribution on behalf of the slaveholder.  To the modern eye, the free blacks in the house 
had a right to defend themselves against this intrusion, but instead, the officers responded to this 
105 ?Conflict with Fugitive Slaves,? ?Easton Gazette,?  January 4, 1851, 2.  
 
 
 
45 
 
reaction by shooting several of the black people inside of the building.  All in all, two officers 
?of the law? aided a slaveholder to recover a fugitive slave, engaged in deceit, broke into a 
building, and shot several free black persons.  This was an act of terror.  
Another instance of extrajudicial behavior was carefully executed in 1857 by the Sheriff 
of Cecil County, John Poole.  A free black man had been charged and lodged in the county jail. 
Poole lured the black man out of jail with a bargain: help the Sheriff find a fugitive slave, and in 
return, the black man would be free to go.  The man agreed to this deal.  However, unbeknownst 
to him, the Sheriff was actually leading the man down to Virginia, where he would be sold as a 
slave.  The Sheriff was eventually caught by the police and charged with kidnapping, thereby 
landing himself in jail.  Poole?s term in jail did not last long however, for in 1858, with possible 
help from the outside, Poole successfully escaped.106 
Poole?s behavior in this instance can be linked to the ideas promoted in Eastern Shore 
newspapers.  Print culture emphasized negative stereotypes about free blacks, while 
simultaneously promoting slavery.  Maryland laws that supposedly restricted free black mobility 
and strengthened slavery were not being enforced.  Against this backdrop, it is no wonder what 
propelled Poole to take the law into his own hands.  Even though he was an officer of the law, 
nothing gave Poole the right to kidnap a free black person, and yet that is what he did.  The 
officer was determined to see that the former prisoner was forced into slavery, where, according 
to Eastern Shore print culture, free blacks rightfully belonged.  Poole?s actions were the 
106 ?The Negro Stolen From Cecil County,? ?Easton Gazette?, September 5, 1857, 2; ?Escape,? ?Easton 
Gazette?, June 19, 1858, 2; ?Charge of Kidnapping,? ?The Kent News?, August 29, 1857, 2; ?Anti-Slavery 
Reporter Vol. VII, Third Series,?? Wilmington Republican?, 1859, 24. 
 
 
 
46 
 
manifestation of ideas propagated in newspapers, whether they were directly responsible for this 
specific incident or not.  This was extrajudicial behavior at its most cruel and violent.107 
Elsewhere, mob rule took hold of Eastern Shore society.  For example in 1857, Robert 
Lucas, and a ?mob at Centreville Md.? attempted to get ahold of and lynch Dave Seeny, a free 
black prisoner.108  This type of activity was at least tangentially attributable to print culture, 
specifically the ways in which newspapers emphasized the violence of free blacks, as well as 
their tendency to escape jail.  Newspapers legitimized these extralegal actions by printing similar 
stories from other areas of the country.  For instance, ?The Kent News? printed a story regarding a 
free black man named John H. Cannon, who ?killed and outraged the person Miss Sarah Griffith, 
near Dover, Del.?  However, Cannon did not remain in jail for long, as he was ?forcibly taken 
from the jail at the place, and lynched by an outraged community till life was extinct.?109  These 
stories of nearby extralegal activity, similar to that on the Eastern Shore, helped to legitimize the 
latter.  By casting these actions as regional, rather than local, newspapers transformed extralegal 
local lynchings into legal behavior. 
There were also a number of abolitionist pamphlets and books that were spread around 
the Eastern Shore that caused slaveholders to take action.  For instance, Reverend Joseph Lane? 
published an abolitionist book entitled ?Maryland Slavery and Maryland Chivalry.?  In the book, 
Lane described the brutality of slavery on the Eastern Shore: 
The American is the worst system of slavery that ever saw the sun; and with our eye fixed on the 
fires of the last judgment, we aver that such shocking abomination, grinding oppression, cruel 
barbarities, unrelenting despotism, and foul impurities, are practised on the Eastern Shore of 
Maryland, as would have disgraced Earth?s most barbarous age and nation.110 
107 Poole was most certainly not the only person to kidnap free blacks and sell them into slavery, see ?The 
Alleged Attempt to Sell a Free Colored Person,? E? aston Gazette?, July 3, 1858, 2. 
108 ?Guilty,? ?Easton Gazette?, August 1, 1857, 2. 
109 ?Lynch Law in Delaware,? ?Easton Gazette,?  September 1, 1860, 2. 
110 Joseph Lane, ?Maryland Slavery and Maryland Chivalry? (Philadelphia: Collins, Printer, 1858), 6. 
 
 
 
47 
 
 
Many on the Eastern Shore were afraid that these stark descriptions of slavery, like Lane?s and 
Long?s, would spread across the region.  These ideas were dangerous because they encouraged 
whites to join the abolitionist cause, and promote black movement Northward.  As abolitionist 
ideas began to spread across the Eastern Shore and gain popularity, so too ensued a crackdown 
on those ideas.  
In 1855, J. W. Corey was accused of being an abolitionist.  He took to ?The? ?Kent News ?to 
publicly defend himself.  In the editorial, Corey stated unequivocally that he pleads ??not guilty!??  
to the charge of being an abolitionist.  He had been accused of associating with abolitionist 
James Bowers, to which Corey rebutted that he only went to see Bowers to collect money 
?which had been due me from him for nearly a year.?  Corey stated that his personal views of the 
slavery issue were of ?no business? to the public, but that they were ?not materially at variance 
with those entertained by slave-holders generally of this county.?111  The fact that Corey had to 
so viscerally defend himself in ?The ? ?Kent News? speaks to the fear he likely felt.  Being labeled an 
abolitionist was a serious charge on the Eastern Shore during the mid 1850?s and brought the 
threat of physical harm to the accused.  If you did not publicly defend yourself, you could face 
physical harm.  
Eastern Shore newspapers gave individuals the ideological justification they needed to 
engage in extralegal activity.  Slaveholders and like minded citizens took the law into their own 
hands.  However, these types of isolated illegal actions did not necessarily represent the majority 
of slaveholders or Eastern Shoremen.  In fact, if anything, these extralegal events conducted 
periodically by individuals were but the foundation for a more organized body politic. 
111 Untitled, ?The Kent News?, December 22, 1855, 2. 
 
 
 
48 
 
Slaveholders, rather than operate independently, came to understand that they were more 
effective when united.   Throughout the 1850?s, many slaveholders on the Eastern Shore began 
to ?organize? their terror in ways unseen in prior decades.  Due to the success of ?runaway slave 
conductors,? slaveholders were ?compelled to pledge to each other ?their lives, their fortunes and 
sacred honor,? in police vigilance.?  The E? aston Gazette? remarked that such meetings 
demonstrated the ?determination of the citizens en mass ?to do or die? in defence of their slaves 
and firesides.?  Fugitive slaves and nefarious free blacks would be ?hunted to the utmost 
confines of the Union? and forced into service for the State ?breaking stone or picking oakum.?
112 
The best example of extralegal organization was the case of James Bowers in Kent 
County, Maryland.  Bowers, a white man, was a known abolitionist in Chestertown in the 
1850?s.  Throughout the decade, a number of slaveholders had brought charges against Bowers 
in court, claiming that he had aided fugitive slaves.  For instance, in 1851, a bill of indictment 
was found against Bowers for ?giving pass to and enticing one of Dr. Davidson's slaves to run 
away.?113  However, due to laws restricting the use of black people's? testimony in court, 
evidence could rarely be established against Bowers, and he walked free several times.114  In 
1853, Bowers was finally tried in court for having assisted a fugitive slave, ?but for want of 
sufficient evidence was acquitted.?  Ever since the trial, Bowers? neighborhood had experienced 
a great ?loss of this kind of property [slaves],? which was assumed to be Bowers? responsibility.
115  
112 ?Another Excitement at Chestertown,? ?Easton Gazette?, October 23, 1858, 2. 
113 ?Arrest in Kent,? ?Easton Gazette?, June 7, 1851, 3. 
114 ?Honorably Acquitted,? ?Easton Gazette?, June 21, 1851, 2. 
115 ?Mob Law In Maryland,? ?The Liberator?, November 19, 1858, 1. 
 
