DOCSLIB.ORG

James Oakes (The Crooked Path to Abolition) Part 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
James Oakes (The Crooked Path to Abolition) Part 1 H-CivWar Author Interview--James Oakes (The Crooked Path to Abolition) Part 1 Discussion published by Niels Eichhorn on Thursday, May 20, 2021 Hello H-CivWar Readers: Today we feature James Oakes to talk about his new The Crooked Path to Abolition: Abraham Lincoln and the Antislavery Constitution, published by W. W. Norton in January 2021. James Oakes is a Distinguished Professor of History at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. He received his Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley. He has published The Ruling Race (1982); Slavery and Freedom: An Interpretation of the Old South (1990); The Radical and the Republican: Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, and the Triumph of Antislavery Politics (2007); and Freedom National: The Destruction of Slavery in the United States, 1861–1865 (2012). To start, Jim, you have written quite a few books, how did you decide to write one on Lincoln and slavery and the Constitution? JO: I never expected, or planned, to write this book. Do we really need another book on Lincoln? In some ways, Crooked Path was—like emancipation—the product of contingent circumstances. I had written an essay that is now the last chapter of the book, on Lincoln and the origins of the Thirteenth amendment. My editor read it and suggested I turn it into a short book. I had already published an essay on Lincoln and race that seemed relevant, and I was finishing up another essay on Lincoln and emancipation in the first year of the war. So I was sitting on three essays that would become chapters when my editor made the suggestion. At the same time I was teaching a documents-based seminar on antislavery constitutionalism, in which Lincoln was tangential. So when my editor made the suggestion I decided to write a couple of new chapters on antislavery constitutionalism and to revise the essays I’d written in their light. Hence Lincoln and the Antislavery Constitution. But there’s a longer intellectual biography to the book, going all the way back to my years in graduate school. I was interested in legal history and was reading books by Bill Wiecek and Robert Cover on slavery, antislavery and the Constitution. At Berkeley I took a class on the history of the common law and studied with a couple of superb legal historians, Jim Kettner and John Noonan, both experts on slavery and antislavery. I was also strongly influenced by Eric Foner’s first book on free labor ideology, which has a compelling chapter on Salmon Chase and the antislavery Constitution. My interest in what might be called the political history of the law was reinforced by Stan Katz when I was teaching at Princeton. As a “preceptor” (basically a faculty TA) for his is course on American legal history I came to think of think of law as a connecting link between social and political history. At one point Stan invited Paul Finkelman to campus to present an early version of his pivotal essay on slavery and the founders, and I pretty much accepted Paul’s neo-Garrisonian interpretation of the Constitution as a proslavery document. I even published an article to that effect. At that point, however, I was primarily interested in slavery. My interest in antislavery constitutionalism was rekindled when I wrote a book on Lincoln and Frederick Douglass. Anyone who studies Douglass has to come to terms with his famous and very public break with Garrison. Douglass’s conversion to the antislavery interpretation of the Citation: Niels Eichhorn. Author Interview--James Oakes (The Crooked Path to Abolition) Part 1. H-CivWar. 05-20-2021. https://networks.h-net.org/node/4113/discussions/7744894/author-interview-james-oakes-crooked-path-abolition-part-1 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. 1 H-CivWar Constitution intrigued me, although my initial thought was that his analysis of the Constitution was brilliant but, alas, rather eccentric. It no longer seems eccentric to me. It wasn’t until I started working on Freedom National that I began to notice that, from the earliest months of the war, Republicans were uniformly claiming that the Constitution empowered to federal government to adopt a number of antislavery policies. I started pushing backward to find the origins of the Republican interpretation. Suddenly the stuff I had read in graduate school years before became newly relevant. My first outing on the subject was a short book on antislavery politics called The Scorpion’s Sting. But I just kept pulling on that thread, and the result, I suppose, is The Crooked Path to Abolition. What do you argue in The Crooked Path to Abolition? JO: I argue that the founders did indeed make important proslavery compromises in the Constitution, as a number of distinguished scholars have argued—not only Paul, but also Staughton Lynd, George Van Cleve, and my friend David Waldstreicher. But the founders also made compromised with the opponents of slavery. The proslavery delegates at the constitutional convention were forced to accept a three-fifths clause rather than the five-fifths they wanted, for example. The deep South delegates also swallowed a slave trade clause they didn’t want, allowing the federal government to take control of the trade away from the states. The Constitution empowered Congress to ban slavery from the territories. And perhaps most significantly—as Sean Wilentz has demonstrated--proslavery delegates tried and failed to secure a constitutional right of “property in man.” Everyone agreed that the federal government could not abolish slavery in a state. That’s the “Federal Consensus,” as Bill Wiecek named it decades ago. But there was sharp disagreement, right from the start, over how much power the federal