On the alarm being given, the captain called all hands to get up and fight. Henry Speck, one of the crew, was knocked down with a handspike. The helmsman was a Frenchman.11 Elijah Morris and Pompey Garrison12 were going to kill him, when Madison told them they should not kill him, because he was a Frenchman, and could not speak English; so they spared his life. Blair Curtis, one of the crew, came aft into the cabin and concealed himself in the state room with Stevens, and escaped with him to the fore royal yard.
The captain fought with his bowie knife along-side of Hewell. The captain was engaged in the fight from eight to ten minutes, until the negroes got him down, in the starboard scuppers.13 He then made his escape to the maintop, being stabbed in several places, and much bruised with blows from sticks of wood found about the brig. After the captain got into the maintop, he fainted from the loss of blood, and Gifford fastened him with the rigging to prevent him from falling, as the vessel was then rolling heavily.
The captain’s wife, her child and niece, then came and begged for their lives,14 and Ben Blacksmith sent them to the hold. Ben then called out for Merritt, and exclaimed that all who had secreted him should be killed. The two female servants then left the berth where Merritt was concealed, and were sent down to the hold by Ben. Jim and Lewis, negroes, belonging to Thomas McCargo, then ran to Theophilus McCargo, who asked Jim if the others were going to kill him. Jim and Lewis exclaimed that ‘master, HE should not be killed,’ and clung around him, begging Morris and Ben, who were then close with their knives in their hands, not to kill him. They consented, and ordered him to be taken to the hold. Jim and Lewis went voluntarily with Theophilus McCargo to the hold.
After a great deal of search, Merritt was found, and Ben Blacksmith and Elijah dragged him from his berth. They and several others surrounded him with knives, half handspikes, muskets and pistols, raised their weapons to kill him, and made room for him to fall.
On his representing that he had been the mate of a vessel, that he was the only person who could navigate for them, and on Mary, a woman servant belonging to McCargo, urging said Madison Washington to interfere, Madison ordered them to stop and allow Merritt to have a conversation with him. This took place in a state room.
Madison said he wanted to go to Liberia.15 Merritt represented that they had not water and provisions for that voyage. Ben Blacksmith, D. Ruffin16 and several of the slaves then said that they wanted to go to the British Islands. They did not want to go any where else but where Mr. Lumpkin’s negroes went last year, alluding to the shipwreck of schooner Hermosa on Abaco, and the taking of the slaves on board that vessel, by the English wreckers, to Nassau, in the Island of New-Providence.17
Merritt then got his chart and explained to them the route, and read to them the Coast Pilot,18 and they agreed that if he would navigate them, they would save his life—otherwise death would be his portion. Pompey Garrison had been to New Orleans and knew the route. D. Ruffin and George Portlock19 knew the letters of the compass. They then set Merritt free, and demanded the time of night, which was half past one o’clock, A.M. by Merritt’s watch. The vessel was then put in Merritt’s charge.20
The nineteen slaves confined at Nassau, are the only slaves who took any part in the affray. All the women appeared to be perfectly ignorant of the plan, and from their conduct, could not have known anything about it. They were crying and praying during the night. None of the male slaves apparently under twenty years took any part in the affray….
Done and protested at New-Orleans, this 7th day of December, 1841, the protestors herewith signing their respective names with said notary.
[Signed]
ZEPHANIAH C. GIFFORD,
HENRY SPECK,
BLAIR CURTISS,
JOHN SILVEY,
FRANCIS FOXWELL.
Mr. Merritt and Mr. Theophilus McCargo have certified on the original of this protest to the truth of the above.
1. At the southern tip of Great Abaco Island in the northern Bahamas.
2. Zephaniah Gifford, first mate, who took command of the Creole after Captain Robert Ensor was severely injured. By “appearer,” Lewis refers to one of the officers and seamen who appeared before him to offer testimony.