 
 
49 
 
By 1858, slaveholders in Chestertown had had enough.  They organized a local meeting, 
led by prominent judge Ezekiel Chambers.  There they designed the plan they would later 
commit.  The slaveholders organized a staged vehicle breakdown outside of Bowers? home. 
They proceeded to the door of the house, and pretended that they ?required assistance to mend 
it.?  When a free black woman answered the knock, the slaveholders rushed in and grabbed both 
the woman and Bowers.  Both of them were taken to the woods, where the slaveholders 
?stripped, tarred and feathered? them ?for tampering with slaves.?116  T? he Planter's Advocate?, a 
pro-slavery newspaper on the Eastern Shore, argued that ?the least possible violence was used,? 
but this was clearly not the case.117  
After being driven out of Chestertown, Bowers returned a few weeks later.  About three 
hundred people assembled, captured Bowers in a carriage, and forcibly drove him to 
Middletown, Delaware, where he was shipped by train to Philadelphia.  The whole event was 
one of ?knock-downs, black eyes, and bloody noses, in every direction.?  A newspaper editorial 
in the ?Easton Gazette? remarked on what had transpired:  
As to the leaders of the party effecting so happy a riddance, it is enough to say that they were 
among the first men in the community - men of wealth and men of intelligence - who, after 
smarting for years under injuries inflicted by underground railroad agents, came to the wise 
conclusion, in Convention, sometime ago, to execute summary vengeance upon every trespasser. 
118 
 
It is certainly the case that this incident was extrajudicial, as it involved citizens, and even the 
local judge, ?enacting summary vengeance? outside of the court system.  As historian Laura 
Edwards notes in ?The People and Their Peace?, throughout Antebellum society the difference 
116 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, July 3, 1858, 2; ?Row in Chestertown,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 10, 1858, 2; 
?Lynch Law in Maryland,? ?The Cecil Whig?, July 3, 1858, 2. 
117 ?Slaveholders Protecting Themselves,? ?The Planter's Advocate?, July 21, 1858, 2. 
118 ?Another Excitement at Chestertown,? ?Easton Gazette?, Oct. 23, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
50 
 
between ?sanctioned forms of community policing? and the actions that police officers actually 
engaged in were not so clear.119  However, what was different about this event was that it 
involved organization at the grassroots level.  Unlike previous cases of isolated extrajudicial 
behavior, this involved intricate planning by slaveholders.  
Similarly, political pressure from slaveholders was the impetus for an ordinance passed 
by the County Commissioners of Kent County in May 1856 to ?provide and deploy a Special 
Police in Kent County.?  If a person secured a ?runaway or absconding slave? in the Kent 
County jail they would be entitled to ?receive proceeds from the sale? of the slave at auction. 
The Commissioners asked that the ordinance?s text be printed in ?The? ?Kent News?, as well as the 
Cecil Whig ?and D? elaware Republican?, to encourage and incentivise people in the nearby area to 
become Special Police and make money in the process.120  Following the passage of this 
ordinance, the number of notices in ?The ? ?Kent News? relaying the number of fugitive slaves greatly 
increased.  For instance, James Gale, a slaveholder, posted a fugitive slave bulletin in 1856: 
$500 Reward - Ranaway from the subscriber, in October 1850, a negro man named Joe Wright. 
Said negro is about 27 years of age, dark skin about 5 foot 4 or 6 inches high, well made and 
regularly featured.  He is supposed to be now in Philadelphia.  I will give the above reward for his 
apprehension, if lodged in Chester Town jail.  
-James H. Gale121 
 
The Joe Wright notice is particularly illuminating, not only because it directly followed the 
passage of the the Kent County ordinance, but also because Wright had ran away in 1850, six 
years prior to the law.  James Gale did not print an advertisement in 1850 regarding Wright, and 
119 Laura Edwards, ?The People and Their Peace: Legal Culture and the Transformation of Inequality in the 
Post-Revolutionary South ?(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2009), 74. 
120 Untitled, ?The Kent News?, May 17, 1856, 2. 
121 ?$500 Reward,? ?The Kent News?, April 18, 1857, 3; Also see ?$600,? T? he Kent News?, April 18, 1857, 3; 
?Caution!,? ?The Kent News?, April 19, 1856, 2; ?Caution,? ?The Kent News?, July 19, 1856, 2; ?Caution,? ?The 
Kent News?, August 16, 1856, 2. 
 
 
 
51 
 
yet in 1856 he chose to do so.  Thanks to the angst spurned by Eastern Shore print culture, 
slaveholders were reclaiming their voice that they thought had been lost forever after the 
Maryland Constitutional Convention. 
However, just because this Special Police ordinance was passed by the County 
Commissioners does not necessarily mean that it would determine the shape of life on the 
Eastern Shore.  This is because police forces on the Eastern Shore, like in most rural counties in 
America in the mid-nineteenth century, only had a sheriff and a few deputies.  Three or four 
people were not enough to scour entire counties and regions looking for runaway slaves.  This 
process required the help of other people in the county who would be incentivised by both 
money and notoriety.  Many people on the Eastern Shore did in fact become Special Police.  One 
of the most famous Special Police cases involved policemen George Vansant and George 
Clayton, who, in June of 1856, were ?out on watch for negroes who had absconded from the 
county.?  While on watch, ?a negro passed by? carrying a hatchet, and ?inflicted a blow? below 
V.?s ear, severing his head from his body.?122  
What is interesting about this case is that it likely confirmed many of the worst fears that 
white people held on the Eastern Shore: that free blacks were murderous criminals.  The 
presence of Special Police to hunt down black people only encouraged blacks to react violently 
to protect themselves against capture, thereby creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.  By viewing 
black people as inherently criminal, white people had effectively created a black criminal class. 
Black people were not going to ?suffer in silence.?  When nonviolence did not work, black 
people were okay with using force if necessary.  William Parker, for example, was a fugitive 
122 ?Murder,? ?The Kent News?, June 28, 1856, 2. 
 
 
 
52 
 
slave from Maryland who, upon relocation to nearby Christiana, Delaware, organized a large 
self-defence group composed of free blacks.123  Similarly, abolitionists such as Eastern Shoreman 
Henry Highland Garnet, actively promoted violence in response to the terror perpetuated against 
slaves and free blacks.  For instance in 1843, Garnet, speaking at the National Negro Convention 
in Albany, New York, told black people to ?strike for your lives and liberties? rather than exist 
as slaves.124  The purpose of the speech was, according to historian Kenneth Mann, to critique 
free black conventions which were of ?little benefit in bringing about the abolition of slavery,? 
while simultaneously spreading ?the philosophy of ?militant crusading? among the free elite.?125 
However, it is important to note that Garnet was not inclined to violence, but merely advocated it 
as an appropriate tool in reaction to terror perpetuated by slaveholders and their sympathizers. 
The violence of the George Vansant murder gained widespread attention across the 
region, and as far away as Canada.  Thomas Ligon, the Governor of Maryland at the time of the 
murder, posted a $200 reward in multiple Eastern Shore newspapers for the ?arrest and 
conviction of the murder of George Vansant.?126  The news of the Vansant murder was also of 
interest to abolitionists; in particular, John Henry Hill, an escaped slave from Richmond, 
Virginia who in 1856, resided in Canada.  In August of 1856, Hill wrote to the famed black 
abolitionist William Still, who at the time was living in Philadelphia: 
123 Carol Wilson, ?Active Vigilance is the Price of Liberty: Black Self-Defense Against Fugitive Slave 
Recapture and Kidnapping of Free Blacks,? in ?Antislavery Violence: Sectional, Racial, and Cultural 
Conflict in Antebellum America,?  eds. ?John R. McKivigan, Stanley Harrold (Knoxville: University of 
Tennessee Press, 1999), ? 108-127, quote found on 123. 
124 Quote found in Neil Hamilton, ?American Social Leaders and Activists? (New York: Facts On File 
Publishing, 2002), 153.  It is important to note that other black leaders, such as Douglass argued against 
this type of violence.  Black self defense was not something advocated broadly. 
125 Kenneth Eugene Mann, ?Nineteenth Century Black Militant: Henry Highland Garnet?s Address to the 
Slaves,? S? outhern Speech Journal,?  36, no.1 (1970), 14-15.  Quotes from Mann originally found in Diana 
Winkelman, ?The Rhetoric of Henry Highland Garnet,? Master?s Thesis, Baylor University, 2007, 40. 
126 ?Reward,? ?The Kent News?, July 12, 1856, 2; also see ?Proclamation by the Governor of Maryland,? ?The 
Kent News?, July 12, 1856, 2. 
 
