The story of Polly is one of resistance against a world designed to commodify her existence. Sold from the estate of her long-time enslaver, she escaped her new owner in a daring attempt to re-stitch the torn fabric of her own kinship community. To understand her actions, one must first examine the complex tapestry of the world that sought to control her.
Dr. James Macgill, heir to his uncle of the same name, presided over a sizable estate in Prince George’s County in the 1830s. His 740+ acre plantation was stitched together from various land tracts along present-day Annapolis Road, a significant crossroads in the Vansville District (later Queen Anne District). The estate was bordered by massive operations: the Jesuit’s 2,000-acre White Marsh plantation, the Ogle family’s 2,000+ acre Bel-air estate, and the Bowie family’s 570+ acre Locust Grove. An 1828 tax list documents the human dimension of this operation, enumerating the 34 people Dr. Macgill enslaved: six elders, eleven adults, four adolescents, and thirteen young children under the age of eight.
The 1828 Levy Court Road Survey details the estate’s strategic location, providing access to the Patuxent River and placing it in direct proximity to the Ogle’s Bel-air plantation—the community where Polly’s future husband, Peter, was enslaved.
Road No. 1 [now-Annapolis Road]: Commencing at the Priests Bridge on the Patuxent, thence through the White Marsh Plantation; then through Bel-air, thence through the plantation of Dr. James Magill by the Forest Chapel, thence by Magruders Tavern…
Road No. 3: …across Collington Branch, thence with the plantations of William Ogle, James Magill, and Walter Bowie…
Using details from the 1828 Levy Court Road Survey, Martenet’s annotated 1861 map details the route of the area’s primary artery (present-day Annapolis Road), an economic corridor connecting the adjacent plantations of Macgill, Ogle (Bel-air), and the Jesuit’s White Marsh.
Married to Julia Ann Compton in 1829, Macgill also owned property in Anne Arundel County near West River Post Office and Samuel Carr, the husband of Mary Compton. The property was situated in the First District along the road that led to Mount Pleasant Ferry, connecting Anne Arundel to Prince George’s County closer to Upper Marlboro, the county seat. The estates wove together the family’s interests across two counties, creating a broader and more complex tapestry of land and human property.
the Snag: the death of the patriarch (1840)
A decade after his marriage, Macgill’s impending death created a snag in the tapestry of his estate, and he composed his last will and testament, dividing his real and personal property among his wife and three born children, while making provisions for his unborn child. Like his uncle, he dictated how the fabric of his estate was to be cut and divided, specifically naming different mother-child family groups and directing the heir who would acquire four family groups, with a third being conveyed to Macgill’s wife as her right of dower, and the unnamed “balance” going to James P. Macgill.
ripped threads of kinship
Macgill’s division in his will ripped the threads of kinship among the community enslaved on his estates. While he nominally kept mother-child groups together, Polly and her children were divided from her larger extended family. As the wife of Peter, she became part of the larger Lee family group, and with Macgill’s will, she was separated from Harriet Lee and her children, Daniel, Oswald [Osborn], Caroline, Ann, and Amelia, who, while unnamed in the will, were named in the inventory and much later in the 1867’s Compensation List of Septimus J. Cook, the second husband of Julia Macgill. Whereas, Polly and her children were conveyed to Thomas Macgill, the oldest son, who would also receive a sizable portion of the Prince George’s estate through provisions of the 1833 will of the older Dr. James Macgill. Polly, Peter, their children, and the family of Harriet Lee were the threads that gave the plantation its texture and life. Macgill’s death subjected these threads to immense strain. They were stretched thin across counties, torn from one another, and tangled with new and unfamiliar threads.
This diagram illustrates the legal fracturing of an enslaved community following the 1840 death of Dr. James Macgill. His will distributed specific mother-child groups, including those of Rachel, Sue, Sophia, and Polly, among his heirs, pulling the kinship network apart and setting the stage for future sales and separations.
threads of inheritance
The will, far from ensuring a smooth transition, pulled the tightly woven kinship community of the enslaved in three distinct directions. Each heir represented a thread pulling part of the tapestry away from the whole. These distinct lines of inheritance did not exist in isolation; they actively pulled the community apart, a process accelerated by the legal and personal entanglements of the heirs.
the dower of the widow: the cook connection
Under Maryland law, Julia Ann Compton Macgill had a dower right to one-third of her husband’s property. This included the enslaved families Macgill designated for her, most notably Harriet Lee and her children. When Julia remarried to Septimus J. Cook in 1845, her dower portion—including Harriet’s family—was legally absorbed into the Cook household. This single act pulled an entire branch of the original enslaved community away, transplanting them into a new network under a new enslaver.
the son’s portion: the line of thomas macgill
Thomas Macgill’s inheritance was anchored in Prince George’s County. As stipulated in two generations of wills, he received a large portion of the home plantation and legal ownership of Polly and her children. While this provision placed Polly in the community where her husband Peter lived, it rested on the financial acumen of the Magill’s guardians to maintain a sizable estate without need to sell off “assets” This thread represented the patriarchal line of succession from uncle to nephew to son.
the balance of the estate: the line of james p. macgill
The younger son, James P. Macgill, inherited the family’s Anne Arundel County property near West River, along with the “balance” of the enslaved people not otherwise assigned. This act created an immediate geographic fracture in the community, moving another group of individuals to a different county and physically separating them from the kinship network on the home plantation. This thread established the West River estate as a distinct, yet connected, Macgill holding—and created the destination Polly would later seek in her flight.
The division of human property among Julia, Thomas, and James P. Macgill set the stage for further disruption. The fifteen years that followed Macgill’s death were marked by a cascade of events—probate, remarriage, and death—that continued to unravel the fabric of the enslaved community.
unraveling in motion: 1840-1855
Multiple events occurred in the years after Macgill’s death that led to self-liberation of Polly in 1855. First, there was the division of the estate as it traveled through probate, followed by the marriage of Julia Macgill to Septimus J. Cook and her subsequent death in 1846, and the re-division of her estate with her children’s. There were sales to settle the debts of the estate. Ultimately in 1855, Thomas Macgill sold his estate that inherited from his uncle to Joshua T. Clark, a neighbor and Justice of the Peace. It is most likely this sale that prompted Polly to seek ways to weave a new beginning for her family.