government had over other aspects of slavery—the slave trade, slavery in the territories and in Washington, D.C., over fugitive slave renditions, and even the domestic slave trade. For me, then, the critical question is notwhich interpretation of the Constitution was correct? Rather, the issue was always the balance of political power between those who supported a proslavery reading and those who affirmed the antislavery reading of the Constitution. Both proslavery and antislavery constitutionalism developed in relation to each other through a series of political disputes beginning in the 1790s and continuing to the Civil War. In the book I trace the role of antislavery activists, black and white, in developing an increasingly robust antislavery constitutionalism. They colonized more and more of the Constitution—the Preamble, the exclusive jurisdiction clause, the privileges and immunities clause, the Fourth, Tenth, and especially the Fifth amendment. They also insisted that the guiding “spirit” of the Constitution was the principle of fundamental human equality articulated in the Declaration of Independence. Over the course of the 1840s and early 1850s a powerful antislavery constitutional synthesis emerged, even as antislavery moved from the radical margins back into the mainstream of American politics. Antislavery activists and politicians did not deny the proslavery compromises in the Constitution. But they argued that those compromises were exceptions to the general rule of freedom in the Constitution. This is not an entirely fanciful reading. The Preamble does state that the purpose of the government was to secure the blessings of liberty, and the Fifth amendment says that no “person” (and slaves are only referred to as persons) could be deprived of liberty without due process of law. And so in the parlance of slavery’s opponents, the Constitution made “Freedom the Rule, Slavery the Exception.” Citation: Niels Eichhorn. Author Interview--James Oakes (The Crooked Path to Abolition) Part 1. H-CivWar. 05-20-2021. https://networks.h-net.org/node/4113/discussions/7744894/author-interview-james-oakes-crooked-path-abolition-part-1 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. 2 H-CivWar I argue that the antislavery Republican Party that emerged in the 1850s was based on a radicalized antislavery constitutionalism. Although the policy of banning slavery from the territories became the common ground for Republicans of all stripes, the underlying constitutional principles justifying that policy, as reflected in the party platforms of 1856 and 1860, were quite radical. For example, Republicans did not merely say that Congress had the power to ban slavery from the territories, they said that Congress could not constitutionally allow slavery in the territories. Congress could no more create a slave than a king. This was so radical that the Republican victory in the 1860 presidential election prompted the secession of seven slave states. You write about something you call “The Antislavery Project.” Can you describe it? JO: The Antislavery Constitution had two distinct policy implications, one for peacetime and the other in case of secession and war. What I call the Antislavery Project, first formulated by the pioneering abolitionist Benjamin Lundy, was a set of policies to be implemented in peacetime. Taken together, the policies were designed to pressure the slave states to abolish slavery on their own. Congress could, “under the Constitution,” ban slavery from the territories, establish rigorous legal standards for fugitive slave renditions, abolish slavery in Washington, DC, suppress slavery on the high seas, and perhaps regulate the domestic slave trade, especially the coastwise slave trade. By surrounding the slave states with free states, free territories, and free oceans—what was known as a “cordon of freedom”—the federal government would indirectly compel the slave states to abolish slavery on their own. This is crucial: The federal government could not abolish slavery in a state, so the goal of abolitionism, and of antislavery politics, was to get the slave states to abolish slavery on their own.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Slavery in the United States - Wikipedia Page 1 of 25
    Slavery in the United States - Wikipedia Page 1 of 25 Slavery in the United States Slavery in the United States was the legal institution of human chattel enslavement, primarily of Africans and African Americans, that existed in the United States of America in the 18th and 19th centuries. Slavery had been practiced by Americans under British rule from early colonial days, and was legal in all Thirteen Colonies at the time of the Declaration of Independence in 1776. It lasted until the end of the American Civil War. By the time of the American Revolution (1775–1783), the status of slave had been institutionalized as a racial caste associated with African ancestry.[1] When the United States Constitution was ratified (1789), a relatively small number of free people of color were among the voting citizens (male property owners).[2] During and immediately following the Revolutionary War, abolitionist laws were passed in most Northern states and a movement developed to abolish slavery. Most of these states had a higher proportion of free labor than in the South and economies based on different industries. They abolished slavery by the end of the 18th century, some with gradual systems that kept adults as slaves for two decades. However, the rapid expansion of the cotton industry in the Deep South after the invention of the cotton gin greatly increased demand for slave labor, and the An animation showing when United States territories and states Southern states continued as slave societies. Those states attempted to extend slavery into the new Western forbade or allowed slavery, 1789–1861.
