Extradition case of John Anderson
Encyclopedia
The Anderson case took place in Canada West from 1860-1861. The case dealt with whether or not to extradite an escaped slave to the United States on the charge of murder. The majority of the presiding judges who handled the case agreed that there was sufficient evidence to prove criminality of the extraditable offence. The decision was based upon the terms laid out in article X of the Webster-Ashburton Treaty
of 1842. Anderson was released however, on a technicality.
slave who escaped to Canada, evading the pursuit of bounty hunters. While on the run he killed a farmer from Howard County, Missouri. Anderson stabbed the farmer, Seneca Digges, who died shortly after. Digges intended to legally recapture Anderson, and ultimately send him back into his master’s custody. Anderson lived and worked in Canada West from 1854 to April 1860, managing to keep a low profile. Anderson was eventually arrested and held by Magistrate William Matthews in Brantford.
John Anderson's motive for escape arose following his sale to another farmer. He realized he would never see his family again in such a situation, and this was unbearable. He hoped to become a legitimate free man and work so he could earn enough money to purchase his family out of bondage. Escape to Canada became his only option after he allegedly killed Missouri farmer Seneca Digges 'by accident' when an attempt on his capture was made by Digges. When he got to Canada there was wanted posters everywhere. The Canadian citizenry and the government at the time engaged in heated debate over whether it was acceptable for Anderson to live free their country. Some people thought that he was dangerous and might end up killing Canadian farmers. Others denied feeling any threat of danger from the man, and argued for him to stay.
of habeas corpus
for him to appear before a court in London, England, to Britain's Canadian subjects who were already in the process of handling the situation. “Not only was the writ ‘an evil precedent’, but it could lead to further conflict between English and Canadian judicatures.” The English courts never got their chance to handle the case because Anderson’s appeal was expedited to the Court of Common Pleas. He was released due to faulty wording in the warrant
.
, and the negative reaction to it, uncovered the need for written clarification of the relationship between English and Canadian courts. As one result, the Habeas Corpus Act 1862
was passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom
in 1862, which denied British courts the right to issue writs of habeas corpus
for British colonies or dominions with their own courts capable of doing so. It reaffirmed that Canadian jurisdictions had become self-sufficient and did not take kindly to interferences in their judicial system. It is a significant case to study in Canada’s legal, political, and social heritage.
Webster-Ashburton Treaty
The Webster–Ashburton Treaty, signed August 9, 1842, was a treaty resolving several border issues between the United States and the British North American colonies...
of 1842. Anderson was released however, on a technicality.
Background
John Anderson was an African AmericanAfrican American
African Americans are citizens or residents of the United States who have at least partial ancestry from any of the native populations of Sub-Saharan Africa and are the direct descendants of enslaved Africans within the boundaries of the present United States...
slave who escaped to Canada, evading the pursuit of bounty hunters. While on the run he killed a farmer from Howard County, Missouri. Anderson stabbed the farmer, Seneca Digges, who died shortly after. Digges intended to legally recapture Anderson, and ultimately send him back into his master’s custody. Anderson lived and worked in Canada West from 1854 to April 1860, managing to keep a low profile. Anderson was eventually arrested and held by Magistrate William Matthews in Brantford.
Legal & Political Significance
Some have argued that the Anderson case, aside from igniting a media, legal, and political frenzy, had a profound impact on Canada’s future relationship with Britain (Brode 1989, Farwell 1912, Reinders 1975). It also set an important precedent for Canadian leaders to make the superior courts handle the most political divisive decisions, which had originally been reserved for the executive branch of government.John Anderson's motive for escape arose following his sale to another farmer. He realized he would never see his family again in such a situation, and this was unbearable. He hoped to become a legitimate free man and work so he could earn enough money to purchase his family out of bondage. Escape to Canada became his only option after he allegedly killed Missouri farmer Seneca Digges 'by accident' when an attempt on his capture was made by Digges. When he got to Canada there was wanted posters everywhere. The Canadian citizenry and the government at the time engaged in heated debate over whether it was acceptable for Anderson to live free their country. Some people thought that he was dangerous and might end up killing Canadian farmers. Others denied feeling any threat of danger from the man, and argued for him to stay.
Assistance
Anti-slavery associations from Britain and pre-Confederation Canada played an instrumental role in assisting Anderson before, during, and after the case. Sir John A. Macdonald, made use of public funds to foot the bill for Anderson’s legal defences.Britain Attempts to Intervene
A crucial feature in the whole situation occurred while Anderson was awaiting an appeal of the Canadian court’s initial decision, which stipulated that he should indeed be extradited. The British Court of Queen’s Bench attempted to interfere by sending a writWrit
In common law, a writ is a formal written order issued by a body with administrative or judicial jurisdiction; in modern usage, this body is generally a court...
of habeas corpus
Habeas corpus
is a writ, or legal action, through which a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to his aid. Habeas corpus originated in the English legal system, but it is now available in many nations...
for him to appear before a court in London, England, to Britain's Canadian subjects who were already in the process of handling the situation. “Not only was the writ ‘an evil precedent’, but it could lead to further conflict between English and Canadian judicatures.” The English courts never got their chance to handle the case because Anderson’s appeal was expedited to the Court of Common Pleas. He was released due to faulty wording in the warrant
Warrant (law)
Most often, the term warrant refers to a specific type of authorization; a writ issued by a competent officer, usually a judge or magistrate, which permits an otherwise illegal act that would violate individual rights and affords the person executing the writ protection from damages if the act is...
.
Reactions
The issue with the English writWrit
In common law, a writ is a formal written order issued by a body with administrative or judicial jurisdiction; in modern usage, this body is generally a court...
, and the negative reaction to it, uncovered the need for written clarification of the relationship between English and Canadian courts. As one result, the Habeas Corpus Act 1862
Habeas Corpus Act 1862
The Habeas Corpus Act 1862 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that limited the right of the English courts to issue writs of habeas corpus in British colonies or dominions...
was passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom
Parliament of the United Kingdom
The Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is the supreme legislative body in the United Kingdom, British Crown dependencies and British overseas territories, located in London...
in 1862, which denied British courts the right to issue writs of habeas corpus
Habeas corpus
is a writ, or legal action, through which a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to his aid. Habeas corpus originated in the English legal system, but it is now available in many nations...
for British colonies or dominions with their own courts capable of doing so. It reaffirmed that Canadian jurisdictions had become self-sufficient and did not take kindly to interferences in their judicial system. It is a significant case to study in Canada’s legal, political, and social heritage.