Polly’s design: weaving against the grain
The impending 1855 sale of the plantation from Thomas Macgill to Joshua T. Clark likely acted as the final catalyst. In response, Polly leveraged her social capital within the enslaver’s network to reach out to William Elson Peach, her late enslaver’s son-in-law. She initiated her own sale, requesting that Peach purchase her to ensure her continued proximity to her husband, Peter. However, while navigating this arrangement with Peach, she almost certainly utilized her own community’s social networks to connect with individuals who offered an alternative path. The “designing person” mentioned in the subsequent bounty notice suggests Polly was not merely seeking a new enslaver but was simultaneously orchestrating an escape. This was her attempt to gather the scattered threads of her own kinship and find lasting liberty beyond the reach of Peach, Clark, and the unraveling Macgill estate.
Sources
1828 Tax List, Prince George’s County
1828 Levy Court Road Survey, Prince George’s County
Marriage Records, for the Macgill-Compton union (1829) and the Macgill-Cook union (1845)
Maryland, U.S., Compiled Marriages, 1655-1850
Maryland, U.S., Compiled Marriages, 1667-1899
Last Will and Testament of Dr. James Macgill (the elder), 1833, PC 1:1
Last Will and Testament of Dr. James Macgill (the nephew), ca. 1840, PC 1:129
Probate Records, Estate of Dr. James Macgill (the nephew), post-1840, which would include:
Inventory and Sales Records of the Estate (PC 4:43, 57, 299; JH 1:20,107,268, 273)
Land Records, for the sale of the Macgill estate to Joshua T. Clark (ca. 1855); EWB 1:137
Newspaper Bounty Notice for the capture of Polly (1855), Baltimore Sun, newspapers.com
The Baltimore Sun’s printer placed the ad in the last column of page 2, underneath a bounty for Peter Culver who had absconded with a “free boy, hired by me, named Alexander” and an ad for Ohio Flour.
$150 REWARD WILL BE GIVEN FOR THE POSITIVE CONVICTION of any one who shall be guilty of harboring my NEGRO WOMAN POLLY, after a knowledge of this notice, whom I purchased lately of the estate of Dr. Magill.—As I have bought Polly through motives of pure humanity, and at her own request, that she might enjoy the society of her husband and relatives, I feel satisfied that she will come to me unless deceived by some designing person in relation thereto. POLLY is not less than forty years of age, a mulatto of neat and tidy appearance, and was last seen on West River. I will give Twenty Dollars if in Anne Arundel, or Thirty if elsewhere, to any one who shall convince her of the fact of my purchase and secure her to me. I also subjoin a certificate of Dr. OGLE, the owner of Polly’s husband. WM. E. PEACH, M. D., Queen Ann, Prince George’s co., Md.
I hereby certify that I have talked with PETER, the husband of Polly, and he says he is very anxious that she should come home to her master, Dr. Peach, immediately. Peter is in bad health and unable to leave the house. [jy25-St*] GEO. C. OGLE.
Within this mundane context of commerce and control, William E. Peach’s advertisement primarily sought the conviction of the “designing person” who “deceived” Polly and harbored her away from Peach who had purchased her “through motives of pure humanity” and while placing a bounty on the return of Polly so he could “secure her to me” almost as an afterthought.
the skeleton layer: who, what, and where
The basic facts of the notice form the skeleton of the story. In July 1855, Wm. E. Peach, M.D., living near Queen Anne in Prince George’s County sought the return of Polly, “not less than forty years of age” who was purchased from Dr. Magill’s estate. In her escape, she was last seen near West River in Anne Arundel County. He offered a tiered $20-30 for Polly’s return and a significantly larger sum of $150 dollars for the conviction of the “designing person”.
the sinews layer: the network of kin and property
The names in the advertisement are held together by a dense network of marriage and property. William E. Peach, son of Queen Anne District landowner Samuel Peach, had married Sarah Alexander Ma[c]gill in 1852. Sarah was the orphaned daughter of Dr. James Ma[c]gill and Julia Ann Compton, having lost her father in 1840 and her mother in 1846. Her life was split between Prince George’s and Anne Arundel Counties. Before her father’s death, she lived on his 740-acre estate along present-day Annapolis Road, situated between the Jesuit’s White Marsh plantation and Magruder’s Tavern, adjacent to Bel-Air, the Ogle estate.
After Dr. Ma[c]gill’s death, Sarah’s world was destabilized. Her mother’s remarriage to Septimus J. Cook and her mother’s subsequent death resulted in Sarah and her sister, James Anna, being shuffled to Anne Arundel County to live with their aunt and uncle, Samuel and Mary Carr. The Carrs owned land near the Ma[c]gill property at West River, which had been inherited by Sarah’s brother, James P. Ma[c]gill. The 1839 will of Dr. Ma[c]gill had stipulated that Polly and her children be conveyed specifically to his other son, Thomas Ma[c]gill.
This 1861 map of the Queen Anne District illustrates the dense network of kin and property that defined Polly’s world. Highlighted are the lands of S. Peach (the family of her new owner, William E. Peach), Dr. Geo. C. Ogle (the enslaver of her husband, Peter), and Dr. Jas Macgill (her previous enslaver). The close proximity of these estates visualizes the community she was desperate to remain within, turning her flight into a calculated risk to preserve her family bonds.
the heart: her husband and relations
As the estate was divided and re-divided, first through the death of James and then through the death of James’ relict and again, as the children came of age, Polly, “a mulatto of neat and tidy appearance” watched as her extended family was separated, corralled and moved from estate to estate. Individuals were sold to new husbands or liquidated to cover bequests and estate charges.
Amid this decade of instability, a transaction was initiated that would move Polly from her legal owner, Thomas Ma[c]gill, to his sister’s new husband, William Elson Peach. Seizing on this moment, Polly appealed directly to the young doctor, requesting that the terms of his purchase ensure she “might enjoy the society of her husband and relations.” Her husband, Peter, was enslaved by the Ogles at Bel-Air, the neighboring estate. According to a “certificate” from Geo. C. Ogle referenced in the bounty notice, Peter was “in bad health and unable to leave the house.” For Polly, a move away from the Queen Anne area would mean the permanent loss of her husband and the kinship network she fought to maintain.
the skin layer: the language of control and value
At “not less than forty years old,” Polly was an elder in her community. Her labor was likely shifting from fieldwork to tasks essential for the plantation’s maintenance: cooking, nursing, gardening, and sewing. In the logic of chattel slavery, Polly’s advanced age meant her external market value had diminished. This is starkly visible in the twenty-dollar bounty Peach placed on her body; he valued the conviction of the person who disrupted his power more than seven times higher than the return of Polly herself. Peach’s language paints him as a paternalist allowing Polly to “enjoy” her family, yet he simultaneously admits his authority is so weak that he needs help to “convince her of the fact of his purchase” and to “secure her to me.”