    [Show full text]
  • America's Historical and Cultural Organizations
    NEH Application Cover Sheet America's Historical and Cultural Organizations PROJECT DIRECTOR Barbara C Batson E-mail:[email protected] Exhibitions Coordinator Phone(W): 804-692-3518 800 East Broad Street Phone(H): Richmond, VA 23219-8000 Fax: UNITED STATES Field of Expertise: Arts: History, Criticism, and Theory of the Arts INSTITUTION Library of Virginia Foundation Richmond, VA UNITED STATES APPLICATION INFORMATION Title: To Be Sold: Virginia and the American Slave Trade Grant Period: From 4/2014 to 5/2016 Field of Project: History: U.S. History; History: African American History Description of Project: To Be Sold: Virginia and the American Slave Trade is an exploration of the visual and material culture of the American domestic slave trade captured through the paintings and illustrations created by British artist Eyre Crowe based on his 1853 visit to Richmond's slave market. Crowe's works captured the complexities and pathos of American slavery and the internal slave trade. To Be Sold uses Crowe's works as the basis to explore Virginia's role as a mass exporter of enslaved people through the Richmond market to the Lower South and the inner workings of the market itself--the most profitable economic activity in terms of gross receipts in Virginia and possibly the nation. To Be Sold is the first exhibition to explore and examine the development of the visual and material culture of the internal slave trade. The project is comprised of a traveling exhibition (January 2015-March 2016), a one- day, two-site webcast symposium,
    [Show full text]
  • ABRAHAM LINCOLN’S WHITE DREAM (Johnson Publishing, 1999)
    GO TO MASTER INDEX OF WARFARE 1 TWO PRESIDENTS, EMBODIMENTS OF AMERICAN RACISM “Lincoln must be seen as the embodiment, not the transcendence, of the American tradition of racism.” — Lerone Bennett, Jr., FORCED INTO GLORY: ABRAHAM LINCOLN’S WHITE DREAM (Johnson Publishing, 1999) 1. “Crosseyed people look funny.” — This is the 1st known image of Lincoln, a plate that was exposed in about 1846. Lincoln had a “lazy eye,” and at that early point the Daguerreotypists had not yet learned how to pose their subjects in order to evade the problem of one eye staring off at an angle. This wasn’t just Susan B. Anthony, and Francis Ellingwood Abbot, and Abraham Lincoln, and Jean-Paul Sartre, and Galileo Galilei, and Ben Turpin and Marty Feldman. Actually, this is a very general problem, with approximately one person out of every 25 to 50 suffering from some degree of strabismus (termed crossed eyes, lazy eye, turned eye, squint, double vision, floating, wandering, wayward, drifting, truant eyes, wall eyes described as having “one eye in York and the other in Cork”). Strabismus that is congenital, or develops in infancy, can create a brain condition known as amblyopia, in which to some degree the input from an eye are ignored although it is still capable of sight — or at least privileges inputs from the other eye. An article entitled “Was Rembrandt stereoblind?,” outlining research by Professor Margaret Livingstone of Harvard University and colleagues, was published in the September 14, 2004, issue of the _New England Journal of Medicine_. Rembrandt, a prolific painter of self-portraits, producing almost 100 if we include some 20 etchings.