 
 
53 
 
Dear Friend: - I am very glad to hear that the Underground Railroad is doing such good business, 
but tell me in your next letter if you have seen the heroic fellow that cut off the head of the Patrol 
in Maryland.  We wants that fellow here, as John Bull has a great deal of fighting to do, and as 
there is a colored Captain in this city, I would seek to have that fellow Promoted, Provided he 
became a soldier.127 
 
The fact that this news story had spread so far speaks to both its gruesomeness, as well as the 
ideas it promoted.  To abolitionists this man was a fierce fighter, and worthy of a higher calling. 
To non-abolitionist whites, this man confirmed that blackness and criminality were not only 
linked, but could manifest themselves in horrific ways that needed to be stopped. 
Four black men, ?James Blackiston alias Denby, Elijah Howard, Aaron Warner, and 
William Rasin,? were ?Arrested on Suspicion? of having ?brutally murdered? George Vansant.128 
One of the men captured, James Blackiston, appears in other records which suggest that he 
would have been a prime target for Special Police.  Blackiston was likely a mixed race son of 
Joseph Blackiston, who had had an extramarital relationship with ?negro Eliza Ann? during his 
life.  Not only did James receive $300 when Joseph died in 1850 (paid out $30 annually), but 
Eliza Ann also received her Freedom Pass when Joseph?s wife died on June 24, 1856, about the 
same time of the Vansant murder.129  Miscegenation was a primal fear of those who believed in 
and manufactured universal blackness and criminality.130  In all likelihood, neither James nor the 
other three men had anything to do with the crime committed.  This was for three reasons: one, 
the initial description of the murder case stated that the ?Villain was not identified,? simply 
describing him as a ?negro.?131  Second, the article describing the four arrested suspects still 
127 William Still, ?Underground Railroad: A Record of Facts, Authentic Narratives, Letters, etc.,?  
(Philadelphia, PA.: People?s Publishing Company, 1871), 191. 
128 ?Arrested on Suspicion,? ?The Kent News?, August 2, 1856, 2. 
129 Will of Joseph Blackiston, ?Freedom pass granted to Eliza Ann June 24, 1856? written in the margin. 
130 For a detailed conversation about this topic, see Adrienne D. Davis, ?The Private Law of Race and 
Sex: An Antebellum Perspective,? ?Stanford Law Review?, 51:2 (Jan., 1999): 221-288. 
131 ?Murder,? T? he Kent News?, June 28, 1856, 2.  
 
 
 
54 
 
stated that Vansant was murdered by ?some malicious person or persons unknown.?132  Third, 
and most important, none of the four men would be charged, or convicted, of the aforementioned 
crime.  The Special Police had simply rounded up a group of ?the usual suspects?: a group of 
black males who were either in trouble with the law in the past, or who the police just wanted 
behind bars because they were black.  Calls by slaveholders to increase the local police presence 
had led to a dire result: innocent black men, assumed to be criminals, were being hunted down. 
The ?real? culprit in the Vansant murder case was said to be ?negro Alfred Reed.?  The 
Grand Jury of Kent County found a true bill against Reed in November 1856, and the case was 
later removed to the court system in Cecil County.133  The case sat in limbo for four months, 
when finally the trial took place.  However, due to ?fatal errors in the indictment? (some stating 
that the murder had taken place in Cecil County, others where the the names Reed and Vansant 
had been inadvertently swapped), the jury returned with a verdict of ?Not Guilty, because of the 
inefficiency of the indictment.?  Reed was then remanded to jail, where he awaited a new 
indictment.134  The case was sent back to the Grand Jury of Kent County where another true bill 
was found against Reed, only to then be sent back again to the Cecil County court system.  By 
January of 1858, the case had been decided in Reed?s favor.  The Judge ruled that the former 
indictment?s errors could not have been taken advantage of, and so the subsequent ?Not Guilty? 
verdict stood.135  
132 ?Arrested on Suspicion,? ?The Kent News?, August 2, 1856, 2. 
133 ?Court,? ?The Kent News?, November 8, 1856, 2; ?Court,? ?The Kent News?, November 15, 1856, 2. 
134 ?Murder Trial,? ?The Kent News?, April 18, 1857, 2. 
135 ?The Circuit Court,? ?The Cecil Whig?, January 23, 1858, 2; also see Oliver Miller, ?Maryland Reports 
Containing Cases Argued and Determined in the Court of Appeals of Maryland, Volume 12?, (Annapolis: 
Robert F. Bonsall, Printer, 1859), 263. 
 
 
 
55 
 
All told, a ?Special Police? law designed to recover fugitive slaves incarcerated four free 
black men briefly, and another for a year and a half.  Not only did the Vansant murder case 
propagate ideas about black criminality, it effectively labeled and incarcerated five innocent 
black men as criminals.  The results were horrid, but they proved that slaveholding pressure and 
organization worked.  Slaveholders had pressured officials to pass a Special Police ordinance, 
and free blacks as well as fugitive slaves were now being terrorized.  
This transition into a more organized body politic did not only happen in Kent County. 
In Queen Anne?s County a ?large meeting of citizens? comprising many of the most respectable 
farmers and slaveholders of that section? was organized to deliberate the case of William B. 
Harwood.   The cause of this action was ?alleged illegal trafficking with negroes? and general 
conduct in the premises that was thought to be incompatible with the interest of the community.? 
The collective body decided that Harwood was to be given ?a notice to quit the neighborhood? 
which allowed him thirty days to leave Queen Anne?s County.136  This was most certainly not 
legal behavior, but this incident did demonstrate an effort on behalf of Queen Anne?s County 
slaveholders to collectively organize and induce action.  If the law could not effectively control 
free black mobility or guarantee ?property? rights, slaveholders would do it themselves. 
There was also an incident in Dorchester County which embodied this transitory period 
from extralegal to legal slaveholding action.  Reverend Samuel Green was a black abolitionist 
preacher on the Eastern Shore.  Green was born into slavery in East New Market, Maryland, in 
1802.  Eventually, Green bought his and his wife?s freedom.  Green became a ?licensed exhorter? 
(only whites could become ?preachers?) in the Methodist Episcopal Church, and even attended 
136 ?Notice to Quit,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 26, 1857,? ?2. 
 