Daina Ramey Berry, in The Price for Their Pound of Flesh, discusses the range of attitudes toward elderly enslaved people. While the enslaved community valued their wisdom and the connections they fostered, enslavers saw only a diminished capacity for labor. This led to either “neglectful paternalism” or “disregarded isolation.” Polly, legally conveyed to an orphaned son whose estate was managed by a series of guardians and second husbands, had likely endured years of disregarded isolation as her value was debated in inventories and accounts. Sarah’s marriage to the paternalistic William Peach provided Polly an opportunity to navigate from disregarded isolation into neglectful paternalism. In this transition, she found an opening to assert her own agency.
the blood of the veins: the flow toward kin
Polly was likely living in the Queen Anne District on the former Ma[c]gill estate when Peach finalized her purchase. From there, she had access to travel lanes and turnpikes leading toward Washington, D.C., and the free states north of Maryland. Yet Peach’s ad reports she was last seen in Anne Arundel County near West River, a journey east, away from the most direct path to freedom. This eastward movement was not a mistake; it was a choice. It suggests Polly was seeking reunification with the family members who had been separated from her years before, when James Ma[c]gill first established his Anne Arundel property. Her journey suggests she was seeking reunification with children or other kin who, despite the legal lines drawn in the will, were physically located at the family’s Anne Arundel property. Her flight was therefore a calculated risk, flowing toward the heart of her kinship network, wherever it was located.
I want to acknowledge historians Daina Ramey Berry (The Price for Their Pound of Flesh) and Edward E. Baptist (The Half Has Never Been Told), whose scholarship was foundational to the anatomical metaphor used as an analytical tool in this research.
For those who wish to delve deeper into these topics, I highly recommend reading these books. You can learn more about them on Bookshop.org (I do not receive a commission from these links)
Martenet’s 1861 Map of Prince George’s County (left), with a version modified to show agricultural regions (right). Dark green indicates primary tobacco cultivation; the lighter shade indicates mixed farming. Source: Base map by S. Martenet (1861); overlay data from M-NCPPC (2010).
introduction: a story rooted in place
Antebellum Prince George’s County was a divided world. The world of planters and estates was visible through the creation of Martenet’s Map of Prince George’s County, which documented the landowners and their proximity to seats of power (Upper Marlborough, county seat, as well as the District of Columbia, the nation’s capital) and to transporation routes (the railways, the rivers, the roads). The single black dot on Martenet’s map indicating landowners obscured the outbuildings, quarters, and fields occupied by the enslaved and free Black population of Prince George’s County.
The historical record documents two versions of Alexander (Sandy) Davidge. In one, he is a financial asset, a name on a legal claim filed by his former enslaver six years later. In the other, he is a man of decisive action, self-liberating from a Maryland plantation in the winter of 1861. The gulf between these two records defines not only his story but the divided world of Antebellum Prince George’s County itself, where the landscape of power shown on official maps obscured the complex lives of the enslaved.
the berrys: a multi-district sphere of control
In 1828, Thomas Berry appears in the tax list for Prince George’s county as owning 1300+ acres called Oxon Hill Manor and 650 acres called Seat Pleasant. Berry acquired these acres through a conveyance from his father, Zachariah Berry “of Concord” and through his 1815 marriage to Mary Williams, the would-be heir of Thomas Otho Williams, d. 1818. Their son, Thomas E. Berry would own property in Queen Anne District in the Partnership Neighborhood, in addition to managing his father’s Oxon Hill Manor estate. Other branches of the Berry family would own land in Bladensburg, including the estates of Concord, Graden, and Independence demonstrating the scope of control the Berry network had on the lives of the enslaved people.
Martenet’s 1861 Map of Prince George’s County showing the location of Oxon Hill Manor, Seat Pleasant, and Partnership, properties owned by Thomas Berry, Mary Berry and Thomas E. Berry, their son.
Alexander (Sandy) Davidge labored for Mary Berry at Seat Pleasant. He was first named in an 1847 deed of separation between Mary Berry and her husband, Thomas Berry. Due to “unhappy differences” that have arisen between the husband and wife. In exchange for the property settlement, Mary gives up any future claim to dower rights on Thomas Berry’s separate estate. Thomas and Mary Berry transfer a significant amount of property to the trustee, Elisha W. Williams, for the sole benefit of Mary Berry. This property includes:
Land, specifically part of a tract called “Seat Pleasant,” which is explicitly identified as having “came to the said Mary Berry as one of the heirs of her deceased Father [Thos. O. Williams]”.
Livestock, including hogs, sheep, cows, and horses.
Farm equipment and crops, including “thirty hogsheads of tobacco”.
A community of enslaved people, who are listed by name.
Among them, is “Sandy”.
The list minimally names relationships between members of the community forced to work in the tobacco fields, to care for the livestock and to tend to the farm equipment. From the list, there are some spouses and some children — and other relationships (siblings, cousins, etc.) are ignored and invisible. While the deed explicitly names the wives of Jerry and Sam Butler and the children of Kitty and Caroline, Sandy is listed between Thomas/Tom and Kitty, an individual seemingly untethered to any named kin in that moment.
Prince George’s County, Maryland, Land Records, Deed of Separation, Thomas Berry and Mary Berry to Elisha W. Williams, trustee, November 10, 1847, Liber JBB 5, folio 102, accessed via MDLANDREC, mdlandrec.net.
Sandy was also listed in the inventory of Mary Berry’s estate when she died a decade later in 1857. A twenty-year old man, the appraisers assigned him an external market value of $1050. The appraiser’s commodification of Sandy rested on their value of his ability to provide physical labor. Charles was nineteen years old, and externally appraised for $1100 while Walter (Wat) was twenty-two years old, and externally appraised for $900.
Like the deed of separation, Sandy, Walter, and the others are untethered in their relationships. Unlike other other inventories who adhere to one of two organizational patterns ( by gender and chronological age, or by adult males, and mother-child groupings), the list of Mary Berry’s estate includes the names of those she enslaved in a non-recognized order. Mimey and Polly, two elderly woman, head the list, despite the inclusion of other elderly men (Tony and Ned); Eliza, Sarah, Jane, pre-adolescent girls are listed immediately following Tony without a mother, suggesting a possible loss prior to the inventory. Alternatively, the list could be organized by sphere of work, with the first half (headed by elderly woman) representing those who labored in the household, while the second half representing the field hands.
Prince George’s County, Maryland. Register of Wills (Inventories). WAJ 1:673. Maryland State Archives, Annapolis, MD.
The death of Mary Berry, the mistress of Seat Pleasant, and the appraiser cataloguing her furniture, agricultural implements and enslaved community precipitated precipitated a forceful fragmentation of that community, initiating an unasked-for migration that scattered kin across the distinct agricultural landscapes of Prince George’s County.
