Back to Town Characters

William Camp Gildersleeve was born December 6, 1795 in Midway, Liberty Co., Georgia, the son of Cyrus Gildersleeve, pastor of the Midway Congregational Church, and Mary Camp.

At about age 16, his father moved the family back to New Jersey, escaping the miasma and fevers of the swampy and mosquito infested land which had weakened them.

In about 1821, Gildersleeve moved to Wilkes-Barre where his father was appointed pastor of the Presbyterian church.

In the late 1830's Gildersleeve, an abolitionist, provided testimony as to his first hand observations of slavery near his boyhood home in Georgia. Excerpts of his testimony were published By the American Anti-Slavery Society in 1839 in a volume entitled American Slavery As It Is, Testimony of a Thousand Witnesses by Theodore Dwight Weld, 1803-1895.

About the Quantity Of Food: "The weekly allowance to grown slaves on this plantation, where I was best acquainted, was one peck of corn."

Regarding Labor: "Overworked I know they are."

Hours Of Labor And Rest: "It was customary for the overseers to call out the gangs long before day, say three o'clock, in the winter, while dressing out the crops; such work as could be done by fire light was provided."

"The corn is ground in a handmill by the slave after his task is done--generally there is but one mill on a plantation, and as but one can grind at a time, the mill is going sometimes very late at night."

On Clothing: "It is an everyday sight to see women as well as men, with no other covering than a few filthy rags fastened above the hips, reaching midway to the ankles. I never knew any kind of covering for the head given. Children of both sexes, from infancy to ten years are seen in companies on the plantations, in a state of perfect nudity. This was so common that the most refined and delicate beheld them unmoved."

Their Dwellings: "Their huts were generally put up without a nail, frequently without floors, and with a single apartment."

Acts of Cruelity: "Acts of cruelty, without number, fell under my observation while I lived in Georgia. I will mention but one. A slave of a Mr. Pinkney, on his way with a wagon to Savannah, 'camped' for the night by the road side. That night, the nearest hen-roost was robbed. On his return, the hen-roost was again visited, and the fowl counted one less in the morning. The oldest son, with some attendants made search, and came upon the poor fellow, in the act of dressing his spoil. He was too nimble for them, and made his retreat good into a dense swamp. When much effort to start him from his hiding place had proved unsuccessful, it was resolved to lay an ambush for him, some distance ahead. The wagon, meantime, was in charge of a lad, who accompanied the teamster as an assistant. The little boy lay still till nearly night, (in the hope probably that the teamster would return,) when he started with his wagon. After travelling some distance, the lost one made his appearance, when the ambush sprang upon him. The poor fellow was conducted back to the plantation. He expected little mercy. He begged for himself, in the most supplicating manner, 'pray massa give me 100 lashes and let me go.' He was then tied by the hands, to a limb of a large mulberry tree, which grew in the yard, so that his feet were raised a few inches from the ground, while a sharpened stick was driven underneath, that he might rest his weight on it, or swing by his hands. In this condition 100 lashes were laid on his bare body. I stood by and witnessed the whole, without as I recollect, feeling the least compassion. So hardening is the influence of slavery, that it very much destroys feeling for the slave."



A Wilkes-Barre Abolitionist
By Miss Narria Wedlock
(Read at the anniversary of the Emancipation Proclamation

Mr. William C. Gildersleeve was born in Midway, Liberty County, Georgia, in 1795. His father (Cyrus Gildersleeve) was a slave holder.

He believed he knew all about the institution of slavery from personal observation. He had seen men, women and children bought and sold in front of his father's church, as cattle are bought and sold.

He left Georgia when a young man, married in New Jersey and settled in Wilkes Barre as a merchant about 1831.

He was known in this part of the State as an uncompromising anti-slavery man. In his house the slaves fleeing from the South towards Canada found a shelter and substantial help. The result was he became the target for pro-slavery men of all parties. He was branded as a black abolitionist, and as such he was known to slave holders who frequently visited Wilkes-Barre in pursuit of their property. The men and women of the present generation can scarcely understand the earnest and bitter feeling engendered by the discussion of the subject of slavery at that time. The riding of a quiet, law abiding citizen on a rail for daring to speak his views on the subject was considered comparatively a small matter.

In January of 1837 the Rev. John Cross visited Wilkes-Barre and spent the Sabbath. He was entertained by the family of Mr. Gildersleeve. On Monday succeeding the Sabbath it was proposed that he should lecture in the court house, but the commissioners refused to give the court house for an anti-slavery lecture. Refused access to any of the churches, denied the use of any of the common places of holding public meetings, Mr. Gildersleeve opened his own dwelling for the discussion of the great and important question of slavery. While Mr. Cross was speaking to a few of the neighbors and friends who had gathered to hear him a mob surrounded the house and pressed their way into the room where Mr. Cross was speaking, and threatened him with violence if he did not at once desist. They also attempted to exact from him a pledge that he would leave town inside of two hours. Baffled in all their efforts to procure such a pledge, and finding that nothing could be effected unless they proceeded to open violence, they at length withdrew, manifesting their patriotism by the destruction of gates, fences, shrubbery, etc. Even the pictures on the walls of Mr. Gildersleeve's parlor that were offensive to them they tore down and trampled under foot.

