Anthony Burns case gained nationwide notoriety
CAMDEN — The dramatic story of a fugitive slave whose case became a national controversy and helped to ignite the Civil War is chronicled in a new book by a Rutgers School of Law–Camden professor.Earl Maltz’s book, Fugitive Slave on Trial: The Anthony Burns Case and Abolitionist Outrage (University of Kansas Press, 2010), illustrates the story of Burns, a runaway slave who in 1854 fled Virginia for Boston, a hotbed for antislavery sentiment. Burns was captured and tried under the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850.
“The case generated national publicity, protests and efforts to rescue him turned violent, and the trial was covered nationwide, so he became a cause célèbre,” Maltz says.
Before the Civil War broke out in 1861, slavery was an issue that divided the nation. The Burns case, Maltz explains, “became a focal point in the conflict between the North and the South.”
Before his court case, abolitionists attempted to free Burns.
“There had been a series of cases involving fugitive slaves in Boston and they actually put chains around the courthouse to make sure people couldn’t get in and rescue them,” Maltz says. “Still, protesters attempted to break down the doors to the courthouse and, during a scuffle, a guard was killed.”
Burns’ lawyers argued that Burns was not in fact an escaped slave and that the Fugitive Slave Act was unconstitutional. Nonetheless, he was eventually remanded into the custody of his owner, Charles Suttle. That decision by trial judge Edward Loring led to more protest and became a significant factor in the struggle for control of the Massachusetts state government.
Loring was a unionist who also supported enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act and the decision against Burns was met with resistance from powerful political antislavery forces in Massachusetts.
“When Loring sent Burns back, Massachusetts politics was in a state of flux,” Maltz says. “The Whig party collapsed and the idea of removing Loring became a central goal of the antislavery movement. Others said Loring just did his job, but the decision really divided conservatives and radicals in Massachusetts.”
Maltz continues, “The bottom line is that no one ever went to jail for the murder of the guard, and the judge who sent Anthony Burns back lost his job. Burns became a symbol of the times and the reaction in Boston reinforced the views of those in the South — that the North was not a reliable partner.”
Soon after his return to Virginia, Burns was sold to a new owner in North Carolina, but had his freedom purchased and returned to Boston in 1855.
The choices Loring faced, Maltz says, were a microcosm of those that confronted Northerners in the 1850s.
“For many, the question was whether the integrity of their governing institutions should be maintained even at the expense at providing aid and comfort to the institution of slavery,” he writes.
A nationally regarded expert on U.S. constitutional law, the U.S. Supreme Court, and legal history, Maltz is the author or editor of numerous books, including Slavery and the Supreme Court, 1825-1861 (University Press of Kansas, 2009) and Dred Scott and the Politics of Slavery (University Press of Kansas, 2007).
Maltz received his bachelor’s degree in history from Northwestern University in 1972 and his Juris Doctor degree from Harvard University in 1975. He teaches courses in constitutional law, employment discrimination, and conflicts of law at the Rutgers School of Law–Camden.
-30-
Media Contact: Ed Moorhouse
(856) 225-6759
E-mail: ejmoor@camden.rutgers.edu