The rendition of Anthony Burns back to slavery was one of the most contentious and dramatic fugitive slave cases seen in Boston. Burns escaped slavery in Virginia by boarding a ship to Boston where he found work in a pie company and a clothing store owned by abolitionist, Lewis Hayden in March 1854. Only a few months after his arrival, Burns was seized by agents working for his master and brought to the courthouse under the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850.
Abolitionists and the Vigilance Committee gathered forces to storm the courthouse, as they had done for Shadrach Minkins in 1851, to free Burns two days after his arrest. Their attempt failed but did not deter abolitionists. Crowds gathered on the streets of Boston after Burns defense attorneys could not stop Burns’ return to Virginia. Some 50,000 protesters shouted “Shame! Shame!” at authorities escorting Burns to the ship that awaited him.
While Boston was considered the hotbed of abolitionist sentiment, not all residents supported the movement. Many merchants and mercantile families had strong ties to the South’s industry and feared what effect emancipation would have on their livelihoods. Edward Everett, Massachusetts Senator, former Massachusetts governor,
former President of Harvard University, and cousin to Otis Everett, was notoriously silent on the fugitive slave laws and the Anthony Burns case, despite speaking against the Kansas-Nebraska Act. He wrote to Jane Anthony Eames in a private letter only that “Conservative feeling [is] utterly….crushed out.” Everett was alluding to Eames of how many he knew, old-fashioned Whigs, had woken up to the rendition case and became staunch abolitionists.
As for the Otis Everett’s, Elizabeth Everett was the only family member to remark on the Burns case and the subsequent turmoil in Boston. She wrote in her 4 June 1854 letter:In a follow up letter on 18 June 1854, Elizabeth remarks that one of the South End’s Unitarian ministers was arrested for his participation in the Burns rescue efforts.
Although it is hard to tell tone in a letter this old and Elizabeth does not much interject her thoughts on the subject, it does appear that Elizabeth Everett does not sympathize with fugitive slaves, or more likely, northern abolitionists. With her husband and two of her sons involved in the merchant business, it is not a surprise that Elizabeth Everett would not take up the cause of abolition. Slavery may have been outlawed in most Northern states by 1854, but commercial urban centers like Boston had a stake in southern slavery. With the invention of the cotton gin, the north was supplied with a surplus of raw cotton which was turned around in northern mills for export. Elizabeth Everett, however, was probably more affected by the commotion in the streets rather than the possible economic impact, evidenced by her 4 July 1854 letter where she comments on an anti-slavery picnic held by Massachusetts abolitionists in which William Lloyd Garrison burned a copy of the Fugitive Slave Act, a copy of the court decision in the Burns case, and a copy of the US Constitution. Elizabeth describes the streets so “full of rabble that we feared we might get in other company than we wanted…”