 
 
56 
 
the Convention of Free Colored People in 1852.137   His home served as a safehouse for many 
prominent abolitionists and fugitive slaves, including Harriet Tubman and William Stills.138  In 
1857, Green was set to move his family to Canada, when a group of Dorchester slaves known as 
the ?Dover Eight? made a highly publicized escape from the area.139  While this group was not 
connected with Green?s abolitionist activities, many in the area were convinced that Green?s role 
as an abolitionist helped prompt these slaves to escape.  This gave Sheriff Robert Bell enough 
reasonable suspicion to search Green?s home.  It was there that Bell discovered maps, ?abolition 
pamphlets,? and at least one copy of ?Uncle Tom?s Cabin?.140 
It was widely known for many years that Green?s home has been used for a safehouse, 
but it was only in 1857 that the police finally had caught him.  Green was brought to trial in May 
of the same year, and subsequently convicted for owning materials that were ?insurrectionary in 
intent.?  The court sentenced him to ten years in the penitentiary.  When petitions were sent to 
the Governor's office asking for a pardon of Green, slaveholders in Dorchester County sent 
letters arguing for Green?s continued imprisonment.  In the letters, the slaveholders documented 
that since the arrest of Green, ?there has scarcely any negroes ran away At all.?141  When Thomas 
Holliday Hicks was elected as governor of Maryland in November 1857, he refused to issue the 
pardon as he was himself a slaveholder from Dorchester County, and was afraid doing so would 
result in him being mobbed.142  By lobbying the state government to strictly enforce laws 
137 Untitled, ?National Anti-Slavery Standard?, June 28, 1862; ?Colored Colonization Convention,? ?Baltimore 
Sun?, July 27, 1852. 
138 William Still, Journal C, Station Number 2, 1853-1854, 99. 
139 Kate Larson, ?Bound For The Promised Land: Harriet Tubman, Portrait of an American Hero?, (New 
York, NY: Ballantine Books, 2004), 140. 
140 Untitled, ?The Kent News?, December 23, 1857, 2. 
141 ?Petition of Dorchester Slaveholders,? 1857, in ?Governor Thomas Hicks (Miscellaneous Papers)?, 
Maryland State Archives, S, 1274-56. 
142 ?Speech of Rev. Samuel Green,? ?Liberator?, August 15, 1862. 
 
 
 
57 
 
regarding abolitionism, slaveholders on the Eastern Shore were beginning to exercise their 
abilities as a unified body politic.  Of course, very few people known to be abolitionists were 
actually charged, better yet convicted of the crimes Samuel Green was.  Green?s imprisonment 
was less about his supposed criminal activity, and more a terroristic symbol: slaveholders were 
warning abolitionists, free blacks and fugitive slaves that the continuity of the current system on 
the Eastern Shore was coming to an end. 
Incidents of organization and community policing, even while producing extralegal ends, 
were an important step towards broader legal change brought about by the revitalized body 
politic of slaveholders.  Alongside individual and collective acts of terror was an effort by 
slaveholders to push for structural change.  Not only did slaveholders work with other 
slaveholders, but different slaveholding organizations from different counties began to work with 
one another as well.    Much of this dramatic change in slaveholding organization is often 
referred to as the ?re enslavement crisis? which occurred after the infamous ?Dred Scott v. 
Sandford ?decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1857.  While the ?Dred Scott? decision did not 
necessarily make many headlines on the Eastern Shore, it is important to note both its national 
impact, as well as how the case altered the ways in which black freedom was understood from a 
legal perspective.  According to Ira Berlin in ?The Long Emancipation,? the ?Dred Scott? decision 
?opened the entire country? to slavery and barred people of African descent from membership 
in the larger American political community.?143  The decision delivered by Chief Justice Roger 
Taney sent shockwaves through the American political system: hot-blooded southerners cheered, 
abolitionist sympathizers protested, while those caught in between were forced to take a side.  
143 Ira Berlin, ?The Long Emancipation: The Demise of Slavery in the United States? (Cambridge, Mass.: 
Harvard University Press, 2015), 154-155. 
 
 
 
58 
 
In the years following the decision several states, particularly those in the South, began to 
impose new restrictions on free blacks under the guise of new legal precedent.  For instance in 
Louisiana, new laws were passed that both curtailed the mobility of free blacks, as well as 
discouraged free black visitors.144  Elsewhere, in states such as virginia and Kentucky, there were 
renewed efforts to rid themselves of the free black population entirely, through forced 
colonization, expulsion, and even re enslavement.145  However, the Eastern Shore was unique 
during this post-?Dred Scott ?period for two reasons.  One, the Maryland General Assembly was 
less likely to react hastily in response to ?Dred Scott?, as compared to other Southern states, 
because of the influence of Baltimore in the legislature, and the growing number of farmers who 
increasingly relied on free black labor.  This meant that it was up to Eastern Shore slaveholders 
to create political pressure that demanded such change.  Second, in the states where slavery still 
existed, most political power still resided with slaveholders, and their well connected families. 
Because of the new Maryland Constitution, Eastern Shore slaveholders needed to organize to 
even stand a chance at putting their desired goals into action. 
It is hard to tell exactly where this movement began, but the most likely location is in 
Chestertown, the same place that had organized the ousting of James Bowers.  Chestertown did 
have a history of supporting legal movements in the past.  For instance, slaveholders in 1852 
organized a meeting to call on Ezekiel Chambers, the local judge, to argue the ?Lemmon ? Case if it 
was to be heard at the Supreme Court.146  However, this was less about creating a local body 
politic and more about supporting Chestertown?s favorite judge.  The movement in the latter part 
144 ?Imperfect Equality: The Legal Status of Free People of Color in New Orleans, 1803-1860,? in ?A Law 
Unto Itself: Essays in the New Louisiana Legal History?, ed. Warren Billings, Mark Fernandez (Baton 
Rouge, La.: 2001), 201. 
145 Berlin, ?Slaves Without Masters?, Chapter 11. 
146 ?The Lemmon Slaves,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 18, 1852, 2. 
 
 
 
59 
 
of the 1850?s was instead about organizing slaveholders for a specific purpose: to change 
Maryland law.  ?Men of wealth and men of intelligence? would gather ?in Convention,? to 
decide the future of free labor and slavery on Maryland?s Eastern Shore.147  
Sometime in the middle of July 1858, Kent County slaveholders met in Chestertown 
where ?stirring speeches were made by Judge Chambers, Senator Pearce, and Hon. J. B. 
Ricand.?148  At the meeting, the slaveholders drafted a set of resolutions designed to address their 
concerns that ?some few evil disposed persons? have secretly and clandestinely operated to 
seduce our slaves to abscond, and in some instances to aid them in escaping.?  Therefore, as 
?citizens of the county in mass meeting assembled,? they declared their ?most unqualified 
condemnation,? of those that had interfered with the slave population.?  Any person who sought 
to help slaves escape bondage should not ?enjoy either the ordinary hospitality of our people, or 
the protection of the laws.?  The slaveholders ended the resolutions by exclaiming that ?there can 
be no neutrality; he that is not for us must be regarded as against us??149  The fact that this 
group of slaveholders referred to their organization as a ?mass meeting assembled? was 
illustrative of the power of the body politic.  This statement carried with it a sense of formality, 
as well as one of importance.  These resolutions also specifically argued that those who aided 
fugitive slaves should not receive the protection of law.  Eastern Shore slaveholders were no 
longer going to seek vengeance, but rather a legal alternative to respond to the crisis.  
A similar meeting of slaveholders was had in August 1858 in Dorchester County.  The 
meeting took place in Cambridge, where addresses were delivered by the Hon. James A. Stewart, 
Hon. Daniel M. Henry and F. W. Thomas, Esqrs.  However, what made this meeting different 
147 ?Another Excitement at Chestertown,? ?Easton Gazette?, October 23, 1858, 2. 
148 ?Slave Holders in Kent County,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 24, 1858, 2. 
149 ?The Meeting At Chestertown,? ?Easton Gazette,?  July 31, 1858, 1. 
 