Martenet’s 1861 Map of Prince George’s County showing the fragmentation of the community enslaved by Mary Berry
A few months after her death, the Planters’ Advocate advertised the sale of Mary Berry’s estates, both real and personal:
Planters’ Advocate, Feb 23, 1858Sale of Mary Berry’s “Servants”, Feb 3, 1858
Transcription of Estate Sale Advertisement
A VALUABLE ESTATEFOR SALE,Containing Eight Hundred and Twenty-Four and One-Fourth Acres.
BY virtue of a decree of the Circuit Court for Prince George’s county, sitting as a Court of Equity, the subscriber, as Trustee, will offer at public sale, on the premises, ON FRIDAY, the 11th day of March next, if fair, if not, the next fair day thereafter, the VALUABLE REAL ESTATE of the late Mary Berry, containing, by a recent survey, EIGHT HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FOUR ACRES AND ONE-FOURTH OF AN ACRE.
This estate is situated in Prince George’s County, very near the District line, commanding a beautiful view of the Capitol and a portion of Washington City.
The improvements are a good comfortable Dwelling House, KITCHEN, and all the necessary OUT-HOUSES, including STABLES and CARRIAGE HOUSE. The Farm Houses consist of four or five TOBACCO HOUSES, in a good state of repair, and affords room enough to house fifty thousand pounds of tobacco.
This farm consists of a soil well adapted to the growth of the finest quality of Tobacco and all the other staple crops grown in the county. Has a sufficiency of MEADOW LAND, some of it TIMBER, and also an abundance of WOOD and TIMBER.
This land, from its proximity to Washington City, affords a rare chance for speculation and a profitable investment. Portions of it might be profitably cultivated in Fruits and Vegetables, in addition to making a Tobacco Farm.
THE TERMS OF SALE, AS PRESCRIBED BY DECREE, ARE: A cash payment of one thousand dollars to be made on the day of sale, and the balance of the purchase money to be paid in three equal instalments, in twelve, eighteen, and twenty-four months; the whole purchase money to be secured by the bond of the purchaser, with security to be approved by the Trustee, and to bear interest from the day of sale. Upon the payment of the purchase money and interest, the Trustee is authorized by the decree to convey the land to the purchaser in fee simple, and all the right, title, claim and interest of the parties to the cause, and of all those claiming by, through or under them or either of them.
Possession of the property will be delivered as soon as the terms of sale are complied with.
Those wishing to purchase are invited to view the premises, and are referred to A. B. BERRY, Esq., who owns the adjoining farm.
C. C. MAGRUDER, Trustee. Upper Marlboro’, Feb. 16, 1859—ts
Transcription of Sale of “Servants”
Sale of Servants.
The personal estate of the late Mary Berry was sold last week. The following servants were disposed of:
Negro man Sandy brought $1205, and was purchased by Mrs. Grace H. Clagett. Negro man Charles $1180—purchaser Mr. R. M. Williams. Negro boy Wat $1005—purchaser Mr. Thomas. Berry. Negro woman Polly $265—purchased by the same gentleman. Negro man John $725—purchaser Mr. Robert M. Williams. Negro man Ned $355—purchaser Mr. Thomas E. Berry. Negro woman Minny $265—purchased by the same gentleman. Negro man Thomas $650—purchaser Mr. A. B. Berry. Negro woman Anne $400—purchaser Mr. Wm. F. Berry. Negro man Sam $736—purchaser Mr. A. B. Berry. Negro man Jim $606—purchaser Mr. Thomas E. Berry. Negro girl Jane $580—purchaser Mr. Wm. B. Boggs. Negro man Jerry $205—purchaser Mr. E. T. Berry. Negro woman Barbara $205—purchaser by the same gentleman. Negro girl Sarah $650—purchaser Mr. Thomas E. Berry. Negro man Tony $275—purchaser Mr. John E. Bowie. Negro man Buster $135—purchaser Mr. Robert M. Williams. Negro woman Minny and child $1105—purchaser Mr. John E. Berry, Jr. Negro boy George $735—purchaser Mr. Fielder Magruder. Negro woman Kitty and three children $1430; purchaser Mr. Zachariah Berry of Z. Negro girl Eliza $620—purchased by the same gentleman. Negro woman Polly and two children $1000—purchaser Mr. John E. Berry. Negro woman Joyce $100—purchaser Mr. T. E. Berry.
At the 1858 estate sale, the community was fragmented; a twenty-year-old Sandy was sold for $1205, while his peers Charles (19) and Walter (22) brought $1180 and $1005 respectively.
the clagetts: the widow’s residence
Sandy was purchased by Grace H. Clagett, a widow who managed her assets from her parents’ residence of Mount Pleasant. The daughter of Col. Henry Waring and Sarah Harrison, she had married Dr. Richard H. Clagett who died in the early 1850s, leaving her with her son, Henry W. Clagett. She managed at least two farms prior to her own death in 1860.
In the fall and winter of 1857, she advertised in the Planters’ Advocate for the hire of additional field hands before purchasing Sandy at the sale of Mary Berry’s estate.
Despite advertising for two additional men, she only purchased Sandy from Mary Berry’s estate, which meant that Sandy arrived alone and without the comfort of a social network at Mount Pleasant. Any family he had lived with Seat Pleasant had been sent to work at other plantations and estates.
Sandy was taken by the Clagett from a farm near the District, near the roads that led to the bustle of the City of Washington. While working the fields on Seat Pleasant, he would have seen wagons and carts traveling into town filled with produce, with livestock tied to back for butchers. He would have seen stagecoaches and horseback riders traveling with the mail and the guests who would stay at the Hotels on Pennsylvania Ave. When he was forced from Seat Pleasant to Mount Pleasant, the landscape would have changed to a waterfront, where traffic was directed to the steamboats and the small boats that traveled the silting Patuxent. Instead of gentlemen headed to the City of Washington for national politics and markets, he would have seen gentlemen headed to Upper Marlborough, the county seat for estate sales, courthouse dealings, and horse races.
Two years after purchasing Sandy, Grace died on May 1, 1860 after a long illness at her parent’s estate, Mount Pleasant. Without a will and inventory, it is presumed her real and personal estate, including Sandy, was conveyed to Henry W. Clagett, her son. The death of his second enslaver most likely stirred up memories of the last time his enslaver died, with the sale of him and his new community on the auction block. Moreover, his new enslaver, Henry W Clagett, was a young bachelor who had yet to “settle down”. Away at Georgetown for college, his visits home may have been stories of drinking and gambling and other college escapades, which often meant money owed to creditors and debts to be covered by the sale of a “valuable field hand”. This recurring pattern of instability, where his life was subject to the whims of inheritance, now placed his future in the hands of a young, unmarried man, Henry W. Clagett. The prospect of yet another disruption may have been the final catalyst for his decision to escape.
the landscape of Escape
Against this backdop, Alexander (Sandy) Davidge self-liberated himself from Clagett’s estate near Mount Pleasant wearing a brown frock coat and dark hat with black pantaloons the day after Christmas. The week between Christmas and New Years was one of anticipation of separation as enslavers hired out or sold individuals, separating them from the comfort of community within a cold landscape bereft of warmth.