The mobbing of Mr. Gildersleeve took place in the spring of 1839. The cause of this riot was an attempt on the part of Mr. Burleigh (who was a prominent abolitionist and anti-slavery lecturer) to address the people of Wilkes-Barre on the subject of slavery. Mr. Gildersleeve entertained him at his house and attempted to protect him. The rioters surrounded Mr. Gildersleeve's house, forced open the doors and were determined to get their hands on Mr. Burleigh, but he made his escape to the house of Mr. Dana, an abolitionist, in the southern part of the town, intending as soon as possible to leave town. It was in the days of stages and the only stage office here was at the Gilchrist hotel on River Street. In this hotel Mr. Burleigh found shelter until the stage started. In the meantime preparations were being made to punish Mr. Gildersleeve. He received a message that Mr. Burleigh wished to see him at the hotel. As soon as he arrived at the hotel the rioters seized him, and having procured a pail of black dye they dashed a portion of it into his face. They then took him and placed him on a rail and carried him about forty rods to their headquarters. The mob was there interrupted by his daughter who clung to him with a tenacity which evinced her resolutions to rescue or suffer with him. About this time a man of influence in the place interfered, so he escaped without any serious injuries to his person.

This is only one of the many incidents that Mr. Gildersleeve suffered in behalf of the colored race. He made no secret of his intense hostility to slavery in all its forms. Everybody knew him to be an abolitionist of the strictest sect. He not only tried to free the colored race, but he organized a Sabbath school in which he took a most active part, that they might be educated and have their minds developed. In fact he was a great friend to the colored race, a friend that should be highly appreciated and his kindness never forgotten. He died in Wilkes-Barre Oct. 7, 1871. (The Historical Record - 1888)


Mr. Gildersleeve and the Mob.
I was much interested in reading the essay of Miss Wedlock in your weekly of February 24. Reference to old-time occurrences of which I was an eyewitness brings them vividly to mind. I well recollect the occasion of Mr. Gildersleeve's ride on the rail to which the writer of the essay refers, as well as the previous experience he had at the time of Rev. Mr. Cross' visit to Wilkes-Barre in 1837.

Both of these occurrences actually took place as depicted, though language is not sufficient to fully express the facts. I fear if they could be adequately portrayed on paper either with pen or brush, there would be few found who would credit them.

Miss Wedlock, has of course, related the circumstances as she received them from others, and is not to be blamed for some inaccuracies in her essay.
Mr. Burleigh was not interfered with at Mr. Gildersleeve's house during the day except by the hooting of some boys, as it had been announced that he would speak at the court house that evening, but the men of the town who favored suppression of free speech were busy making preparations to give the abolition orator and poet a warm reception on the occasion.

The meeting was held in the upper room of the old frame court house and at an early hour all the available space was occupied by the mob. Mr. Burleigh, accompanied by Mr. Gildersleeve, Frank Dana and a few others, (there were but few of that persuasion,) with difficulty forced their way to the speaker's stand.
Without any introduction the orator essayed to speak. He had uttered but a few sentences, when at a given signal the uproar commenced. Cries of "hustle him out, hustle him out," resounded from all parts of the room, and soon a rush was made for the little coterie of abolitionists who had braved the fury of the mob by venturing into their presence.

To describe the scene, as I have said, is beyond the power of tongue or pen, or painter's pencil. I was in the rear end of the room, and near the head of the winding, rickety stairway, and made my escape with all speed to the street. The crowd rushed down and out in the greatest possible confusion, and soon I observed Mr. Burleigh emerge leaning on the arm of Frank Dana followed by a crowd of men and boys. They moved hurriedly down Main Street, unmolested save by a terrific hooting and howling, and so on until they reached Mr. Dana's house in Woodville.

The next day Mr. Burleigh hurriedly left the town, but the mob, maddened by his escape, determined to wreak their vengeance on the inoffensive man who had dared to invite his presence in Wilkes-Barre. A scantling was prepared on one end of which an ox's horns, and on the other a tail of the same animal, were nailed. A crowd of men carrying the "horse," assembled at Mr. Gildersleeve's residence, and a few of them entered the house and brought him out in their arms and placed him in position. He offered no resistance. His countenance was as placid as a summer morning, and he seemed to enjoy the martyrdom. There was no other indignity offered to his person, as the essayist relates. His mild, unresisting demeanor seemed to completely disarm those who had any such intention. He was quietly ridden to the Phoenix Hotel, there rested a few moments, and was returned in the same manner to his home.

I well remember the profound depths to which the community was stirred on the occasion, but there was none brave enough to interfere and denounce the furious mob. Indeed, some leading citizens partially, at least, justified the proceeding.
C. E. Lathrop.
Carbondale, March 3, 1888
(The Historical Record - 1888)


The Gildersleeve Episode
There appeared in a recent issue of your paper a communication from C. E. Lathrop, giving a truthful account, as he understood the facts, of the outrage perpetrated upon the person of W. C. Gildersleeve, in the year 1837. Mr. Lathrop says: "A crowd of men carrying the 'horse' assembled at Mr. Gildersleeve's residence, and a few of them entered the house and brought him put in their arms and placed him in position."