 
 
60 
 
than the one in Chestertown is that these resolutions were principally written as a call for a 
?convention of the slave-holders of the Eastern Shore in order to adopt measures of protection.?
150  The motion for an Eastern Shore slaveholders convention had been voiced by some 
newspaper writers, but had never been formalized until the Cambridge meeting.  A month after 
these resolutions were adopted, an article in the ?Easton Gazette? remarked that an Eastern Shore 
slaveholders convention ?seems to be gaining general favor.?  The article went on to describe the 
need for greater security of slave ?property? in ?this exposed portion of Maryland.?151 
The idea of an Eastern Shore slaveholders convention was a rather simple one: 
slaveholders from all parts of the Eastern Shore would meet in one place, craft resolutions in 
response to their perceived problems, and then turn them over to the General Assembly who 
would then consider different laws to enact.  Because of the new Maryland Constitution, Eastern 
Shore slaveholders could no longer individually pressure the General Assembly to pass what eer 
bill they wanted.  They now had to unite in order to put pressure on the political body.  However, 
while it may appear simple, this plan required immense organization and tactics.  Slaveholders 
from every county would first have to meet in order to choose which people to send to the 
convention.  The people at the convention would then have to craft policy suggestions that could 
both pass muster in the General Assembly, as well as make a lasting impact.  Even though this 
was an uphill battle, a newly revitalized body politic of slaveholders on the Eastern Shore was 
willing to give it a try.  With Kent County already tacitly supporting such a plan, and Dorchester 
fully endorsing it, there were only six more counties left to have their voices heard (and only 
three more needed - a majority - to call such a convention). 
150 ?Slave Holders Meeting at Cambridge,? ?Easton Gazette?, August 14, 1858, 2. 
151 ?The Eastern Shore Convention,? ?Easton Gazette?, September 18, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
61 
 
Following the meeting in Cambridge, slaveholders of Worcester County met in 
September 1858 to discuss their grievances, as well as the newly conceived slaveholders 
convention.  The ?Snow Hill Shield? claimed that it ?was one of the largest and most respectable 
ever had in the town,? and that ?notwithstanding the great diversity of opinions upon the details 
of matters brought before the meeting,? they all agreed as to the ?necessity of prompt, 
determined action in protecting our slave property.?  At the meeting, the slaveholders of 
Worcester specifically endorsed the idea of an Eastern Shore convention, and suggested that it be 
held on November third, 1858, in Cambridge, Dorchester County.152 
With the convention in mind, the slaveholders in Worcester decided that their resolutions 
should best reflect what they wished would be the product of the Eastern Shore convention in 
November.  The first resolution stated that the State of Maryland ?has the power and owes to her 
citizens the duty, of protecting slave property within her limits against all adversaries of our laws 
and institutions.?  It added that the laws should be made ?more stringent on this subject,? and 
that civil officers, such as Zadok P. Henry, be authorized to capture ?every white man, and? 
free negro? that breaks the law.  What is critical about this resolution is that it deemed Maryland 
law as capable of solving slaveholders? grievances.  Slaveholders were no longer reacting 
violently, but rather looking for legal remedies.  This resolution is also important because it is the 
first time in any set of resolutions passed that suggests the fugitive slave problem is linked to the 
broader ?free black problem.?  Just as Eastern Shore print culture defended slavery while 
simultaneously condemning supposed free black behavior, so too were slaveholders beginning to 
fuse the two together.153  
152 ?Slaveholders Convention,? ?Easton Gazette?, September 25, 1858, 2. 
153 ?Resolutions of the Worcester Slaveholders? Convention,? ?Easton Gazette?, September 25, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
62 
 
The other resolutions of the Worcester meeting went on to articulate some potential 
lawful solutions.  For instance, the second resolution argued that slaves be banned from owning 
corn patches, banned from leaving home without a pass, and banned from selecting their own 
house (masters would do so for them).  This resolution also called upon constables and 
magistrates to ?break up woods-meetings and all unlawful gatherings of slaves and free negroes, 
and to enforce the patrol laws.?  The fourth resolution requested that citizens make a record of 
the numbers, names, ages, of all slaves they knew to have absconded, and also that the General 
Assembly at its next session ?appoint agents to ferret out said slaves, and reward by law such 
agents, a liberal bounty on all fugitive slaves reclaimed by them.?  The fifth resolution, and 
perhaps the most chilling, recommended that authority be given to Postmasters in ?to open and 
read all letters and other documents addressed to free negroes, or slaves; and whenever anything 
incendiary shall be found therein, to place them in the hands of proper officers for prosecution.?
154 
Once more, there were some familiar themes in the Worcester resolutions.  The second 
resolution explicitly linked the free black problem with the fugitive slave problem.  The fourth 
resolution specifically called upon the General Assembly of Maryland to take lawful action. 
Following the Worcester meeting, the Board of Trustees of the Agricultural Society for the 
Eastern Shore of Maryland met at Wye Cottage and demanded that the citizens of Talbot County 
be the next group ?to deliberate in regard to the protection of property in slaves, and as to the 
propriety of sending delegates to the proposed Eastern shore Convention to be held on this 
subject at Cambridge...155  Slaveholders, and the like minded citizens of Talbot County, 
154 Ibid. 
155 ?Untitled,? ?Easton Gazette?, October 16, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
63 
 
responded by holding a meeting in Easton on the twenty-sixth of October.  All in all, they drafted 
only one resolution of consequence: ?the citizens of Talbot county in Convention assembled, feel 
a common interest with their brethren of the other counties of the Eastern Shore, in the proposed 
object of the Convention to be holden in Cambridge on the 3d of November proximo? 156 
In total, five counties sent delegates to the Eastern Shore Convention: Talbot, Caroline, 
Dorchester, Somerset and Worcester.  Although Kent did not end up sending official delegates, 
slaveholders from the county did attend.  However, while the convention was attended by 
delegates from almost two-thirds of Eastern Shore counties, that did not necessarily mean that 
the convention was approved of by all.  In Eastern Shore newspapers in particular, there was 
great concern raised as to the ultimate effects of such a convention.  Some editorials simply 
stated that there were better ways to go about the ?securement of slaves,? and that the convention 
would inadvertently produce a ?disastrous effect? on the institution of slavery.?  Another article 
called the convention ?disadvantageous,? and that if the convention were to be called, ?you do it 
without our co-operation.?157  An editorial in the E? aston Gazette ? argued that it was best if a 
?slaveholder may fix his own plan and devise his own means, rather than ?slave-holders 
conferring together.?158 
While most criticisms of the convention were vague, a lengthy editorial printed in the 
Easton Gazette ? laid out the real reasons why some were skeptical of the convention, and it had to 
do with the free black question.  As already mentioned, by the time the convention was set to 
begin, a few of the county resolutions had begun to link the free black question directly to the 
problem of slave fugitivity.  This was scary, especially to the growing number of people on the 
156 ?The Slaveholders? Meeting,? ?Easton Gazette?, October 30, 1858, 2. 
157 ?Slaveholders Convention,? ?Easton Gazette?, September 25, 1858, 2. 
158 ?The Absconding of Slaves and It?s Remedy,? ?Easton Gazette?, August 28, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
64 
 
