# Talk:History of slavery in Indiana

—

Does Hoosier refer to a person who's surname is Hoosier or to Indiana natives in general (as in Hoosier)? It isn't really made clear in the text. 193.118.251.61 18:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

It's to refer to people from Indiana.  As there was nobody in the article with the surname of Hoosier, there should be little confusion.--Bedford 19:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

This article does not even mention Dennis Pennington or Jennings battle (anti-slavery) against Thomas Posey and his supporters (Pro-Slavery). It also says nothing about their tak over at the constitutional convention and how they stacked it against slavery, or Jennings campaign motto "No slavery in Indiana" and the he declared indiana "a free state". I will try to add that in somewhow.Cool10191 (talk) 14:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I think this is overly critical of Indiana, not very fair. Indiana had to do this because of rulings in federal court.I haven't removed it though, but it should be discussed. This reads as though the whole state of Indiana was pro-slavery. Even with the true end of slavery in the state, Hoosiers were supportive of the South’s right to hold slaves, expressed by the help Indiana gave to those who sought fugitive slaves. The Indiana General Assembly passed a law in 1824 that allowed for warrants to be given to slaveholders or their agents to directly go retrieve their slaves. A traveler from New York, Dr. Samuel Bernard Judah, described Vincennes in 1829 as having many blacks, making the observation of them being “generally poorly clad…poor miserable race”.Cool10191 (talk) 15:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I started this article by copying/pasting part of a paper I did in graduate school about the Southerness of Indiana.  So I was interested in showing parallels.--Bedford 18:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I think that is fine. I want to add info about the anit-slavery movement in Indiana, it was pretty strong. That would balance it better. I wil dig up some refences and add something in. Thanks Bedford!Cool10191 (talk) 23:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone object to this reference http://www.adena.com/adena/epler/e13.htm. It sites this as it's source: Indiana, A Redemption From Slavery, by J. P. Dunn, Jr, pages 355-359.
Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1888 
I am adding to the reference section. The page gives an interesting look at how slavery was viewed and contested in the early days of the territory. Feel free to remove it if you think it is not a good reference.Cool10191 (talk) 14:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Several books by Jacob Piatt Dunn are on Google Books; check to see if the original source is on there, instead of quoting that website.--Bedford 14:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
It's there, I will link the book directly. I haven't based anything I've added from that site. The book looks interesting, i will try to browse it later for anything interesting to add. Thanks BedfordCool10191 (talk) 17:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I would like to do a fairly substantial re-write of the article. While it does contain alot of useful information I think it still has somewhat of a baised tone. Mainly that it does not give much information on the anti-slavery movement within the state or much credit to them for actually winning the slavery debate. Here are some points I would like to integrate into the artcle, it may take a me little research but I will try to do it later today:
1. I want to make it clear that the early Territory government was appointed by the federal governemtn, who at the time was dominated by southerners, (Washington, Jefferson, etc ) But as time changed and norterners came to power (Madison, Adams) that it co-incides with defeat of slavery in the state. 
2. also worth mentining, in correletion with point 1, the govorner was appointed by the president until 1816, and was always pro slavery, (harrison and posey). They in turn appointed the state legislature up until 1805. In 1805 the lower house of the legislature was elected and only one of them, Davis Floyd was anti-slavery. Then in 1809 the people where allowed to elect the entire legislature and then the anti slavery won overwhelmingly. They passed laws outlawing slavery and ind. servitude. So the facts bear out that the "establishment" was pro-slavery, but when the people were permitted to elect their government it swung strongly against slavery. 
3. I think it would be good to more accuratly and fully explain the early debate on slavery in the state. How Harrison tried to force it on the state with the appointed legislature in 1803. Then the springfield meeting of the anit-slavery party and how theyformed a plan to combat the slavery party. How the people went around Harrison in 1805 and overruled his attempt to get slavery. Then their ongoing battle - Jennings's went to congress to hurry statehood so they could be rid of the appointed governers. Pennington and his part took the state legislature and battled back against Harrison and by the time posey had come the legislature was running the state - Posey was so disliked becasuse of his pro-slavery positions that he was supposedly heckled out of Corydon by Pennington. Then bring this right on down the line to pennington getting the position of census enumerator and spreading anti-slavery propeganada statewide the year before the consitionial convention. Then at the convention how it was stacked with anti-slavery men. and finally their crowning truimph in the consitution: they made it unconsitional to remove the clause that banned slavery. Effectivly they prevented slavery from ever entering teh state. 
4. Then i would tie in how after election Jennings was forced to stop runaway slaves by federal law after the incident with pennington and the slave stealing in 1819.
5. finally tie that into the larger nationwide slavery struggle - Indiana ultimatly aligned with the north.. ec. the rest is history
 Charles Edward 16:02, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