3. Based on the chronology in the “Protest,” the Creole left Norfolk on 13 October and sailed up the James River to Richmond to pick up more slaves. It left Richmond on 25 October and sailed back down the James to Hampton Roads, leaving for New Orleans on the 30th. The U.S. Senate report of 20 January 1842, drawing on depositions from Captain Robert Ensor, First Mate Zephaniah Gifford, and Second Mate Lucius Stevens, confirms the first two dates but states that the Creole left Hampton Roads for New Orleans on 27 October.
4. Thomas McCargo had brought along his young son, Theophilus, to teach him the slave-trading business.
5. Elijah Morris was one of the four leaders of the mutiny, along with Madison Washington, Ben Blacksmith (also known as Ben Johnstone), and D. (or Doctor) Ruffin.
6. Jacob Miller, one of the passengers, is listed as Jacob Leitener (also Lightner and Leidney) in other documents. A Prussian cook, he assisted the steward, William Devereux.
7. Lewis McCargo, the slave and servant of Thomas McCargo, also assisted the steward, William Devereux. In this sentence, commas have been corrected from the published account, and semicolons added, to avoid confusion.
8. Metal bar used as a lever.
9. Ben Blacksmith is listed as Ben Johnstone in other documents. He was probably a blacksmith.
10. Henry Speck was one of five sailors on the Creole; the others were John Silvy, Jacques LeComte, Francis Foxwell, and Blinn (or Blair) Curtis, who is listed as Blair Blinn in most other documents.
11. Jacques LeComte (also spelled Leconte).
12. One of the nineteen rebels, Pompey Garrison was not considered one of the leaders of the rebellion.
13. Openings at deck level to allow water to run off.
14. Captain Robert Ensor had brought along his wife, their fifteen-month-old daughter, and his fifteen-year-old niece.
15. A country in West Africa that was founded during the 1820s by the American Colonization Society, a white-led organization that hoped to solve the U.S. race problem by shipping blacks to Africa. The Republic of Liberia achieved its independence in 1847.
16. D. Ruffin, one of the leaders of the rebellion, is listed as Doctor Ruffin in other documents.
17. Many of the slaves on board the Creole came from Robert Lumpkin’s slave pen in Richmond, Virginia, and thus would have known about the wreck of his ship Hermosa and the subsequent liberation of the slaves on board.
18. A navigation guide.
19. George Portlock was one of the nineteen rebels.
20. See Merritt’s deposition below.
“The Hero Mutineers”
The New Orleans “Protest” was the first of a number of pieces about the Creole that Garrison would print in his newspaper. In the 7 January 1842 issue of the Liberator (the source of the text below), he published an account of the rebellion that had first appeared, in a slightly different form, in December 1841 issues of the New York Evangelist and the New York Journal of Commerce.
In publishing the Protest of the officers and crew of the Creole, we have wished to place an important providential event in such a manner before our readers, as to enable them to give it the most thorough consideration. Like the death of Lovejoy1 and the case of the Amistad captives, it forms a part of that train of high providences by which God is developing to this nation the nature of slavery—its deleterious influence, and the absolute necessity of its abolition. The Protest is from the officers and crew of the Creole, given before a Notary Public, in New-Orleans, and cannot be supposed to represent in too favorable colors the conduct of the mutineers. We hope every reader of the Evangelist will give it a thorough perusal.
We read it with surprise and admiration. Whether we consider the force and presence of mind displayed, the clemency exercised, the unsleeping vigilance maintained, or
the sublime reliance on the justice of their cause, as they approached Nassau, we confess that we can think of nothing in the long range of history which gives a nobler impression.
Of the 135 slaves confined in the hold, only 19 appear to have taken any active part in the revolt. Of these 19, four appear to have been the chief agents.2 Of these, one who wore a name unfit for a slave, but finely expressive for a hero, seems to have been the master spirit—that name was Madison Washington! By the way, we have always thought it a singular, nay, a dangerous practice, to confer such emphatic names upon men in bondage.