Mr. Lathrop may or may not have been present on that occasion, but if he was he has forgotten just what did occur. There are still living eye witnesses, who were present and saw the entire performance. The veteran catchpole, J. F. Chollet, is one, C. E. Butler, another, and all, so far as I know, agree that the disgraceful procession started from the old Phoenix, now Wyoming Valley Hotel, and proceeded up Market, turning up Franklin Street, as it was on that street Mr. Gildersleeve lived, in the house now owned by B. G. Carpenter. When the crowd had arrived about opposite the Harvey buildings it was met by Andrew Beaumont, who peremptorily demanded that they should desist from their hellish work. The men engaged in bearing the rail seemed cowed by the determined actions of Mr. Beaumont, and sullenly set the sufferer down, and the howling, yelling band of followers slunk away, leaving Mr. Gildersleeve in the middle of the street.

While coming up Market Street, Mr. Gildersleeve appealed to his tormentors to release him. as the seat he was occupying was not only humiliating, but torturing his person as well, while the crowd of yelling hoodlums were jeering at his every effort to find a softer spot on the rail.

Tom Drake, the poet laureate of the "Muggletonians," composed an epic commemorative of their grand achievement. The Old Phoenix was called in Muuggletonian parlance the Eagle's Eye, and the old Dennis Hotel, corner of Market and Franklin, was known as "Rotgut Hall." Only two lines of this grand poetic effusion occur to me at this time. In allusion to Mr. Gildersleeve's efforts to free himself from his tormentors, Tom wrote:

"Twixt Eagle's Eye and Rotgut Hall
He lost his love of railing."

In order to get their victim within their power the conspirators, who entertained such a deadly hate against abolitionists, sent word to Mr. Gildersleeve that a Mr. Camp was at the hotel and desired to have a talk with him, so he went down there and fell into the trap set for him.

Another statement of Mr. Lathrop's is slightly at variance with the exact facts in the case. In alluding to the "horse," he says there was affixed at one end a pair of horns and at the other a tail. This is certainly a mistake, as the one Mr. Gildersleeve was forced to mount was a plain 3x4 inch hemlock scantling without any adornments. But there was just such a steed prepared as be describes; that was intended for use on another and more important occasion.

Mr. Gildersleeve had the rioters bound over to answer at the next court of quarter seasons, and whether there was an indictment found or not I am unable to say. But on the morning on which the court met, Judge Jessup being on the bench, the "horse was found standing in front of the court house ready for mounting, and a crowd of excited men could be seen watching every movement of the machinery of justice. It may have been that the officers of the law were not overawed by these mysterious preparations, but certain it is that the case was never brought on for trial and there was no occasion for using the wooden steed otherwise than as above stated.

It may be supposed at this day, that it was only the rowdy element of our town that could so far forget what was expected of good citizens as to join in this most disgraceful proceeding; but such is not the fact. At that day it was regarded as rather meritorious than otherwise to persecute an abolitionist, and some of the actors in that scene stood high in the social scale of our town, and their descendants would no doubt blush to see their names in print as active participants on that occasion.
W. J.
(The Historical Record - 1888)


A Mob Rebuked by a Woman
Luzerne, March 18, 1888
I wish to correct a single paragraph of Corrector Lathrop's article, "Mr. Gildersleeve and the Mob," published to-day in the Record. He makes a mistake when he says, "but there was none brave enough to interfere and denounce the furious mob."

After leaving the Phoenix Hotel, when the mob reached the corner of Market and Franklin Streets, that noble woman, Mary Tracy, (afterwards Mrs. Charles A. Lane) rushed out of the old Sinton Store (then Sinton, Tracy it Co.), denounced and shamed the master spirits of the mob, till they were completely cowed, and ingloriously surrendered.
An Eye Witness
(The Historical Record - 1888)


The Gildersleeve Episode
In the winter of 1836-7 Washington J. Dennis, a Wilkes-Barre gentleman, kept a district school in Wayne County, where I was born. When I accompanied him to his home in the spring of 1837 he engaged me to run one of his Union canal boats from Wilkes- Barre to Philadelphia via the North Branch canal, the Union canal from Mlddletown to Reading and thence to Fairmount down the Schuylklll Slack Water Navigation Co.'s Works. I was made captain. (The Union Canal is carried up the mountain to Lebanon by the aid of nineteen locks in two miles and then the five mile level is boarded tight upon both sides to prevent leakage. The water feeding this level is pumped up out of Swatara creek.) Our boat was a covered one and we carried down staves, whisky, grain, butter, eggs and other produce and brought back store goods for Reddlng's store in Pittston and for Wilkes-Barre merchants. (Scranton was not thought of and even Providence had but a box or two on the manifest for the year, and these were sent to Harry Heermans. There was at that time no other way of bringing goods into the country only by the Delaware & Hudson canal and railroad to Carbondale. Heerman's kept the only store between Carbondale and Pittston).