Clagett supposed that Alexander was making his way to family members at Mrs. Thomas E. Berry’s near Long Old Fields, or acquaintances near Bladensburg, suggesting that Sandy was going back to the neighborhood from which he had been extracted, and back to a known community.
Excerpt from the 1861 Martenet Map showing the location of Clagett’s residence and the locations named as possible destinations with their proximity to the District of Columbia.
The portrait of John Mulvaney, 1863 provides a visual possibility of what Alexander Davadge wore on his escape to freedom. Choosing a frock coat (more formal than everyday work wear), it would allow Sandy to blend into the crowds moving through the streets of the City. The frock coat would also provide a layer of warmth as he left in the midst of winter.
Transcription of Bounty for Sandy Davadge
$100 Reward. RAN AWAY from the subscriber, living near Upper Marlborough, on Wednesday, the 26th ultimo, a negro man SANDY, who calls himself
SANDY DAVADGE.
Sandy is about five feet nine or ten inches high; is of a dark complexion; has a full suit of hair and a fine set of teeth; is quick when spoken to, and very polite. He had on when he left home a pair of black pantaloons, brown frock coat and a dark hat. He has relations living at Mrs. Thomas E. Berry’s place, near the Long Old Fields, and also acquaintances in Bladensburg.
I will give the above reward for his apprehension, if taken out of the State of Maryland, and Fifty Dollars if taken in the State—in either case he must be brought home or secured in jail, so that I get him again.
HENRY W. CLAGETT. January 2, 1861—tf
As he traveled the roads, turnpikes and trails into the District where he could make for a “Free State”, he would have been wary of slave patrols, set up to control his movement through the landscape of tobacco fields and orchards. Some were more formally organized and others were suspicious planters and planters’ sons, hiding behind bushes to capture the family fleeing for freedom.
“Running Off Negroes,” Port Tobacco Times, and Charles County Advertiser (Port Tobacco, MD), January 3, 1861, p. 3, accessed via Newspapers.com.Transcription of “Running Off Negroes”
RUNNING OFF NEGROES.—The Pr. Georgian of last Friday says:
This day fortnight ago, Messrs. Francis M. Bowie and John E. Bowie, Jr., having some cause for suspicion of some such occurrence, posted themselves in a suitable position and captured a negro who was carrying off, in the dead of night, a negro woman and her two children, the property of the first named gentleman. They were in a covered wagon. The negro is a slave of a lady residing in Montgomery, and the wagon was borrowed from an officer at the Observatory, for another purpose. The prisoner was brought here the day following and indicted by the Grand Jury. He is now in jail.
“Appointment of a Patrol in Alexandria County.” Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), January 4, 1861. From Newspapers.com.“Affairs in St. Mary’s County, MD.—Runaway Slaves—Patrols called out.” Evening Star (Washington, D.C.), June 5, 1861. From Newspapers.com.
Transcription of “Appointment of a Patrol in Alexandria County”
APPOINTMENT OF A PATROL IN ALEXANDRIA COUNTY. The Gazette says: “The County Court of this county at its last term, appointed a patrol for the country portion of this county. The appointment was made under the following provision of the Code of Virginia: “The county court of each county may, when necessary, appoint for a term not exceeding three months, one or more patrols, consisting of an officer either commissioned or non-commissioned, who shall be captain of patrol and so many privates as it may think requisite, to patrol and visit within such bounds as the court may prescribe, as often as it shall require, all negro quarters and other places suspected of having therein unlawful assemblies, or such slaves as may stroll from one plantation to another without permission.”
The following gentlemen were named as the patrol:—Wm. J. Garey, Captain; S. Burch, jr., John Marcey, George Marcey, Elijah Burch, Thos. Thompson, Samuel Marcey and Chas. W. Payne, privates.
It is the duty of this patrol to visit all parts of the county, at least once a week; to break up all unlawful assemblies and arrest negroes violating the law. The members of patrol failing to perform duty, are subject to a fine of five dollars, and when on duty the captain is entitled to one dollar and each private to 75 cents for each twelve hours service.
Transcription of “Affairs in the St. Mary’s County, MD”
AFFAIRS IN ST. MARY’S COUNTY, MD.—Runaway Slaves—Patrols called out—The Leonardtown Beacon of Thursday has the following in relation to affairs in that neighborhood:
Three negro men, representing themselves as runaway slaves from Virginia, were arrested and lodged in our county jail on Tuesday last. They crossed the Potomac in a canoe, and were arrested by private citizens and handed over to the sheriff. They were young, likely negroes, and stated that “they had heard a great deal of talk about Maryland, and came over to see if the truth had been told them.” They represent their masters to have been absent from home at the time they determined upon their tour of investigation. We learned on Tuesday last that there had been many recent cases of runaway in this county. Would it not be well to reorganize the system of patrol that proved so efficient here last winter?
Since the abandonment of the patrol, the negroes have pretty generally fallen into their old night-prowling habits and we hear of several who have ran away from their owners and are now lurking in the county. The patrol force has never been legally disbanded, and are consequently at liberty to go upon duty whenever they may think the public interest requires it. We believe that it requires it now, and we recommend that the force in the different districts proceed at once to make an organization and go upon duty and remain upon duty while the present excitement through the country continues to exist. We hope to hear that the patrol force are in active operation in every district of the county by Saturday next.
During the winter of 1861, Southern Maryland was a region of high tension and strategic importance in the Civil War. As a border state with strong secessionist sympathies, particularly in counties like Prince George’s and Charles, the area was under a heavy Union military occupation designed to secure its loyalty and protect the perimeter of Washington, D.C.
This resulted in a significant and visible presence of Union troops guarding crucial infrastructure, such as railroads and key roads. The Potomac River became an active military frontier due to the “Potomac Blockade,” where Confederate batteries on the Virginia side frequently exchanged fire with Union forces in Maryland, disrupting river traffic. This created a volatile atmosphere for refugees from slavery who sought to navigate both troops and patrols on the road to freedom.
disappearance from the Map
After 1861, Alexander (Sandy) Davidge vanishes from the known map.