It does not appear whether the mutineers had previously digested their plan, or not. If they had, they betrayed remarkable fidelity and efficiency in bringing it to an issue. If not, the leaders, and especially Madison Washington, manifested astonishing presence of mind and decision of character, in his movement. His reply to Merritt, when found in the hold where the women were kept—his escape to the deck, in spite of the united resistance of Merritt and Gifford—his commanding attitude and daring orders, when he stood a freeman on the slaver’s deck, and his perfect preparation for the grand alternative of liberty or death, which stood before him, are splendid exemplifications of the true heroic.3
His generous leniency towards his prisoners, his oppressors—men who were carrying him and 134 others, from a condition of slavery already intolerable, to one which threatened still more galling chains, is another remarkable feature. He spared the life of the poor Frenchman,4 because he could not speak English, and the captain’s life, at the entreaty of his wife and children. He dressed the wounds of the poor sailors who had fought against him; he spared the life of Merritt and also of young Theophilus McCargo;5 and when he had command of the cabin, invited the whites to partake of its refreshments. All his movements show that malice and revenge formed no part of his motives.
Yet this leniency was accompanied with the most vigorous and efficient measures. How nobly he seems, when making Merritt pledge, at the mouth of the musket, at one o’clock at night, to navigate the vessel to New Providence; when commanding the captain and Merritt to have no communication; when placing the sailors on duty at their usual posts, and subjecting them to the same necessary restriction of non-intercourse; when pacing the deck with his three brave associates until morning, with his knife drawn, and his eye upon every spot where the least danger could arise! To heighten the moral grandeur of the scene, remember that he did not know how many of the remaining slaves might side against him; and even feared he should have to quell an insurrection against the new authority. The 19 consulted together, kept their counsels to themselves—and, so far as we can learn, exercised complete self-control over their passions, and maintained uninterrupted harmony of purpose and action.
But nothing in the whole affair appears so sublimely affecting as their conduct on arriving at Nassau. They divested themselves of all their arms, even casting them into the sea, and came before the British authorities defenceless—confiding in the justice of their cause, and in the protection of free and righteous institutions against the claims of their oppressors! Noble men! Here was no sense of guilt, no meanness, no deception. They only wished to say emphatically, what they did; that they only sought to obtain their freedom. This act of theirs is a splendid tribute to the British Government, and is a brighter gem in the diadem of her sovereign, than the victory of any battle field. It was confidence in law, sustained by power, and founded on unquestionable justice. Take it altogether, it was morally magnificent. The liberty which saluted them on landing, by the triumphant shouts of thousands that welcomed them, must have been a glorious reward to these men for their brave and perilous achievement.
In these remarks, our readers will perceive that we have done little more than to translate, in the appropriate language of freedom, the statements of the Protest, written by their enemies. The case before us is important, however, as we suggested at first, on account of its providential relations to the great question of abolition. It differs from that of the Amistad captives in one grand point, viz: that these by law were slaves, while those were not.6 The public at large, and the supreme voice of immutable law, pronounced the Mendians innocent, nay, extolled their conduct. The public is now called upon to decide upon another case, divided from that of the Mendians only by the narrow line of a law, in its nature confessedly unjust, and abominable to every intelligent freeman.
The claim of property in their flesh and bones and souls, asserted by slaveholding law, was not, could not have been binding on the slaves themselves. There are only two grand reasons which render it the duty of men, in any circumstances, to submit to the enforcement of such an ignominious claim on themselves and their offspring. One is the hope of obtaining deliverance by patient waiting, and the other is the impossibility of obtaining it by insurrection. These two reasons rest over the condition of our Southern slaves at large, and sustain the true abolition doctrine of doing nothing to encourage, but every thing to discourage insurrection.
But these reasons in the case of the Creole slaves, had vanished. Before them, there was a splendid prospect, by valorous resistance, of immediate and perpetual liberty. Again we repeat it, the restraining reasons had vanished, and both law and gospel justified their rising.
Admitting the truth of these positions, (and they will be sustained by the voice of the American public, and of British law,) the institution of slavery will stand out before our people in the most appalling aspect. We do not wish to push the subject too far, at present. But we wish to enquire, whether, if Great Britain refuses to give up these ‘murderers,’ the American people are prepared to enforce the demand against her? We wish to enquire if our readers have reflected on that portion of the Report of the Secretary of the Navy, which points out the danger of our Southern coast in case of war with Great Britain, arising from the existence of slavery?7 We wish our readers would reflect on these possibilities, and thus discern how great a national risk we run, by the direful bearings of this detestable institution, entrenched in the protection of a system of government, by nature perfectly averse to it.