At this time the North, not only in Congress, but out of it, was controlled wholly by the South. Southerners taught us to believe that without slavery the country would go to the devil at once. Nearly everybody believed it. The smooth words of Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun were law in the land in regard to slavery. The fugitive slave law had not been enacted, but every Northern man was told and taught that to catch a runaway "nigger" was a duty he owed his God and his country. The poor, sore-footed, hungry slave who sought liberty in flight, found only here and there a friend to give him aid, shelter and food. Those who did were called Abolitionists, in disdain. They were hooted and howled at almost as bad as the escaping slave and everywhere and time were treated with contempt. Not only this, but their families were ostracized from society. They had few, if any, associates.

A fugitive slave found his way to Wllkes-Barre and was directed to Montrose on his way to Canada. William C. Gildersleeve was a philanthropist and the great Abolitionist of Wilkes-Barre. He was a zealous, generous, warm-hearted man who thought that all men were born free and none should be slaves. These sound doctrines he owned in public, greatly to his prejudice In the Wilkes-Barre community. His convictions were strong and he defied public opinion. The people looked upon him as a public enemy and it needed but little incentive for a demonstration.

At about this time an incident In Wilkes-Barre hastened and intensified the Glldersleeve affair. At the Phoenix hotel, where the popular Gilchrist pampered to the Southerners, an escaped slave was employed as waiter. His former master, with two or three friends, dined here one day when the negro made his appearance to serve the guests. The master sprang for his former slave, who with a brave and friendly carving knife defended himself as he could and finally escaped running across the street and leaping into the Susquehanna river below the bridge and swimming vigorously across and escaped in spite of the pistol shots fired after him.

I landed my boat in the Wilkes-Barre basin one evening where but the single house of Mr. Brobst stood in 1837 and ventured up to the Public Square, where a great crowd of people were standing. In the then small, quiet town this thing was unusual, and I ventured to inquire what was going on. "Riding Gildersleeve on a rail" was the reply. He had been taken from his house, divested of all his clothing but his pantaloons, placed on an ordinary rough fence rail, supported by a man on each side and carried by four or five strong men. From his head to his pants he was covered with tar and feathers, and though uncomplaining, presented a picture of despair. He made no protest, answered no questions, uttered no sounds. From the court house he was carried to the Phoenix Hotel, where several Southern sympathizers looked on approvingly, then taken up River street to the old Redoubt, then turning to the right across Union street down by the residence of Andrew Beaumont, who lived in a three-story building on the corner. Beaumont was then the great Democratic chief of Luzerne county. He was father-in-law of Samuel P. Collings, one of the best and brightest newspaper editors in the State. When Beaumont saw these disgraceful proceedings going on, he harangued the crowd and tried to disperse it as did Anthony H. Emley, a private banker, and Edward Le Clerc, but succeeded indifferently. The excited throng carried Gildersleeve to his door on the inhospitable rail, admonished him to be careful in future and he vanished into his own house.

Though fifty-one years have passed, few are living who witnessed the transaction, but if any are remaining who participated In the affair they wish to blot the reminiscence out. No arrests were made because public opinion was averse to any conviction and any Jury would have brought in a verdict of "served him right."
H. Hollister. (from Historical Record, Vol. 8, 1899)


The Gildersleeve Episode
The Story As Told By His Daughters
A Period That Was Marked By Serious Political Disturbances
Since coming to Florida my attention has been called to an article that appeared In the Record in relation to the mob that occurred In Wllkes-Barre in 1839 and the experience of W. C. Gildersleeve in connection with the same, written by Dr. Holllster of Scran ton, a few years since; with the suggestion that, in the Interest of historical truth, some corrections should be made in the report of what the doctor saw in Wllkes-Barre sixty years ago.

The leading facts connected with this unpleasant episode in the history of Wllkes-Barre, fortunately, were made a matter of record at the time they occurred, by the Rev. Albert Post, who was ably conducting an anti-slavery paper In Montrose. Susquehanna County, Pa. A carefully preserved file of this paper of Dr. Post, to which I have had access, is in the possession of the family of the late Mr. John Fordham of Green Ridge.

Dr. Hollister was a young man in 1839, and he has reported to the best of his recollection what he saw. He is entirely correct as to the time the mob occurred and as to its character. There was aroused in his heart by what he saw of this disgraceful affair, a feeling of righteous indignation to which he often referred in very strong language in his advanced life. The trouble in the hotel of Mr. Gilchrlst, on the river bank, of which the doctor speaks, when an effort was made to capture a stalwart man who was a fugitive slave from Virginia, had no connection with the mob of 1839. It did not occur until after the enactment of the Fugitive Slave Law, eight or ten years after the mob. But It did actually occur. Just as the doctor has described it.

In the indignities heaped on Mr. Gildersleeve at the time of the mob, there was no use made of either tar or feathers, but before hoisting him onto the rail on which he was carried through the streets, there was thrown Into his face and over his clothes some black mixture, not unlike printer's ink.

The true animus of this mob was the same as that which prevailed in Boston when Wendell Phillips was mobbed—and in the country very generally when Lovejoy was murdered. It was very largely political. The two great political parties of the country— Whigs and Democrats—were controlled largely by the South; and the Abolitionists antagonized both these parties. They advocated principles that In the judgment of representative men of both the great political parties were subversive of the underlying principles of our government. As a result those who resorted to mob law on this occasion were of both political parties. Mr. Gildersleeve was not careful to conceal his anti-slavery views. And representative men of both parties, who had no sympathy with the mob, had as little sympathy with Abolitionists.