OK! I finally got around to working on the article. I added in the points I wanted to. I would like to remove some information that was already in the article and reword things  a bit. I may go ahead and do that now.  Charles Edward 17:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
OK I did it. Also in my research I found som eof my dates where wrong i nmy above comments. The correct dates are in the article. Charles Edward 17:55, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I thought of another point to incorporate into the artcle which i did slightly: The population was around 3,000 when all the pro-slavery stuff was going on. But about 5 years later the population had increased to near 20,000 and slavery began to be seen in a bad light in the territory. The early establishment was certainyl pro-slavery, but the larger influx of settlers during the first two decades turned the tables and swelled the anti-slavery party's ranks. Charles Edward 14:45, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Some suggested corrections/expansion of article. I don't know how to add this as a separate post, I apologize if this is the wrong way to do it.:

Very illuminating article - among other things, I had no idea Jefferson was machinating against the spread of slavery early on. However, some errors in the initial notes regarding the rewrite that may have already been corrected in the article. I don't know how to do this, but wanted to bring it to people's attention:

1) James Madison was not a northerner, but a Virginian and a slave-holder. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Madison>.
2) I don't think it's accurate to correlate the abolition of slavery in Indiana to a shift in power in the presidency and US politics in general from south to north. Abolitionists rose to power in Indiana  during a period dominated by Virginians on the national level. Presidents Washington 1789-1797, Jefferson 1801-1809, Madison 1809-1817, and Monroe 1817-1825 were all slaveholders from Virginia. John Adams 1791-1801, was the only northerner and non-slave-owner in the office during the first 36 years of the presidency. Indiana achieved statehood and legally abolished slavery well before the end of that time. The next northerner to take the presidency, John Quincy Adams, was in 1827, after the battle in Indiana had already been won by the abolitionists. I think the voluntary emancipation of most slaves in Indiana in compliance with the law between 1816-1820, and the enforcement of the law by the state for almost all of the remainder shortly after 1820, speaks to local political efforts and personal beliefs more than to trends in national politics. <All the information on the presidents outside of Lincoln are from their Wikipedia pages>
4) The presidency and national politics were by no means dominated by anti-slavery northerners after John Quincy Adams' term. The debate and conflict was intense, and if anything, the presidency was more for than against slavery. Andrew Jackson, 1829-37, was a wealthy Tennessee slave-holder. Martin Van Buren, 1837-1841, was from New York, but growing up, his family had slaves, and he took a clear stand against abolition on taking office. William Henry Harrison took office in 1841, and as your article points out, aggressively promoted slavery. Zachary Taylor was a Louisiana slave-holder. Pierce and Buchanan, according to their wikipedia articles, were considered "doughfaces" - northerners with southern sympathies; Democrats who tried to maintain the union by acquiescing to slavery interests, and who supported laws that encouraged it, such as the Kansas-Nebraska act. <All the information on the presidents outside of Lincoln are from their Wikipedia pages>
The Dred Scott case, the runaway slave act, and other pro-slavery laws on the national and state level occurred during this time, and actually tightened the grip of slavery during this time. Even free people of color lost freedoms during the antebellum period. <See Paul Heinegg's freeafricanamericans website and books: http://books.google.com/books?id=JcF6E75ZAeUC&pg=PR7&lpg=PR7&dq=paul+heinegg+free+people+of+color&source=bl&ots=hQl0HbLHz1&sig=QK6PZsurvJFe0KQtzUX0QYWA0nQ&hl=en&sa=X&ei=wzMKUeXgBoe6iwLckICAAg&ved=0CEIQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=paul%20heinegg%20free%20people%20of%20color&f=false, http://www.freeafricanamericans.com/> But the South was not so unified in support of slavery as we tend to think; even during the civil war, there was open resistance to secession and slavery. <See the "Renegade South" website: http://renegadesouth.wordpress.com/2011/11/10/free-people-of-color-in-old-virginia-the-morris-family-of-gloucester-county-a-case-study/, http://renegadesouth.wordpress.com/book-in-progress-southern-communities-at-war/>. 
Here is a map illustrating the spread of legalized slavery across the country from 1844 to the onset of the civil war:  <http://www.mrlincolnandfreedom.org/map/1844.html>. 
3) The statements regarding the effect of living in Indiana on Lincoln's strong anti-slavery beliefs are misleading or disputable. The article gave me the impression that it was the slavery he was exposed to in Indiana that formed this conviction. However, he was exposed to slavery during his early life in Kentucky, and his parents' strong anti-slavery convictions were surely an important influence. <http://www.nps.gov/abli/planyourvisit/boyhood-home.htm>  And while the time period referenced for the  crystallization of his convictions may be right, according to some it was what he saw on his trips to New Orleans while working on a flat boat that formed his intense personal commitment. <http://www.mrlincolnandfreedom.org/inside.asp?ID=5&subjectID=2>. According to that web page, even Lincoln courted slave-holding interests in Kentucky and made promises not to impose emancipation if the state would remain in the union. Kentucky politicians and slave-holders were outraged when Lincoln issued the emancipation proclamation after the war started.
Just some suggestions, some perhaps beyond the scope of this article.m.m (talk) 09:38, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

