New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-11-08


TIE consequent losses Of the Maryland
shareholders have created high degree oil
excitement among them. Not long since as
our readers are swsre, a Mr.. Bowers, living al or
near Cbes'ertown, in the County of Kent on the
Eastern Shore Of Maryland. was indicted Tor ai'ue
slaves TO escape. He appears to have been ior
some time an object Of suspicion TO his slavehod-
ing neighbors on account of bis decided and OUT
spoken hostility to the peculiar institution "A
hostility. however by which he came rsh'Iy
enough, being one Of the Society of Friends, who
now for hundred years past and more have reit-
Grated their decided testimony against slsyehold'
ing. All that could be proved against Dir. Bowers
was, that he wss an Abolitionist. This the slave
holders thought ought to be amply sufficient to Sc
cure his conviction. The Jury, however,
made up. We suppose, principally or entirely
Of non.slaveholders did not think so, but
brought in verdict of acquittal The enrsged
slave holders thereupon resolved to take the law
into their own hauds. A large party of them lay
in wait late at night near Mr. Bowers's house;
sent some Of their number to entice him from
his bed under prctense that their vehicle had
broken down and that they needed his assistance;
and having thus entrapped him. tarred aud feath-
cred him. grossly mstreated his wife, then at the
point Of giving birth to a child, Who hearing the
noise came to bis assistance, and finally compelled
him to take temporary shelter in neighborng State
The non.slaveholders of that vicinity, Jury of
whom had declined to convict Mr.. Bowers without
any evidence did not quietly acquiesce in this out
rage. Mr. Bowers had lodged complaint against
several Of the rufsns, and they had him bound over
to appear at Court. Many fights occurred on public
days between those who approved, and those who
condemned the outrage, on Mr.. Bowers. The
Bowers party seemed to be the stronger, and there
appeared to be considerable danger not only that
indictments might be found against the ruiiians,
but that they might be banished. The Shareholders
thought it necessary to make a new demonstra
ton. They called county meeting, made iaming
speeches, passed braegadocio resolutions and in
vited al the counties on the Eastern Shore to seed
delegates to grand Convention to be held at Cam
bridge, Nov. 3, to devise means for the protection
Of slave property aud to uphold the domination so
long exercised by the shareholders over the non
shareholders as well as the slaves. That Conyen-
ton met accordingly, though of the eight counties
which compose the Eastern Shore only fige were
represented.
Thus met in council, these magnanimcus slave.
holders seem to have hesitated little to actually
usurping the government of the State and under
taking, law or no law, TO trample their nom
slaveholding feow.c citizens under foot. They did
not pass resolutions at the County Conventions, or
some Of them had done, highly approving the out.
rage on Mr.. Bowers, and proposing to set up a
system Of Lynch Law for the protection of slave
property. Instead of this they proposed to call
general convention of the whole State, including
Observation-Disclosures as well as shareholders, to meet at
Baltimore on the second Wednesday Of June, 1859,
for the purpose Of deyising some system for The
better regulation of the negro population of the
State to be laid before the next Legislatures body
to which the shareholders may the more confidently
address themselves since, according TO the Maryland
rotten borough system of representation they hare
most disproportioned representation in it. But
though these valiant shareholders evidently shrank
from that contest with the non shareholders,
which they had previously threatened, they turned
with true bulldog ferOcity upon portion of the
free aboring population of the State less able to
defend themselves. BY the census of 1850, the
State of Maryland contained ALI ,943 white people,
by whom 4, 6s5 were owners Of one slave, 5,33l Of
from two to four slaves, 1897 Of from five to nine
slaves 1-22 of from ten TO nineteen slaves, 655 of
from twenty TO fortynine slaves, - Of from fifty to
| ninety-nine slaves, : of from hundred to one
hundred and ninety. nine slaves, and of from three
to five hundred slaves in the whole, 5000 slave
| holders out Of white population of 4l7,9l2.
These l6 040 Shareholders or allowing each of them
to have family of FIVE persons which is exceeding
ly liberal, these so 200 persons interested in slave
property own among them 81, 365 slaves. There
are also in Maryland 74,723 free colored persons,
Of whom, it appears, that 1889 are native
| born inhabitants of the State. 1t Is upon
this large body of free coored persons in the veins
of a considerable number of whom runs some ofthe
best blood of Maryland, that the shareholders of
the Eastern Shore have turned their greedy eyes.
They cOolly PROPOSE after maligning and blscken-
ing the character of these people as much as they
can, to reduce the whole of them to Slavery thus
indemnfying themselves, We suppose for their
losses by flight, and at the same time providing
fund by means of which to buy up the aid of suf
fcicnt number of the white non-slaveholders to
assist them in carrying out this grand scheme of
kidnapping and plumber.
In the presentation and advocacy Of this scheme
for reducing seventy-four thousand native-born
inhabitants Of Maryland to the choice between
exile and slavery, one Judge Stuart, who is
har Of ha 'pita 20.