The daughters of Mr. Gildersleeve were school girls at the time of the mob, and I give their version of the matter, which covers the disturbance at the Court House, where the trouble commenced, the breaking into Mr. Gildersleeve's house to capture an anti-slavery lecturer, and the riding of him (Mr. Gildersleeve) on the rail.

This is In substance, what they say: "Father was a kind of Lloyd Garrison and Wendell Phillips and men of that way of thinking. Charles Burleigh, a prominent abolitionist and public lecturer, was being entertained at their house. He attempted to deliver a lecture in one of the rooms of the Court House on the 'Freedom of the Press.' The meeting was broken up by the Mobocratlc element, and Mr. Burleigh returned with their father to their house. The mob followed them, demanding that Mr. Burleigh leave the town Immediately. They forced their way Into the house, but did not succeed in capturing Mr. Burleigh. Mr. Francis Dana took him under his wing and gave notice to the crowd that if Mr. Gildersleeve would not fight, he would, and that he would take Mr. Burleigh to his house, and that he would shoot the first man who attempted to lay hands on him. The mob followed Mr. Dana and Mr. Burleigh as far as the fence around Mr. Dana's house, and then halted. They were not prepared to face the music of Mr. Dana's musket —and dispersed. This was in the afternoon. The meeting in court house was in the forenoon of the same day. The following day, when Mr. Burleigh was taken to the hotel, where he expected to take the stage for New York, the mob gathered again, with threats of violence and he (Mr. Burleigh) was concealed In a room upstairs. Then there came to Mr. Gildersleeve a letter professedly from Mr. Burleigh, telling him that he was a prisoner In the hotel, that he wished to see him at once, and that he surely would not desert his friend In trouble. This letter was a forgery. Mr. Burleigh had not asked to see Mr. Glldersleeve. The family suspected the forgery, and urged him not to leave the house. He had no fear of personal violence and went to the hotel and asked to see Mr. Burleigh. Mr. Gilchrist declined to grant his request. The trap was sprung. Mr. Glldersleeve was now In the power of the mob. He was taken Into a room where an attempt was made to exact from him a promise that he would not harbor Anti-Slavery lecturers or fugitive slaves, and that he would hold his peace on the subject of slavery. He declined to make any such promise. Then It was that they threw discolored water In his face and on his clothes, and lifted him on the rail and carried him up the street as far as Dennis's Hotel, now the Second National Bank, where they rested for the purpose, as they assured him, of administering to him 'a dose of liquor,' as his temperance views were as offensive to most of them as his Anti-Slavery views. It was while resting here that Mr. Beaumont addressed the crowd and earnestly entreated the men to desist In their disgraceful and disorderly conduct, and his family were made acquainted with the trouble. They (his family) Immediately rushed through the crowd led by an 'amazon-kitchen maid,' and were permitted to lead Mr. Gilder-sleeve to his home on Franklin street. He was not seriously hurt."

This is a brief epitome of the story of the Wilkes-Barre mob in 1839, without embellishment, by those who were in position to know its history. N. Q. Parke, Arlington, Florida, Feb. 28th, 1899. (from Historical Record, Vol. 8, 1899)


John Taylor Bennett's Version
Another man who witnessed the Gildersleeve affair in 1839 is alive and sends the Record some details—John Taylor Bennett of Egan, Moody County, South Dakota, He says he went to the court house with Frank Dana and rang the bell to bring the people to hear the man Burleigh from Philadelphia speak against slavery. Some of them were awful mad. Mr. Burleigh came in, accompanied by Mr. and Mrs. Gildersleeve and Mrs. Brower, (sister of the latter) and a few other women. The crowd would not allow Burleigh to speak and the women withdrew and went home, Burleigh going to the hotel.

Afterwards Glldersleeve was enticed there, on the lying plea that Burleigh wanted to see him. Having him in their power his enemies threw a pail of hatter's dye over him and rode him on a scantling. He afterwards had 40 or more of them arrested, they keeping out of Jail by giving bail. Before time for trial Judge Conyngham and Judge Bennett begged Gildersleeve to waive most of the charges and in the kindness of his heart he did so. I remember the year 1839 very well, as I built Dana's Academy that year. (from Historical Record, Vol. 8, 1899)


The Gildersleeve Outrage
Persons interested in the details of the riding on a rail of William C. Gildersleeve of this city in 1837 will find them In the Historical Record, Vol. 2, page 68. Evidently the statement that he received the added indignity of being tarred and feathered is a mistake. A pail of tar had been provided but it was not used. Mr. Gildersleeve was, however, treated to the indignity of having a pail of hatter's dye thrown over him.

As bearing on the item which appeared in the Record of Feb. 15, George H. Welles writes thus from Wyalusing:
"Mr. Gildersleeve was induced to go to the Phoenix Hotel under some pretence, and was then taken up by the young men and placed upon a scantling and carried to Market, thence out to Franklin and they turned up by the Dennis corner and had gone about 150 to 200 feet when they were met by Mrs. Gildersleeve and overtaken by the Hon. Andrew Beaumont, who caused the party to lower the rail and its rider. No violence was done to Mr. Gildersleeve. I saw the party as they turned Into Franklin, being just on my way from school. He was fully dressed and had not been tarred and feathered.