You might want to mention Harrison Spring in your the article.--Bedford 13:56, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah that's a good idea. Did they use slave labor there? (I would bet he did). That must be documented somewhere, i will try to research it. Congrats on your adminship! Charles Edward 14:48, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
Thanks.  I would love to expand that article into something DYK worthy.--Bedford 16:21, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
I have a book somewhere that is really old about the history of harrison county. Probably in some box in the back of libarary. I bet there is some info in there on the spring.  I also have a book on W H Harrison too, there must be at least a mention. I will see what I can dig up. I had looked at that article awhile ago, its interesting! Charles Edward 16:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The internet inline citations used in this article are improperly formatted and this problem may hinder a GA nomination. Internet citations require at the very least information on the  title, publisher and last access date of any webpages used. If the source is a news article then the date of publication and the author are also important. This information is useful because it allows a reader to a) rapidly identify a source's origin b) ascertain the reliability of that source and c) find other copies of the source should the website that hosts it become unavaliable for any reason. It may also in some circumstances aid in determining the existance or status of potential copyright infringments. Finally, it looks much tidier, making the article appear more professional. There are various ways in which this information can be represented in the citation, listed at length at Wikipedia:Citing sources. The simplest way of doing this is in the following format:
<ref>{{cite web|(insert URL)|title=|publisher=|work=|date=|author=|accessdate=}}</ref> 
As an example:

<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.discovery.org/a/3859|title=Avoiding a Thirty Years War|publisher=www.discovery.org|work=[[The Washington Post]]|date=2006-12-21|author=Richard W. Rahn|accessdate=2008-05-25}}</ref>
which looks like:

Richard W. Rahn (2006-12-21). "Avoiding a Thirty Years War". The Washington Post. www.discovery.org. Retrieved 2008-05-25.
If any information is unknown then simply omit it, but title, publisher and last access dates are always required. I strongly recommend that all internet inline references in this article be formatted properly before this article undergoes GA review, and indeed this is something that a reviewer should insist you do before promoting your article. If you have any further questions please contact me and as mentioned above, more information on this issue can be found at Wikipedia:Citing sources. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 17:12, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I have been meaning to do that. I will go through and format them all this afternoon.  Charles Edward 17:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:History of slavery in Indiana/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for criteria)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose):  b (MoS): 
I have performed a copyedit; there was nothing else than small typos. Also see comments on images.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR): 
The partial reorganizing of the references is in my eyes an attempt to make it easier accessible, and your way of doing it is not wrong; I just find it cluttering to not put all the book references in one place and the notes in another.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 
There is one major concern I have—this article is entirely about the political situation on slavery. There should at least be one section on the slaves, what the nature of their duties were, their impact on the economy and other social aspects about them. At the moment there is hardly any mention about slaves in the entire article, just politicians who have opinions on the matter. This is of course covered in other articles, so a single section with a {{main}} will by far suffice (slavery was after all similar in Indiana to other states).
 Done
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars etc.: 

It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
MoS indicates that forcing sizes on images should be avoided unless utterly necessary. If you can find an even better way to display the two bottom images, please do so, but remember text is not allowed to be squeezed between the two.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
All in all an impressive article. I am placing on hold due to the one matter of coverage; fix that and I will be more than happy to pass. Arsenikk (talk) 16:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your review! I will address the image issue and reorganize the references. In regard the comments on broad, I have a good source on the activities of the slaves and I should be able to put something like that together this afternoon.  Charles Edward 17:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I've added the section, and it appears you have already adjusted the references. I have also added a paragraph between the two conflicting images, and that should hopefully also resolve that issue.  Charles Edward 21:03, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Great; simple and elegant, yet dauntingly accurate. Congratulations with writing a good article, and thank you for your quality contributions to Wikipedia. Arsenikk (talk) 10:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The Polly Supreme Court case was argued by an Indiana lawyer/judge named Amory Kinney, who together with his abolitionist brother-in-law John Osborn wreaked havoc on the pro-slavery crowd in Knox County and neighboring counties after moving to Indiana from upstate New York circa 1819.
Kinney proceeded from Polly to represent many more slaves in court and usually obtaining their freedom.  The most successful freed slave is practically unknown to Hoosier historians.  He was Jacob Hawkins, whom Kinney helped sue for freedom.  Hawkins is sometimes mentioned (in The Negro in Indiana and a recent bio of William Henry Harrison) as the first slave on the books who "signed up" to be an indentured servant for a period not to exceed ninety years, in 1805.  After obtaining his freedom he proceeded to amass a thousand acres of well-tended farmland & play a key role in the local development of the Wabash-Erie Canal.  Hawkins' son and he also helped develop rail and coalmining industries through their holdings in Southern Indiana.  Jake Hawkins lived long enough to see Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation passed in 1863.
Am writing this today off the top of my head but can document/footnote the Kinney/Hawkins story.  Kinney and Osborn have great tales to tell, too -- Osborn started Indiana's first outright abolitionist newspaper up near Terre Haute.  Don't you, my fellow Wiki-historians, believe this earliest of chapters of slavery in Indiana should be included in the article?  Thanks.Keith Ellis (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

i agree, we should add a mention. It might be more appropriate in the Polly v. Lasselle article though. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 16:58, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

When were voting rights of blacks in Indiana established?
Musicwriter (talk) 02:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I would assume with the 15th amendment... AnonMoos (talk) 02:46, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
That is right. There was a prior attempt to grant the right in 1851, but it failed. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 15:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I am intrigued to know what documentation exists for the proposition Grouseland was built by slave labor.  The bulding was built by William Lindsay (a free white man).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.90.114.191 (talk) 23:22, 5 September 2011 (UTC) 

I noticed in the article itself that the "edit" tabs for each section have a different appearance (i.e. bigger, bolder, and not in brackets) than usual.  Anybody know why or how to fix? Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 19:06, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on History of slavery in Indiana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070822165604/http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/collections/stats/histcensus/php/newlong.php to http://fisher.lib.virginia.edu/collections/stats/histcensus/php/newlong.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150423190154/http://www.ait.net/products/mary_bateman_clark/ to http://www.ait.net/products/mary_bateman_clark/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:35, 5 November 2017 (UTC)