In 1867, the former slaveholders submitted claims for compensation for the people emancipated by the November 1864 Constitution of Maryland. Henry W. Clagett was one of the enslavers who submitted a claim. On his list was “Sandy Davidge, age 24”, his name one of 54 people enslaved by Clagett. Clagett, by placing him on the list, is stating on oath Davidge was “in his possession” on Nov 1, 1864, after his escape to freedom. There are no records to clarify if Clagett had recaptured him or if he submitted a fraudulent claim.
Alexander’s family, the ones enslaved by Mrs. Thomas E. Berry near Long Old Fields, appears on a list submitted by “Thomas Berry”: Polly (Mary) Davidge, age 50 and WalterDavidge, age 24, purchased from Mary Berry’s estate and likely Alexander’s mother and brother, as well as Esther (Hessy) Davidge, age 34, and Henry Davidge, age 16.
Clagett’s compensation claim in 1867 is an attempt to place him back on the Marlborough plantation ledger, but his physical body is gone. His final destination, his geography of freedom, remains unknown.
William B. Harwood operated as a merchant in Queen Anne on the Patuxent River during the 1850s. The 1850 census enumerated his household, including a wife and child, and recorded his modest real estate valued at $1,200, likely a town lot and store. An 1852 Bill of Sale documents his role as a purveyor to the local planter class, detailing a substantial sale to Haswell Magruder of dry goods, spirits, groceries, and 1,000 cigars. Yet, by 1857, Harwood was insolvent, unable to pay his creditors.
Transcription of Insolvent Notice
INSOLVENT NOTICE.
PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, TO WIT:
ON application to the subscriber, Judge of the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County by petition in writing of WILLIAM B. HARWOOD, of said county, stating that he is in insolvent circumstances and unable to pay his debts, and praying for the benefit of the act of the General Assembly of Maryland, entitled “An act for the relief of insolvent debtors,” passed at January session, eighteen hundred and fifty-four, on the terms therein mentioned, a schedule of his property and a list of his creditors on oath, as far as he can ascertain the same, being annexed to his petition; and the said WILLIAM B. HARWOOD, having taken the oath by the said act prescribed, for the delivering up of his property, and given sufficient security for his personal appearance at the Circuit Court for Prince George’s County to answer such interrogatories and allegations as may be made against him; and the said WILLIAM B. HARWOOD, having further made oath, that he has not, at any time, sold, lessened, transferred or disposed of any part of his property, for the use and benefit of any person or entrusted any part of his money or other property, debts, rights or claims, thereby to delay or defraud his creditors or any of them, or to secure the same, so as to receive or expect to receive any profit, benefit or advantage himself therefrom; and having appointed JAMES M. BOYD his Trustee, who has given bond as such, and received from the said WILLIAM B. HARWOOD a conveyance and possession of all his property, real, personal and mixed—I do hereby order and adjudge that the said WILLIAM B. HARWOOD be discharged; and that he give notice to his creditors by causing a copy of this order to be inserted in some newspaper published in Prince George’s County, once a week for three consecutive months, before the next November Term of said Circuit Court, to appear before the said Circuit Court, at the Court House of said County at the said Term, to show cause if any they have, why the said William B. Harwood should not have the benefit of said act as prayed.
Given under my hand this eighth day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and fifty-seven.
PETER W. CRAIN.
True copy—Test: CHARLES S. MIDDLETON, Clerk.
June 10, 1857—3t [Planters’ Advocate]
Despite his established business, the economic pressures that precipitated the Panic of 1857 proved insurmountable. The panic was fanned by overspeculation, falling grain prices after the Crimean War, and tightening credit. Harwood, a merchant in Queen Anne, would have been reliant on credit and the local farmers ability to pay their bills. Falling crop prices and credit crisis would have crushed his ability to navigate the market, leading to his unpaid debts. By June 1857, Harwood petitioned the Circuit Court, declaring himself insolvent and unable to pay his creditors.
Queen Anne District from 1861 Martenet Map
a trustee’s ledger: seizing a merchant’s accounts
The court appointed James M. Boyd to act as trustee for Harwood’s accounts. Boyd was a landholder whose 160-acre farm, part of the tract “Ample Grange,” was situated about two miles north of Queen Anne Town. His property holdings, which included a tobacco house, corn house, granary, and “quarters for servants,” marked him as a successful small yeoman, a class of farmer holding between 40 and 280 acres. The scale of his diversified operation placed him at the upper end of this group, a man of sufficient standing and perceived stability to be entrusted by the court with the assets of a failed peer.
The legal process of insolvency, while offering relief from creditors, stripped Harwood of his economic autonomy and subjected his actions to the scrutiny of both the court and his community. The oath he swore—that he had not hidden assets to “delay or defraud his creditors”—would soon become a focal point of conflict. Within months, accusations would surface that directly challenged this sworn statement, moving the conflict from the formal setting of the courthouse to the arena of public opinion and vigilante action, where the planter network sought to enforce its own economic and social order.
the underground economy
an Economy within an economy: the m.s. plummer notice
M. S. Plummer was a large planter whose estate on the border of Queen Anne and Marlboro District was home to the hundreds of people he enslaved. His real estate was valued at $120,000 and his personal property $500,000 in the 1860 census, speaking to his wealth acquired from the labor of the people enslaved on his estates. The heir of William Wells of George and married into the Waring family of Mt. Pleasant, M. S. Plummer was established among the large planter class.
In July 1857, just months before the official start of a national financial panic, an unknown thief entered a cabin within the quarters on Plummer’s estate and stole clothing belonging to the enslaved occupants. The stolen items—including cassimere pants, a flowered vest, and lawn dresses—were not the rough, utilitarian workwear of tweed or osnaburg issued to field hands. Instead, they were fashionable, ready-made garments that, along with the five dollars also taken, point to the owners’ participation in the internal economy of the enslaved.
This underground economy was essential for survival and for carving out a space for self-expression. Through activities outside their forced labor, enslaved people generated income that allowed them to supplement the meager provisions provided by enslavers. They completed “overwork” tasks, sold produce from their garden plots, marketed handmade goods like baskets, and sometimes hired out their own time on Sundays or holidays. The resulting income enabled them to purchase goods from merchants or peddlers, trade for different foods, and acquire clothing that reflected their own tastes and style.
Transcription of Advertisement and Notice
$50 Reward.
I WILL give a reward of FIFTY DOLLARS for the apprehension and conviction of the rogue or rogues who entered one of my quarters on Thursday morning, the 9th instant, between ten and eleven o’clock, and took therefrom the following articles:
1 pair blue cassimere Pants, 1 black summer cloth Coat, 1 white Skirt, 1 white Vest with blue flower, 1 pair Shoes, with brass tacks, 1 blue lawn Dress, 1 pink lawn Dress. Also—Five Dollars in money.