"As suit was begun against the rioting, the same young men added legs to the scantling with cow's horns on one end and a tall upon the other, and a place was smoothed as a saddle and rough leather stirrups added. A nail was driven at one place upon which they hung a tar bucket. It was understood at the time that this was to intimidate the prosecution in the case. It had that effect and the suit was discontinued.

"Andrew Beaumont occupied a store on the corner of Franklin and Market streets, and was thus in a position to be speedily advised of what was taking place. I do not believe that there was one young man among the rioters who would willingly have done a serious injury to Mr. Gildersleeve. What I saw I stated in the Record some years since.

I knew all of the young men engaged at the time, but I think It best to omit the names.

I think _______ was the leader, as he was the largest and most athletic looking man among them. The horse, or cow, was trimmed in Isaac Bowman's leather finishing yard, where all things needful were handy. I attended school at the time in the old brick store building on Main street, just below the Square, second story. The leader afterwards apologized to Mr. Gildersleeve and asked his pardon. George H. Welles. (from Historical Record, Vol. 8, 1899)



Mr. Lathrop's Recollection
You publish in the issue of Feb. 15, 1899, an article from the pen of the late Dr. Holllster, on the Glldersleeve Episode." The writer was singularly mixed up in his references to the two events which occurred in Wllkes-Barre nearly twenty years apart He confounds the two which had no connection with each other and grew out of totally dissimilar causes. The first event (the riding on a rail) occurred, as he states, in the fall of 1837, and the other, (the attempted capture of a fugitive slave) in 1855.

The doctor wrote of the "great crowd of people standing in the Public Square," which was occasioned by the attempted delivery of an address on the abolition of slavery, by one Burleigh, a noted abolition orator of that day. I was one of the crowded audience (then about 11 years old) who assembled in the upper room of the old courthouse, most of whom were there to prevent any speech being made. Soon after the lecturer had commenced he was hooted down, and under the cry "hustle him out," was forced down the stairs, and with a few of his sympathizers made his way to the home of Frank Dana In South Wllkes-Barre. The next day he left the place, and the fury of the mob was turned against Mr. Gildersleeve.
The other event occurred at comparatively recent date and, no doubt, there are many of your readers who remember it. One thing which makes it evident that the doctor confounds the two events is that In 1837 William H. Alexander kept the old "Phoenix," while Gllchrist was proprietor in 1855.

Among the series of articles mentioned as "published In the Record some years ago" will be found one contributed by me which goes more fully Into the circumstances of the occasion.

The gentleman spoken of as a teacher In Wayne County was Weldon (not Washington) J. Dennis. C. E. L. (from Historical Record, Vol. 8, 1899)



Edith Brower described her great uncle Gildersleeve in Little Old Wilkes-Barre As I Knew It:

" Terribly strong was he in his opinions and feelings, singularly calm in speaking them out, rarely raising his voice, hardly ever severe in tone. He never lost his “darkey” accent or his inability to pronounce certain sounds. It was dis and dese and dem and dat with him always.

Early in 1800 he came to the North from Georgia. His father, Cyrus Gildersleeve, when the entire country held pro-slavery views, rebelling by nature against the hideous institution, long before the Emancipation Proclamation freed all his slaves and arrived here a comparatively poor man.

Wilkes-Barré, reactionary from the start, nothing if not conservative, looked upon, William Camp Gildersleeve, son of such a man as Cyrus, as a dangerous and impious radical. A man of the strictest piety, he was reckoned unfaithful to his religion, for did not the Holy Scriptures uphold slavery? He was a “Red Republican”. So were the Browers Red Republicans. These two families were the only ones in town that held the new views, and were consequently somewhat under the ban socially. I never felt this, but the rest of the family had felt it, even up to the very breaking out of the war.

With few exceptions, all the clergymen in the United States preached pro-slavery. Dr. Dorrance preached it. The pulpit still arrogated authority, the people still yielded it a certain submission. But people and pulpit together later experienced a sudden and violent change...

Uncle Gildersleeve suffered a very definite and material form of martyrdom for his opinions. An anti-slavery lecturer who came here was entertained by him, in consequence of which act he was ridden on a rail, though fortunately escaping the additional torture of tar and feathers.

For many years his place was a station of the “Underground Railway”. I used to hear how, if one went to his house early enough in the morning, his kitchen would often be found full of wretched hunted negroes, ragged, filthy, panic-stricken, yet drawing breath freely in this temporary refuge. All were fed and in various ways cared for, then hidden in cellars, barns, corn-cribs, smoke-house, or other buildings, to remain concealed until the following night, when one of Uncle Gildersleeve’s big teams would carry them on their way to the nearest station—Tunkhannock."