Eastern Shore who were ?almost entirely dependent? on free black labor to work their crops, and 
would be economically hurt if restrictions on free black mobility were passed.  The article began 
by claiming something which was rare to see in Eastern Shore print culture, that ?the negro is a 
human being is not denied even by ?hot blooded Southrons;? and, therefore, the question of 
interference with privileges he has enjoyed so long as to almost make them rights, necessarily 
compels a delicate handling.?   While the author of the article did not ?doubt of the power of the 
Legislature in the premises,? the author also doubted ?the wisdom, the propriety, the humanity, 
of such extreme measures.?159 
The editorial went on to describe exactly how important free blacks were to the ?political 
economy? of the Eastern Shore.  Farm labor, ?house services of non-slaveholders,? and a large 
portion of the ?heavy, disagreeable,? labor was performed by free blacks.  If free blacks were 
sold again into slavery who would replace them?  The author suggests, only the ?substitution of 
the most degraded of the swarms of foreigners that flock to our shores!?  Although some free 
blacks were known to ?steal? not work if they can live without it, [and] tamper with the slaves,? 
at least their status was ?in a state of subordination.?  When white hirers need free black labor, 
they receive ?his services? without the innumerable and harassing evils incident to the 
employment of white labor.?  Though the author of the piece was against banning free blacks or 
re enslaving them, the author also recognized that slaveholders had ?legitimate? grievances.  To 
answer these concerns, the author proposed that legislation be set forth to distinguish between 
the ?two classes of free negroes.  Let the useful one stay here and continue to be useful.  Let the 
159 ?Slaveholders Convention,? ?Easton Gazette?, December 11, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
65 
 
other class be banished or sold.?  Under this conceived law, free blacks would ?give white 
security for his good conduct; in default of which he shall be banished or sold into slavery.?160  
The reason that this article is so important is that it reflects the dire concerns of Eastern 
Shore print culture.  While editors had originally been complicit in exploiting the fears and 
anxieties of slaveholders in order to sell more newspapers, they now realized, too late, that their 
words could cause tremendous damage to the Eastern Shore economy.  By promoting a free 
black archetype and defending slavery, these editors had inspired slaveholders to begin a process 
of legal reform.  Now they sought to reel it back in.  Free blacks, in the eyes of newspaper 
editors, were no longer bad actors, but rather desperately needed laborers in the Eastern Shore 
economy.  ?Bad? free blacks and ?good? free blacks needed to be distinguished from one another, 
rather than lumped into one group. 
However, no matter how hard the newspapers on the Eastern Shore tried, they could not 
stop a moving train.  Their words had had a demonstrable effect.   On the third of November 
1858, the convention of Eastern Shore slaveholders assembled at Cambridge.  It is important to 
note that the vice president of the convention was Curtis Jacobs from Easton, Maryland.  Jacobs 
was a member of the General Assembly, and had previously been instrumental in crafting the 
Maryland Constitution, rewritten in 1850.  Although the construction of the General Assembly 
was to the disadvantage of the Eastern Shore, Jacobs was successful at expanding the powers 
vested in the General Assembly: the power to regulate the free black population and see their 
removal from the state, the power to insist that free blacks register with the state?s government, 
the power to deny free blacks real estate, deeds, and wills, etc., and the power to ban free blacks 
160 Ibid.  This particular law is actually similar to laws in Ohio during the Antebellum period.  See Stephen 
Middleton, ?The Black Laws: Race and the Early Legal Process in Ohio? (Athens: Ohio University Press, 
2005),? ?56. 
 
 
 
66 
 
from immigrating into the state.?161  He also chaired the notable, though ineffective, Committee 
on the Free Black Population established by the Assembly to address concerns about free black 
labor in the state.  Jacobs, now vice president of the Eastern Shore convention, could use his 
influence to insist that the General Assembly use the powers he himself gave it. 
The paper trail of Curtis Jacobs is one of the few surviving records of Eastern Shore 
slaveholders, and so it is important to explore his writings briefly.  Although Jacobs had never 
been a fan of free black labor, it is clear that by the time of the Cambridge Convention his anger 
and frustration had boiled over as a result of Eastern Shore print culture.  In his famed pamphlet 
The Free Negro Question in Maryland, ? Jacobs articulated arguments that newspapers like T? he 
Kent News? and the ?Easton Gazette ? had propagated for the previous decade: 
The history of Free Negroism in Maryland, is a history of indolence, vice and crime throughout, 
often stained with the blood of their fellows and frequently our white population is victimized to 
their hellish deeds.  Freedom in their hands is a deadly poison, which they understand to mean 
cessation from labor, and full license to do as they please?. Serility with them is ingrain, natural, 
and coherent; it was planted their by God himself and cannot be eradicated by man.  They make 
good slaves, because the principle of slavery is the predominant element in their nature; they 
abuse freedom, because they have no rational conception of its uses.162 
 
Similarly, Jacobs was known among business leaders as being one of the primary spokesmen 
against the growth of the free black population whose link to the ?instability of the slave system 
was indisputable.?163  Jacobs? diary is also a rarity when it comes to archival sources.  Most 
notably, in his diary, Jacobs recounted an incident where some of his slaves had conspired to 
poison him.  However, instead of blaming the slaves, he instead turned his ire on ?the evil 
influence? of free blacks who supposedly put them up to this plot.164  Not only was Jacobs 
161 ?Maryland Reform Convention,? ?Easton Gazette,?  April 12, 1851, 1. 
162 Curtis Jacobs, ?The Free Negro Question in Maryland? (Baltimore: John W. Woods, Printer, 1859), 20. 
163 R. J. M. Blackett, ?The Captive?s Quest for Freedom: Fugitive Slaves, the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law, and 
the Politics of Slavery? (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018), 325. 
164 Quote found in Willa Banks, ?Curtis Washington Jacobs: Architect of Absolute Black Enslavement, 
1850-1864,? ?Maryland Historical Magazine?, 104, no. 2 (Summer, 2009), 124. 
 
 
 
67 
 
influenced by print culture, but his own experiences seemed to align and confirm the worst ideas 
promulgated by Eastern Shore newspapers.  Jacobs? ideas were not only on full display at the 
Cambridge Convention, they were also instrumental in crafting the final resolutions. 
The slaveholders convention at Cambridge lasted only two days.  On the fifth of 
November, 1858, the people of the Eastern Shore, ?in general convention assembled,? resolved 
that ?free negroism and slavery are incompatible with each other, and should not be permitted 
longer to exist in their present relations, side by side, within the limits of the State.?  In effect, by 
using such stark language, Eastern Shore slaveholders were taking a page out of print culture. 
Free blacks embodied ?vicious habits,? a ?refusal to labor,? and an ?incapacity for self 
government.?  As Eastern Shore newspapers argued, free blacks were not similar to slaves, but in 
fact polar opposites.  Slavery and free labor could not exist side-by-side.  According to the 
resolutions adopted at the convention, Maryland law should offer free blacks two solutions: be 
reenslaved, or leave the state.165 
What was curious about the convention is that the delegates did not go straight to the 
General Assembly with their proposal.  Instead, the convention proposed a state convention in 
Baltimore, similar to the one they were currently attending.  Delegates to the Baltimore 
Convention would meet ?not as slaveholders and non-slaveholders, but as citizens of the 
Commonwealth? in order to address ?free-negroism in our midst.?  There, the delegates would 
devise ?some system to be presented to the Legislature of Maryland? that better regulated the 
free black population.  Slaveholders on the Eastern Shore hoped that they could sway enough 
delegates in Baltimore by printing their list of grievances ?in the newspapers in every county, 
165 ?Convention of Slaveholders,? ?Easton Gazette,?  November 13, 1858, 2. 
 
 
 
68 
 
and the city of Baltimore.?166  By transferring power over to the Baltimore convention, 
slaveholders were hoping to transform an Eastern Shore problem into statewide problem. 
General Assembly members would have no choice to act with the entire state backing a set of 
proposals. 
A Baltimore slaveholders conention was not partiularly new in Maryland.  For instance, 
in 1842, southern slaveholders in Maryland organized a convention in Baltimore to propose new 
restrictions on black freedom, as well as to prevent runaways.  Three years later, in 1845, 
slaveholders again organized to pressure the General Assembly to act in regards to these desired 
goals.167  However, what made these early efforts at organizing different from those in the latter 
part of the 1850?s was that Eastern Shore slaveholders were hoping to present a united front in 
the face of traditional Baltimore opposition.  No longer were these conventions simply 
collections of disgruntled slaveholders not getting their way.  This was an organized political 
effort armed with serious ideas that was proposing specific solutions.  
The slaveholders convention met in Baltimore in June of 1859, with Judge Chambers of 
Chestertown presiding.  At the convention, there was boisterous debate from all sides.  Most 
notably, it was Curtis Jacobs who brought up the question as to whether free blacks should be 
reenslaved and/or forced to leave the state.  Jacobs argued in favor of the motion, stating that 
?lazy, degraded, and immoral? free blacks should be sold by the state as conscript slaves to 
nonslaveholders so that ?citizens of limited means? could themselves become slaveholders.  If 
nothing was done, free blacks would spread ?like the locust clouds of Egypt? paralyzing our 
166 Ibid. 
167 Berlin, ?Slaves Without Masters?, 210-211. 
 