And I also forewarn all free negroes, mulattos or slaves from Anne Arundel or Prince George’s Counties from crossing over or through my farm, either day or night, Sunday or any other time, without permission of myself or my overseers; and I will give TEN DOLLARS reward for the apprehension of every free negro or mulatto caught so trespassing.
I will give TWENTY DOLLARS reward for the conviction of any person or persons who deal with or purchase hogs, shoats, pigs, lambs, meal, fish or bacon from any of my servants, or who purchase such articles from others, stolen from my farm. And I will also give a liberal reward for any information that will lead to such conviction.
M. S. PLUMMER.
July 15, 1857—tf
Queen Anne District from 1861 Martenet Map
Clothing Advertisements and Sketch of Enslaved People
Richmond Dispatch, 1857
Daily National Intelligencer and Washington Express 1857
Planters’ Advocate, 1859
Miller, Lewis. Represents Our next door neighbor. Mid-nineteenth century. Watercolor and ink on paper. The Abby Aldrich Rockefeller Folk Art Museum, The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, Williamsburg, VA. As published in Encyclopedia Virginia. Accessed July 6, 2025. https://encyclopediavirginia.org/4118hpr-00ee78908746584/.
Plummer’s notice sought more than the return of the stolen articles; it was a comprehensive effort to sever the networks that sustained the enslaved community. He issued a strict prohibition against Black people—enslaved or free—traversing his extensive estates, not only during the day but specifically at night and on Sundays, the very periods that allowed for a greater freedom of movement and social interaction. This clampdown on physical movement was directly linked to a more critical prohibition against economic exchange. By offering a reward for the conviction of anyone who purchased goods from his “servants,” Plummer attempted to dismantle the underground economy itself, denying the enslaved community the ability to profit from their own production and to exercise consumer choice.
opportunity knocks at the Quarters’ door
By publishing his notice in the Planters’ Advocate—a newspaper that served the interests of Prince George’s County’s white society with its advertisements for runaway enslaved people, trustee sales, and plantation managers—M.S. Plummer did more than just report a theft. He publicly drew a line against the local underground economy, threatening conviction for “any person or persons” who dared to purchase goods from the people he enslaved. This public ultimatum raises a critical question: who in the community would risk social condemnation and legal trouble by engaging in this forbidden trade? The circumstances of William B. Harwood, a merchant residing just a few miles away in Queen Anne Town, present a compelling answer. Declared insolvent just one month prior, his legitimate business shuttered and his assets seized by a trustee, Harwood possessed both the motive of financial desperation and the commercial skills of a merchant, making him an ideal candidate to operate within this illicit, cash-based market.
Although no single document provides direct evidence of William B. Harwood’s participation in the underground economy, a powerful case can be built from the convergence of his financial ruin and his social position. The 1850 census is a critical source, recording him not only as a merchant in Queen Anne but also as the head of a household that included the Coursey family, a free Black family. This long-standing association could have provided Harwood with a level of access and familiarity within the broader Black community—both free and enslaved. When his formal business collapsed in 1857, this pre-existing social network, combined with his skills as a merchant, would have made him an accessible and logical, if illicit, trading partner.
1850 Census for Queen Anne District, Prince George’s County, ancestry.com
panic ignited
Northern part of Prince George’s County from 1861 Martenet Map
While Plummer was attempting to control the economic activities of the Black community, local enslavers were fearing the escape of their “valuable servants” through the Underground Railroad, often blaming “outside agitators.” Two attempts at self-emancipation from the summer of 1857 highlight this conflict between the enslavers’ public narrative and the reality of enslaved resistance.
The first event was the coordinated escape of two enslaved women, Mary (Molly) Adams and Lucy, from Owen Carroll’s property, and two enslaved men, Anthony and Nat Butler, from a neighboring enslaver. The two news artifacts detailing this escape present conflicting stories. An article in the Planters’ Advocate frames the event as an abduction by a white Northerner, portraying the actions of a vigilante “committee of citizens” not as extra-legal intimidation but as a decorous civic procedure. This sanitized version stands in stark contrast to the reward notice placed by the enslavers. The bounty ad’s detailed descriptions of Lucy’s “intelligent countenance” and the men’s worldliness—Anthony having been hired out for years and Nat Butler being a prior runaway familiar with Washington and Georgetown—point to a group of capable, knowledgeable individuals. The joint escape of Mary, Lucy, Anthony, and Nat Butler suggests a carefully planned operation, undermining the paternalistic propaganda of the Planters’ Advocate, which sought to erase the agency of the self-liberating individuals by portraying them as guileless “servants.”
“Abducting Slaves.” The Planters’ Advocate [Upper Marlborough, MD], 19 Aug. 1857. MSATranscription of “Abducting Slaves”
Abducting Slaves.—We regret to learn that two valuable servants, the property of Mr. OWEN CARROLL, living near Beltsville, in this county, went off from home on Sunday night, the 9th instant. It is supposed they were enticed away by a white man, hailing from the North, who was last winter employed in the factory of Mr. C. At that time he was suspected of tampering with the slaves; and suspicion becoming certainty, a committee of citizens escorted him to the cars, and “shipped” him to a more suitable field of action. It is supposed he returned secretly, and the result is as above stated.
“$700 REWARD,” The Baltimore Sun (Baltimore, MD), August 29, 1857, 3.
Transcription of Bounty for Freedom Seekers
$700 REWARD.—Ran away from the residence of Mr. Owen Carroll, near Beltsville, in Prince George’s county, on Sunday night, August 9th, negro woman MARY OR MOLLY ADAMS, aged about 21 or 22 years, stout, strong built, color black, full faced and short curled hair; walks very straight and quick. Also, LUCY, aged about 17 years, medium size, color dark chesnut, very intelligent countenance, and pleasant when spoken to. Also, negro man ANTHONY, who calls himself Anthony Radley, about six feet tall, strong and well made and rather fleshy, black complexion, short curly hair, especially on the forehead. He has for the last two years been hired to Mr. Batchelor, on the Plank Road. They took a variety of good clothing. Also, negro man NAT BUTLER, who sometimes goes by the name of Joseph or George Brown, who ran away from the same neighborhood about this time last year, and since that time has been lurking in Washington, Georgetown and their vicinity. He is tall, well made, with a sharp chin, high cheek bones and more prominent nose than common to the negro race.
The two girls belong to Owen Carroll, Esq., who offers a reward of one hundred dollars each for their apprehension and security in jail, so that they may be obtained again.
The two men belong to Dr. James Higgins, and a reward of $250 each will be paid for their arrest and security in jail so that they be obtained again.