October 13, 1853
The Wilkesbarre Slave Case
Arrest of the Deputy Slave Catchers
On Tuesday afternoon of last week, after our form was made up, a warrant issued by a magistrate of Wilkebarre, on the oath of Mr. William C. Gildersleeve, a highly respectable citizen of that borough, was served by the High Constable of Wilkesbarre, upon John Jenkins and James Creisson, two of Commissioner Ingraham's slave catching deputies, charging them with a riot, and an assault and battery on Bill Thomas, an alleged fugitive slave with an intent to kill him. The warrant also included the name of George Wynkoop, but Mr. Wynkoop being absent from the city, it was not served upon him. Soon after their arrest, upon petition of certain friends of these deputies, Judge Grier granted a writ of habeus corpus to bring the High Constable and his prisoners before the U. S. circuit Court, and on Wednesday morning the case came up before Judge Grier. The Bulletin, which will not be suspected of any wish to represent the Judge's conduct in an unfavorable light, thus reports the proceedings of the Court:

Mr. Jackson, for the High Constable of Wilkesbarre, read his answer to the Court, in which he admits that he held the Deputy Marshal in custody, but alleged that he did so by legal authority, having arrested them on a warrant issued by Gilbert Burrows, a magistrate of Wilkesbarre, on the action of William C. Gildersleeve, a citizen of Wilkesbarre.

Judge Grier, sternly: Who is William C. Gildersleeve?

Marshal Wynkoop: Your honor, he is an abolitionist of Wilkesbarre.

Mr. Jackson: He is a respectable storekeeper of that borough.

Judge Grier: Was the assault and battery committed on him?

District Attorney Ashmead: No, sir; he did not allege it.

Judge Grier: Oh! Oh!

District Attorney Ashmead said he would now read the petition for the habeas corpus...

Judge Grier: I take it for granted that the facts set forth in the petition are true., and I shall rely upon them, unless they are shown to be false.

Mr. Brown: We rely upon the warrant of the magistrate, issued upon the oath of a citizen.

Judge Grier: If you deny what is set forth in the petition, I will hear the facts in the case. I will not have the officers of the United States harassed at every step in the performance of their duties by every petty magistrate who chooses to harass them, or by any unprincipled interloper who chooses to make complaints against them, for I know something of the man who makes the complaint. The laws of the United States arte binding against me, and I will not take the warrant issued in this case as sufficient to hold these officers...


Judge Grier: If this man Gildersleeve fails to make out the facts set forth in the warrant of arrest, I will request the Prosecuting Attorney of Luzerne County to prosecute him for perjury. I know that the United States have a limited authority; but where they have it, it is clear, undoubted and conclusive, that theirs is the sovereign authority. If any tuppenny magistrate, or unprincipled interloper can come in, and cause to be arrested, the officers of the United States, whenever they please, it is a sad state of affairs. After a man against whom the U. S. warrant was issues has run away, some fellow intervenes and runs to a State Judge for his interference, and has the U. S. officers arrested. There was a case recently of this kind and to that I now allude. If habeas corpuses are to be taken out after that manner, I will have an indictment sent to the U. S. Grand Jury against the person who applies for the writ, to see whether the United States officers are to be arrested and harassed, whenever they attempt to serve a process of the United States. I speak of what is daily done to thwart the United States in the exercise of her lawful authority. I will see that my officers are protected. When will you be ready with your proofs in this matter, Mr. Brown?

Mr. Brown: This day one week.

Judge Grier: Then upon that day I will hear your proof.

The case then went over until that time.
(Pennsylvania Freeman - Newspaper Article)


November 10, 1853
From the Daily Register.
Another Chapter in the Wilkesbarre Affair
Judge Grier threatens to hang Mr. Gildersleeve!!
Letter from Mr. Gildersleeve, showing sundry reasons against the Execution

To The Hon. Judge Grier, of the Supreme Court of the United States

Sir:
In your remarks from the Bench, on the hearing of the Habeas Corpus sued out of the Circuit Court over which you preside, by John Jenkins and others, and also in your printed opinion, you have taken liberties with my name, no less inconsistent with the dignity of your official station, than with truth and justice. The insinuation, equivalent as a positive assertion, that I am an "unprincipled interloper," does not amount to proof, although proceeding from the lips of a Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States.

An affidavit was made upon me, upon which a warrant was issues for the arrest of certain slave catchers. You were pleased to remark " If this man fails to make out the facts set forth in the warrant of arrest, I will request the prosecuting attorney of Luzerne County t prosecute him for PERJURY." Perhaps it would still more aid and comfort felons if you would request all prosecuting attorneys to prosecute all Grand Jurors for perjury, whenever the facts they had sworn to were disproved on trial; in other words, whenever a person indicted is acquitted on trial, send the Jurors who indicted him to the State Prison for perjury!

I made an affidavit stating facts according to the best of my knowledge and belief, and which was strictly and literally true. I informed the magistrate that I had not been an eye witness of the facts stated. Hence there was no fraud practiced or attempted.