 
 
69 
 
energies, demoralizing our people, and devouring our substance.?168  The Eastern Shore?s 
slaveholding body politic had risen up over the course of the 1850?s, and demanded legal 
remedies.  Jacobs was now the voice of that legal movement.  
Others that attended the convention vehemently disagreed with Jacobs and his approach. 
However, Judge J. Thompson Mason, while against the Jacobs? proposal, complemented Jacobs 
for essentially raising the fundamental question: ?Shall Maryland become a Free State or a Slave 
State??169  Ultimately, the resolutions adopted at the Baltimore Convention were ?moderate and 
conservative,? reflecting the tradition of Maryland as being a middle ground state.  The body as a 
whole designed three resolutions.  The first stated that ?the general removal of the free blacks 
from the State of Maryland is impolitic, inexpedient and uncalled for.?  The second resolution 
argued that the free black population should still be regulated by laws so that they might be 
?orderly, industrious and productive.?  The final resolution called upon the state legislature ?to 
review and amend the laws relating to free negroes and to emancipation.?170 
All in all, these measures were not what the slaveholders on the Eastern Shore had 
desired.  A newspaper editorial after the convention congratulated the delegates for not caving to 
the ?extremists who are anxious to get up a negro issue in Maryland.?  The convention had 
begun ?big with the fate of Caesar and Rome.?  By the end, the ?young Solons and Ciceros? had 
seen ?their labor, thought, and lofty aspirations? ingloriously thrown away.?171  The convention, 
from an Eastern Shore perspective, was a failure.  No guarantee that the General Assembly 
would adopt reenslavement.  No forced emigration of free blacks.  The convention was, 
168 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, March 5, 1859, 1; also see William Freehling, ?The Road to Disunion, Volume 
II: Secessionists Triumphant, 1854-1861? (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 194-198. 
169 Freehling, ?The Road to Disunion?, 196. 
170 ?Slave Holder?s Convention,? ?Easton Gazette,?  June 18, 1859, 2. 
171 Ibid. 
 
 
 
70 
 
however, not without its successes.  It demonstrated that slaveholders did have the ability to 
politically organize locally, region wide, and statewide.  The fact that the convention even came 
into existence showcased the power of Eastern Shore print culture.  Words in newspapers 
propelled slaveholders to unite and take collective action. 
The November following the convention, the raid on Harpers Ferry occurred.  This 
caused a panic throughout the Eastern Shore, and the hysteria was once again propagated by 
newspapers.  For instance, the ?Easton Gazette? began to print articles relating the ?incendiary? 
nature of free blacks.  It was reported that in Kent County that a ?free negro man? encouraged a 
slave to burn his master?s barn down, along with ?three horses and all his corn and provender.? 
Another free black man supposedly enticed a slave to burn his master?s stable as well as ?his 
corn, fodder, and ten head of horses and mules.?172   Elsewhere, newspapers printed reports that 
letters of ?insurrectionary character? were beginning to pop up along the Eastern Shore.  One 
such letter arrived in St. Michaels, and ?owing to the present state of affairs in Virginia,? 
slaveholders were necessarily frightened.  The reaction to these news reports was ?calm, but 
determined.?  Slaveholders used the lessons of the 1850?s, and began to immediately organize. 
They set up a meeting at the local court house in order ?to adopt the most effective means for the 
protection of citizens and property.?  At the slaveholders meeting, ?a committee from each 
district was appointed? to discuss possible remedies.  The result was that they encouraged Curtis 
Jacobs, and other hardliners, to once more make a push in the legislature for tougher laws.173 
Jacobs took the cue, and pleaded with moderates in the Assembly to at least consider 
some legislation.  After Jacobs threatened to resign if no such laws were passed, the General 
172 ?Incendiary Fires in Kent County,? ?Easton Gazette?, January 28, 1860, 2. 
173 T. Stephen Whitman, ?Challenging Slavery in the Chesapeake: Black and White Resistance to Human 
Bondage, 1775-1865? (Baltimore: Maryland Historical Society, 2007), 207. 
 
 
 
71 
 
Assembly adopted two measures that would be put up for public referendum.  The first barred 
future manumission of slaves.  The second authorized counties to set up a Board of 
Commissioners that would ensure free blacks remained employed.174  However, even though 
Jacobs was finally able to get legislation introduced, and passed, the public referendum still 
needed to go through.  At the coming presidential election the people of Baltimore, St. Mary?s, 
Calvert, Howard, Kent, Worcester, Somerset, Talbot, Queen Anne?s, Prince George?s, and 
Charles counties, where the referendum made it onto the ballot, all rejected the initial 
manumission law.  Only Somerset passed the Board of Commissioners law.175  Although 
slaveholders had demonstrated their political abilities, they were unable to overcome 
nonslaveholding votes.  As William Freehling says in his book ?The Road to Disunion?, ?Maryland 
would continue meandering up Delaware?s northward path, with no swerve back Alabama?s 
way.?176 
Ultimately the growth of the free black population was too much for slaveholders to 
overcome.  Slavery's demise on the Eastern Shore could not be easily reversed.  However, that 
did not mean that slaveholders did not put forth effort in their attempts.  They harnessed print 
culture, and used it towards creating a political movement on the Eastern Shore.  While some 
slaveholders had engaged in extralegal activity on an individual and collective level, many 
instead chose to create legal, positivist action.  Even after their considerable defeats, slaveholders 
used their newfound organizational tools to continuously push for change.  One example of this 
shift was the trial of Reverend John Dixon Long.  
174 ?An Act,? ?Easton Gazette?, September 29, 1860, 1; ?The Colored Population - Important Bills Before the 
Maryland Legislature,? ?Easton Gazette,?  February 11, 1860, 1. 
175 ?A Negro Law,? ?Easton Gazette?, July 28, 1860, 2. 
176 Freehling, ?The Road to Disunion?, 198. 
 
 
 
72 
 
The Reverend was a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church (M. E. Church) on the 
Eastern Shore.  In 1844, the M. E. Church had split into two separate regions, North and South, 
over the issue of slavery.  Every year since the split, the Church held an annual border 
conference at Philadelphia, which invited the Church?s members in Delaware, the Eastern Shore 
of Maryland, and Southeast Pennsylvania to attend.  The Church was unclear after the 1844 split 
how border region churches were to treat the issue of slavery, and oftimes, these annual 
conferences became ?the great battle-ground? where issues like slavery were hashed out.177  John 
Long had been a minister with the M. E. Church on the Eastern Shore for many years, and was 
squarely against the institution slavery.  In 1857, Long published an abolitionist book entitled 
?Pictures of Slavery,? which decried the horrors of slavery, as well as the Church?s 
unwillingness to stand squarely in opposition to the peculiar institution.  Following the 
publication of Long?s book, the Philadelphia Annual Conference was set to begin; it would be a 
Conference like no other. 
At the Conference, Reverend Thomas Quigley, charged John Long with ?Misrepresenting 
the people of Maryland and Delaware? Misrepresenting the ministers who have labored in 
Maryland and Delaware,? and ?Misrepresenting the colored people.?178  Quigley, who was then a 
minister serving in St. Michaels where Long had previously served from 1853-1855, sought to 
have Long excommunicated from the Church.179  No longer would abolitionist literature, under 
the guise of religion, be looked over with a passive eye.   However, the ?trial? of John Long 
ended rather calmly.  The charges were ultimately dropped, as the members of the Conference 
177James M. McCarter, ?Border Methodism and Border Slavery?, (Philadelphia: Collins, Printer, 1858), 3. 
This book describes the famed 1858 Philadelphia Annual M E. Conference in detail. 
178 ?Charges Preferred Against a Minister,? ?The Kent News?, August 15, 1857, 2. 
179 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, August 15, 1857, 2. 
 