Address DR. JAMES HIGGINS, Baltimore, Md.; OWEN CARROLL, Beltsville, Prince George’s county, Md., or JEFFERS & COOK, No. 5 Law Buildings, Baltimore. a25-6t*
The second escape occurred in the same relative vicinity, involving a family from the farm of Isaac Scaggs. A series of articles and runaway ads describe the flight and subsequent recapture of Maria and her four children: Dall, Lem, Bill, and Ben. An initial report describes their escape as part of a larger “Stampede of Slaves,” noting the clear evidence of coordination as they acquired a wagon under the pretense of attending a camp meeting. Another article speculated they were seen on a canal boat near Cumberland, Maryland, suggesting they were using the C&O Canal to make their way north.
The bounty ads Scaggs placed, however, reveal a more intimate and courageous story. Adam Smith first self-liberated with the larger group, then risked his newfound freedom by returning to Scaggs’s farm to help his partner, Maria, and their four children escape with him. After the family was recaptured, Scaggs’s narrative shifted. He claimed in the press that a “would-be friend” had actually abducted them, intending to sell them into the domestic slave trade through a slave “pen” in Alexandria. This story, which contradicted earlier reports of an Underground Railroad escape, served to delegitimize abolitionist aid. As a final act of control, Scaggs had the newspapers publish Maria’s coerced “script of penitence.” Her forced expression of gratitude towards her enslaver was a calculated mode of survival, likely performed to ensure she and her children would not be sold South as punishment for their bid for freedom.
A post-emancipation record offers a final, telling chapter to the family’s story. In the Slave Statistics submitted by enslavers for potential compensation, Isaac Scaggs listed the people he held in bondage as of November 1, 1864, the date of Maryland’s emancipation. On that list were the four children: Dal (spelled Dall in the 1857 notice), Lem, Bill, and Ben.
Maria, their mother, was absent.
Her absence from the record points to one of two likely, and equally tragic, outcomes. It is possible that between 1857 and 1864, Maria made another, successful bid for freedom, a choice that would have required the devastating sacrifice of leaving her children behind. Alternatively, Scaggs may have made good on the implicit threat in the recapture notice, selling Maria to the domestic slave trade as a final act of retribution for her agency in the 1857 escape. Regardless of the specific path, the official record confirms the family unit was violently and permanently broken before emancipation arrived.
“STAMPEDE OF SLAVES.” Evening Star [Washington, D.C.], 25 Aug. 1857, p. 3. newspapers.comTranscription of Stampede of Slaves
STAMPEDE OF SLAVES.—On Saturday, a number of slaves, belonging to various citizens of the District, obtained a covered wagon, under pretence of going to the camp meeting in the adjoining county. They departed, but have not returned, and their owners have reason to believe that they have emigrated by the underground railroad. Some fifteen slaves are missing, most of them belonging in this city and county. Among the losers are Messrs. Linton, Randolph, Harbaugh, and Isaac Scaggs. Officers have been in search of the fugitives, but up to this time none have been recovered.
Transcription of Abducted Slave Regained
Abducted Slave Regained.—Our readers will remember that we, a few weeks ago, related the elopement from their home, on the line of the Baltimore Railroad, of a number of slaves, the property of Mr. ISAAC SCAGGS, of this county, including a man, woman and four children. We learn that this woman and children have been reclaimed. Our informant gives us the following account, as received from the woman:
On her way from dinner to the field she met a man, who asked if she would not like to better her condition. An affirmative answer being given—“like a fool to leave so good a master,” as she expresses it—he made arrangements to meet her that night, which he did, and compelled her, with her family, ranging from two to fourteen years of age, to walk to Washington, a distance of from twelve to fourteen miles. On reaching that city they were locked up, and allowed to see no one, except the woman who supplied them with the necessaries of life. They were finally taken to Alexandria and placed in a “pen,” and, had not their owner succeeded in finding them there, would doubtless have been sold away down South. She expresses her detestation of the would-be friends of the slave, and is now satisfied with her return to her old quarters.
Slave pen, Alexandria, Va. Virginia Alexandria United States, None. [Photographed between 1861 and 1865, printed between 1880 and 1889] Photograph. https://www.loc.gov/item/2013651888/.American Anti-Slavery Society. Slave market of America. New York: Published by the American Anti-Slavery Society, 1836. Broadside. Library of Congress, Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Washington, D.C. Accessed July 6, 2025. https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/2008661294/.
exorcism
illusion of Justice and Mercy
These events shook the established sense of security in Queen Anne District, creating a panic to rival the Panic of 1857. Not only was the global market in crisis, imperiling the sale of the planters’ cash crops, but Harwood’s insolvency was a stark reminder of the crisis that beheld the perilous role of credit in the lives of American capitalists. Moreover, agitators, decoys and the Underground Railroad was stealing the planters’ most valuable assets: the people they enslaved. This double threat to the financial security of planters required them to convene and establish a response to the threats to their security.
The planters of Queen Anne District, roiled by the recent events, met as a committee of citizens and as such, resolved that William B. Harwood, disgraced merchant, be expelled from Queen Anne for his “illegal trafficking with negroes” — the phrase “trafficking with negroes” could refer to the trafficking of stolen goods, warned about by M. S. Plummer, or could refer to the trafficking of stolen people, warned about by Isaac Scaggs. In either situation, the “most respectable and intelligent farmers and slaveholders of that section” acted outside of a legal court proceeding and as a self-appointed vigilance committee. By framing their meeting as a consideration of “matters appertaining to their interests,” they were asserting their collective power to define and enforce the social and economic rules of the community.
Occurring in the midst of a national financial panic and after a summer of high-profile escapes, the expulsion of William B. Harwood was the culmination of multiple crises. He was the perfect scapegoat: a failed merchant with a history of violating social norms. The “Notice to Quit” was the planter community’s definitive response, an act of vigilantism that purged a man they saw as a threat to their economic interests, their social order, and the institution of slavery itself.
“Notice to Quit,” The Planters’ Advocate (Upper Marlborough, MD), December 9, 1857.Transcription of “Notice to Quit”
**Notice to Quit.—**We learn that a large meeting of citizens of Queen Anne District and the adjoining portions of Anne Arundel, comprising many of the most respectable and intelligent farmers and slaveholders of that section, was held at Queen Anne on Saturday last to consider certain matters appertaining to their interests. The result of their resolutions was to serve on WM. B. HARWOOD of that place a notice to quit the neighborhood, and giving him thirty days in which to remove. The cause of this action was alleged illegal trafficking with negroes on the part of HARWOOD and general conduct in the premises that was thought to be incompatible with the interest of the community.