In your usual gentlemanly style you observed, " I know something of the man who made this complaint." If you knew aught against my veracity or integrity you kept it to yourself. Perhaps you may know something of me. You may know that I hate oppression. That I believe in the doctrine of the Declaration of Independence. That I do not believe in the power of the United States Government, nor in the power of the combined governments of the world, rightfully to chattlelize a single human being. Moreover that I look upon the fugitive slave act as unconstitutional, a foul disgrace to our country, and that I loathe it from my very soul; while you take pride in enforcing it. In your zeal for this despicable act, you thought to intimidate me by sending me a threat some two years since that if you could ever get me before you, you would hand me. See the affidavit of Mr. Butler, annexed. The fear of you and your threatened halter has not yet prevented me from expressing my opinions. You have thought proper to punish my audacity by insulting me from the bench. You are indignant at the interference of a tuppenny state magistrate with United States officers. It maybe humiliating to you, but such is the system of our Government, that a tuppenny Pennsylvania magistrate ha sa perfect right to order the arrest not only of a deputy Marshal, but a Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, on a criminal charge. Hence it is no matter os surprise that a justice of the peace should order the arrest of official slave catchers, when they assume the part of brutal and murderous assailants. a Justice of the peace may appear in the view of a Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States. a " tuppenny magistrate", but in the estimation of honorable, virtuous men, the office of a Justice is infinitely more honorable than that of a slave catching commissioner, at any bribe of five dollars a head; the spawn of a United States Judge, not the choice of a free people.

We are left to infer from your written opinion that no degree of violence and brutality in catching negroes is culpable or illegal. You seem to have forgotten the warrant for the arrest of an alleged fugitive is a civil, not a criminal process. The fugitive is not charged with crime. He is merely charged with "owing service." He is an unfortunate debtor. Can it be that you suppose a sheriff, in executing process in an action of debt, may take an armed posse and deliberate with his associates on the propriety of shooting the defendant, if they cannot otherwise take him, and that they may violently assault him, and beat him, and fire pistols at him, endangering his life, and all this without showing his warrant!

As to the legality of your proceedings, others more competent must decide. As to the impropriety and indecency of your language and deportment on the bench, no difference opinion well be entertained by those who understand what is requires of the manners of a gentleman, and the unimpassioned impartiality of a judge.

We are officially assured that in the conduct of three deputy marshals towards the alleged fugitive there " was nothing worthy of blame", except perhaps, " a want of sufficient courage and perseverance!" That the public may judge what is the style of slave hunting approved by a Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, I refer them to the affidavits of Jacob Kutz, Casper Fetterly, Henry Patton, and Charles Gegenheimer, heretofore published.

These affidavits, besides sustaining to the fallest extent the one made by me, disclose a most brutal and murderous assault upon an unfortunate but innocent man. His nominal master gave me a brief history of his character. He said he was honest and faithful; that he had given a boat on the Rappahannock in his charge; that in all the loads of produce which he had disposed of and accounted to him for, he had no reason to believe that he had wronged him out of a shilling. This noble resistance and courage displayed by this man at the time of his attempted arrest, would have made any white American the pride of his countryman. He exemplified to the letter, the sentiment of Patrick Henry - "Give me Liberty or give me Death." Your assertion above, that these officers had done "nothing worthy of blame," and their acts of unfeeling cruelty exhibit the brutalizing influence of the "Fugitive Slave Act" on all who stoop to execute it. The claimant of Bill (the name of the alleged fugitive) also told me that Bill's father was a white man, worth one hundred thousand dollars, and that he had full knowledge of the late treatment of his son at Wilkesbarre.

With the overflowing of parental sympathy, why does he not fly to the aid and succor of his child in his hour of extremity? The sad tale is soon told; this unholy and peculiar institution cuts out natural affection.

The outrage at Wilkesbarre, and the indecent and arrogant zeal of a man who fills the high and honorable station of a Judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, will do something to increase the intense odium wit which the fugitive slave act is viewed by the better class of the community. May that odium continue to expand and to gather force until it shall finally render it impossible to execute this execrable act. If this be treason, you are at liberty to make the most of it.

W. C. Gildersleeve



The following is Mr. Butler's affidavit, referred to in the above letter:
Before Gilbert Burrows, a Justice of the Peace, in and for the Cpunty of Luzerne, and State of Pennsylvania, personally came John L. Butler, of Wilkesbarre, in said county, and being duly sworn, deposeth and saith as follows, viz:

About two years ago, I met Judge Grier in the City of Washington, D. C. The Judge asked me if I knew Gildersleeve, of Wilkesbarre. I replied that I did; that he was a respectable merchant, and conscientious good man. Judge Grier said to me, I hear that he harbors negroes, and gives them arms. I replied, he mat harbor negroes but I think he would not arm them. Judge Grier then requested me to tell Mr. Gildersleeve from him, that if he, Gildersleeve, shold ever be brought before him he would hang him; which message I delivered to Mr. Gildersleeve on my return home.

J. L. Butler

Sworn and subscribed, October 28, 1853, before me,
G. Burrows, Jr.

Wilkesbarre, October 28, 1853
We, the undersigned, cheerfully bear testimony to the high estimation in which Gilbert Burrows, Esq., is held in this community. Few men, if any, among us are more truly respected, as a citizen, a magistrate and a Christian.

John Dorrance (Presbyterian Clergyman),
H. H. Wells (Presbyterian Clergyman),
Stephen Vaughn (Acting Justice of Peace)
Hendrick B. Wright (M. C., Democrat)
Edward Lynch (Cashier of Bank)
Henry M. Fuller (Ex-M. C., Whig)

( Pennsylvania Freeman - Newspaper Article)