A Century of Negro Migration | Page 3

later included in the Northwest Territory. Slavery then became
more and more extensive until by 1750 there were along the
Mississippi five settlements of slaves, Kaskaskia, Kaokia, Fort Chartres,
St. Phillipe and Prairie du Rocher.[10] In 1763 Negroes were relatively
numerous in the Northwest Territory but when this section that year
was transferred to the British the number was diminished by the action
of those Frenchmen who, unwilling to become subjects of Great Britain,
moved from the territory.[11] There was no material increase in the
slave population thereafter until the end of the eighteenth century when
some Negroes came from the original thirteen.
The Ordinance of 1787 did not disturb the relation of slave and master.
Some pioneers thought that the sixth article exterminated slavery there;
others contended that it did not. The latter believed that such
expressions in the Ordinance of 1787 as the "free inhabitants" and the
"free male inhabitants of full size" implied the continuance of slavery
and others found ground for its perpetuation in that clause of the
Ordinance which allowed the people of the territory to adopt the
constitution and laws of any one of the thirteen States. Students of law
saw protection for slavery in Jay's treaty which guaranteed to the

settlers their property of all kinds.[12] When, therefore, the slave
question came up in the Northwest Territory about the close of the
eighteenth century, there were three classes of slaves: first, those who
were in servitude to French owners previous to the cession of the
Territory to England and were still claimed as property in the
possession of which the owners were protected under the treaty of 1763;
second, those who were held by British owners at the time of Jay's
treaty and claimed afterward as property under its protection; and third,
those who, since the Territory had been controlled by the United States,
had been brought from the commonwealths in which slavery was
allowed.[13] Freedom, however, was recognized as the ultimate status
of the Negro in that territory.
This question having been seemingly settled, Anthony Benezet, who
for years advocated the abolition of slavery and devoted his time and
means to the preparation of the Negroes for living as freedmen, was
practical enough to recommend to the Congress of the Confederation a
plan of colonizing the emancipated blacks on the western lands.[14]
Jefferson incorporated into his scheme for a modern system of public
schools the training of the slaves in industrial and agricultural branches
to equip them for a higher station in life. He believed, however, that the
blacks not being equal to the white race should not be assimilated and
should they be free, they should, by all means, be colonized afar off.[15]
Thinking that the western lands might be so used, he said in writing to
James Monroe in 1801: "A very great extent of country north of the
Ohio has been laid off in townships, and is now at market, according to
the provisions of the act of Congress.... There is nothing," said he,
"which would restrain the State of Virginia either in the purchase or the
application of these lands."[16] Yet he raised the question as to whether
the establishment of such a colony within our limits and to become a
part of the Union would be desirable. He thought then of procuring a
place beyond the limits of the United States on our northern boundary,
by purchasing the Indian lands with the consent of Great Britain. He
then doubted that the black race would live in such a rigorous climate.
This plan did not easily pass from the minds of the friends of the slaves,
for in 1805 Thomas Brannagan asserted in his Serious Remonstrances

that the government should appropriate a few thousand acres of land at
some distant part of the national domains for the Negroes'
accommodation and support. He believed that the new State might be
established upwards of 2,000 miles from our frontier.[17] A copy of the
pamphlet containing this proposition was sent to Thomas Jefferson,
who was impressed thereby, but not having the courage to brave the
torture of being branded as a friend of the slave, he failed to give it his
support.[18] The same question was brought prominently before the
public again in 1816 when there was presented to the House of
Representatives a memorial from the Kentucky Abolition Society
praying that the free people of color be colonized on the public lands.
The committee to whom the memorial was referred for consideration
reported that it was expedient to refuse the request on the ground that,
as such lands were not granted to free white men, they saw no reason
for granting them to others.[19]
Some Negro slaves unwilling to wait to be carried or invited to the
Northwest Territory escaped to that