 
 
73 
 
could not come to a consensus as to whether they should support Long?s book, or denounce it. 
While the specific facts of the case are interesting enough, the impact and ramifications of the 
trial are more important.  Though Quigley failed to get a conviction at the Conference, the trial 
served as an warning to others who might publish abolitionist pamphlets or books: if you printed 
abolitionist ideas, you were going to be charged, and perhaps excommunicated from the Church. 
Between the time Long?s book was published, and the Philadelphia Conference, there had 
already been numerous Eastern Shore newspapers which had published articles decrying both 
Long, and abolitionism.  This case epitomized Eastern Shore slaveholders? newfound plan of 
action: organize, and pressure institutions to act.  However, as with their legal maneuvers in the 
General Assembly, the slaveholders failed at achieving their goals.180 
Slaveholders continued down this road when, in 1860, Kent and Millington circuits of the 
Methodist Episcopal Church assembled at the M. E. Church in Chestertown.  The M.E. Church 
had formally condemned slavery in 1860 after a decades long battle between pro and antislavery 
forces.  In reaction to this, two of the M.E. circuits met in convention in Chestertown in order to 
draft resolutions calling for a ?New Chapter? of an M.E. Church on the Eastern Shore, one that 
would be pro slavery.181  
Eastern Shore slaveholders also made significant efforts to actively promote colonization 
as a way of exporting free black laborers.  The Maryland Colonization Society had long roots, 
dating back to the early Antebellum period.  Like its national forbearer, the American 
Colonization Society, the Maryland Colonization Society repeatedly couched its arguments for 
black removal in logistical and spiritual arguments, as to avoid being perceived as a racist 
180 A great summary of the trial can be found in Hannah Bonner, ?Abolitionist On Trial: Rev. John D. Long 
and the 1858 Philadelphia Conference,? ?Journal of the Historical Society of the EPA Conference? (2008). 
181 Untitled, ?Easton Gazette?, August 11, 1860, 2. 
 
 
 
74 
 
organization.  However, during the 1850?s the Society began to argue for black removal in more 
strident terms.  In an 1852 issue of the ?Maryland Colonization Journal? an author wrote, ?That 
the presence of two races in Maryland, under such circumstances, can be advantageous to either, 
or promote the prosperity of the State, no one pretends.?182  While embodying the idea of 
universal blackness, this argument also conveyed a sense of urgency found elsewhere in the 
Colonization Journal.?   When Reverend John Seys went to recruit potential candidates for 
colonization on the Eastern Shore, he received a sense of ?apathy? amongst the ?colored 
population.?  This fact was immediately followed in the ?Journal ?by the following passage: ?The 
State has not yet renewed the annual donation to the Society, which expired by limitation at the 
end of the past year, and the public will bear in mind that the expenses of African emigration 
may hereafter have to be defrayed entirely by voluntary contributions.?183  It is clear in the 
Journal? that members were increasingly worried that their funds would be cut off by the 
Maryland legislature, if more members were not recruited.  This is similar to the modern private 
prison industry: in order to stay open, you need to keep your rooms (in this case boats) filled.  
During the 1850?s, this urgency made its way to the Eastern Shore of Maryland.  Agents 
of the Maryland Colonization Society repeatedly preached to free blacks about the benefits of 
colonization, as well as solicited donations from prominent white slaveholders.184  The latter was 
particularly important because it showed a change in the institutional framework of the 
organization.  The Society, as previously mentioned, had tried to cast itself as a non-racist, and 
completely ?voluntary? organization.  However, the need to keep the Society running necessitated 
182 ?Maryland Colonization Journal,? 242. 
183 ?Maryland Colonization Journal,? 170. 
184 ?Maryland Colonization Journal,? 192.  This is not the only example.  Throughout the ?Journal ? during the 
1850?s, there are records of ministers going to collect donations from Eastern Shore slaveholders. 
 
 
 
75 
 
the recruitment of as many black emigrants as possible.  This meant going to white slaveholders 
to promote a possible exchange.  The Society needed black emigrants, and money in the form of 
donations.  Slaveholders wished to see their slaves removed from the area when their terms of 
servitude had ended.  This exchange meant that the Society was no longer strictly voluntary, but 
indeed coercive.185  In 1857, their stated goals had clearly changed from earlier in the 
Antebellum period: 
The Maryland State Colonization Society proposes to remove and establish on the Western Coast 
of Africa, such persons of color as may desire to emigrate thither; and also to aid in the removal 
and settlement of such persons as may be manumitted by their owners for that purpose.186  
 
Not only did slaveholders begin working with Colonization agents to export black people to 
Africa, they also continuously pressed the General Assembly to increase funding for the agency. 
The colonization project fit squarely with the larger project of Eastern Shore slaveholders: 
organize, and build institutions that could create the change they desired. 
Eastern Shore slaveholders would also go on to be influential at the Southern Rights 
Convention of Maryland held in Baltimore in February of 1861.  The Convention had been 
conceived as a response to the growing number of Southern states seceding from the Union.  A 
number of familiar characters attended the Convention, including Kent County?s James Pearce 
and Judge Chambers (who served as the president).   The Convention agreed on two points, ??that 
the secession of the seven slaveholding States?was induced by the aggression of the 
non-slaveholding States, in violation of the Constitution,? and that Maryland should not be 
?made a highway for federal troops.?  However, beyond these two points, no agreement on the 
185 Also see: Beverly Tomek, C? olonization and Its Discontents: Emancipation, Emigration, and Antislavery 
in Antebellum Pennsylvania? (New York: New York University Press, 2011), 121-122; Ousmane K. 
Power-Greene, ?Against Wind and Tide: The African American Struggle against the Colonization 
Movement (? New York: New York University Press, 2014),? ?14. 
186 ?Maryland Colonization Journal?, 343. 
 
 
 
76 
 
controversial issue of secession could be met.  Although slaveholders on the Eastern Shore were 
armed with the ideas put forth in print culture, there was only so much leverage that they had in 
actuality.  Maryland would remain in the Union, and not formally join in the South?s uprising.  
 
While the political actions of slaveholders had little actualized effects, what they did in 
the 1850?s was truly remarkable.  They harnessed the rhetoric and arguments presented in 
Eastern Shore print culture to curtail the demise of slavery, and the rise of free black labor in 
Maryland.  Their new abilities to organize and unify constituted a re?v?italized body politic 
amongst Eastern Shore sla?v?eholders, and solidified the presence and the power of sla?v?eholding 
ideology on the Shore.  Maryland?s tenuous position in the Ci?v?il War was continuously prodded 
by sla?v?eholders who refused, in the face of free black labor, to gi?v?e in.  Throughout the War, 
during Reconstruction, and still to this day, the Eastern Shore remains a bastion of conser?v?atism. 
Shore political and cultural solidarity, although not strong enough to withstand national and 
global trends, has done a remarkable job at maintaining demographic homogeneity and 
propertied hegemony. 
Though not exactly the same, in many ways this period on the Eastern Shore forecasted 
what was to come in both the black codes after the Civil War and Jim Crow laws during 
post-Reconstruction.  Slaveholders would not simply accept that free black labor was the way of 
the future, especially if that meant the dilution of slaveholding power.  With the help of print 
culture, slaveholders were able to make ideological arguments against free labor, and in support 
of slavery.  The preponderance of particular articles in newspapers across the Eastern Shore 
spectrum helped unite slaveholders in their cause.  While the ideas in Shore print culture were 
 
 
 
77 
 
not necessarily new, the utilization of such arguments by slaveholders in order to organize and 
enact legal change was unique and revolutionary.