We suggest these reflections, in order to show the reader the necessity of using every possible means to bring about voluntary emancipation. By all the love we have for the American Union—by all the respect we cherish for the principles of universal law—by all the horror we entertain of war between two such governments as those of Great Britain and the United States, and by the dread with which we regard the spirit of insurrection, as well as by all the immense systems of interests, embossed in the destinies of three millions of slaves, and all the intermingled relations of the church of God, we beseech, as if all these were beseeching, that our readers will universally realize the necessity of the most kind, wise, urgent and immediate exertions, to accomplish their cheerful and voluntary emancipation. We have no time to lose. The voice of Providence speaks sternly against our delay. If we have arguments, let us set them all in order; if we have tears, let us bid them flow; if we have eloquence, let us consecrate it to the service; if we have philosophy, let us learn to discern and discriminate on this subject; and if we have religion, let us send up continual prayer before God, that he will overrule all this matter in tender mercy, and bring us to a happy issue of justice, freedom and perpetual union.
1. The antislavery journalist Elijah Parish Lovejoy (1802–1837) was killed by a proslavery mob during an assault on his press in Alton, Illinois.
2. The four leaders of the slave rebellion were Madison Washington, Ben Blacksmith (or Johnstone), Elijah Morris, and D. (or Doctor) Ruffin. The other fifteen mutineers were George Grandy (who died from a head wound received during the mutiny), Richard Butler, Phil Jones, Robert Lumpkin (or Lumpley), Peter Smallwood, Harner Smith, Walter Brown, Adam Carney (who was killed during the mutiny), Horace Beverly, America Addison Tyler, William Jenkins, Pompey Garrison, George Basden, and George Portlock.
3. William H. Merritt, a slave trader on board the Creole, was responsible for overseeing the slave
s; see his deposition in the next selection below. Zephaniah C. Gifford was the first mate.
4. Jacques LeComte (also spelled Leconte) was the French helmsman.
5. The son of Virginia slave trader Thomas McCargo, who owned many of the slaves on board the Creole.
6. The U.S. Supreme Court decided that the Amistad rebels, who were Mende-speaking people from West Africa, could not be considered slaves because of the illegality of the international slave trade.
7. The novelist and playwright James Kirke Paulding (1778–1860) served as secretary of the navy from 1838 to 1841. During that time he submitted an annual report on the state of U.S. naval forces.
Deposition of William H. Merritt
When the Creole arrived at the British colony of Nassau, Bahamas, Madison Washington and his fellow rebels were initially jailed by British authorities. But the British refused to return the slaves to the Creole’s white officers (and eventually freed Washington and his compatriots), thus setting off a diplomatic incident. To make the case for the return of the slaves, the white officers, sailors, and slave traders told their stories in November 1841 to the New York lawyer and diplomat John F. Bacon (1789–1862), who at the time was U.S. consul in Nassau. From the point of view of Bacon and other U.S officials, the blacks were murderous rebels who should be returned to their white owners, but antislavery people who read the same depositions tended to regard the blacks as resourceful, freedom loving, and compassionate. The depositions became part of the U.S. record of the rebellion, and were presented by President Tyler and Secretary of State Webster to the U.S. Senate on 19 January 1842, and were printed as Senate Document 51, 27th Congress, 2nd session, 1842 (the source of the text below). The deposition of the slave trader William H. Merritt, whose job on the Creole was to oversee the slaves, is of particular interest because aspects of his account clearly had an impact on Douglass’s conception of Tom Grant in The Heroic Slave. Douglass may have read Merritt’s full deposition in Senate Document 51; he almost certainly knew the shorter version of Merritt’s story given in the New Orleans “Protest.”
Two Slave Rebellions at Sea Page 11