    [Show full text]
  • 1315 Duke Street Alexandria , Virginia
    BUILDING AND PROPERTY HISTORY 1315 DUKE STREET ALEXANDRIA , VIRGINIA BENJAMIN A. SKOLNIK , PHD ALEXANDRIA ARCHAEOLOGY OFFICE OF HISTORIC ALEXANDRIA CITY OF ALEXANDRIA , VIRGINIA JANUARY 2021 1315 Duke Street – Building and Property History FRANKLIN AND ARMFIELD OFFICE NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK REFERENCE NUMBER : 78003146 VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HISTORIC RESOURCES ARCHITECTURE ID 100-0105 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE SITE NUMBER : 44AX0075 Cover image: Front of "slave pen," Alexandria, Va., Russell, Andrew J., photographer, [between 1861- 1865], Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/2006683273/ . See Figure 89. Office of Historic Alexandria P a g e | 2 City of Alexandria, Virginia 1315 Duke Street – Building and Property History CONTENTS SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................. 9 RESIDENCE (1812– 1828) ....................................................................................................................... 11 FRANKLIN & ARMFIELD (1828-1837) ............................................................................................... 20 GEORGE KEPHART & CO., ET AL. (1837-1859) .............................................................................. 53 PRICE, BIRCH, & CO. (1859-1861) ....................................................................................................... 86 MILITARY OCCUPATION DURING THE CIVIL WAR (1861-1866) ............................................. 91 BOARDING HOUSE
    [Show full text]
  • Ten Years of Political Abolitionism, the Liberty Party, 1839-1848
    THEY TOOK THE VAN1 TEN YEARS OF POLITICAL ABOLITIONISM, THE LIBERTY PARTY, 18.39-1848 A Thesis Presented to the F~culty of the School of Social Science Morehead State University In Partial }'ulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in History by Doris Lynn Koch May 1969 Accepted by the faculty of.the School of Social Scienoe, Morehead State University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts in History .degree. ) 'I I Director Master's Chairman ... TABLE OF CONTENTS . PAGE INTRODUCTION I I I I O I I I I I .._, .. • . .. · •·. • . 1 CHAPTER I. PETITIONING AND QUESTIONING FAI~ • • • • • • 5 II. UNITY FRml DIVISION • , , , • • , , , • • • , 17 III, EARLY DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LIBERTY PAR~Y • • 101 IV, A TRIO OF CArlDIDATES: THE ELECTION OF 1844 135 V. THE PARTY IN TRANSITION • •. , • • , , • • • . 158 . VI, THE LIBERTY PARTY IN DECLINE, , , , , • , , 181 ASSESSMENT OF THE LIBERTY PARTY , , , , , . , , , , , 213 BIBLIOGRAPHY . - . • • • .• . 220 ·- INTRODUCTION Panaticsl Disunionistsl Foolsl Such epithets were bailed at the men who from 1830 to 1860'labored tor the emancipation of the American Negro, The history of the Liberty party forms a chapter in the lengthy narrative of abolitionism, Throughout the history of civilization, men have found that by banding together and promoting their particular cause in the bounds of fellowship, their chances for success are greatly enhanced, Abolitionists did not form a coherent group until December 4, 1833, when deliberations in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
    [Show full text]
  • The African Squadron of the United States ! Navy, 1843-1861: a Critical Study
    I MASTER'S THESIS M ..619 Î 1 I PFAUTZ, James Coleman ! THE AFRICAN SQUADRON OF THE UNITED STATES ! NAVY, 1843-1861: A CRITICAL STUDY. Î r The American University, M.A., 1968 I Political Science, international law and relations University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan THE AFRICAN SQUADRON OF THE UNITED STATES NAVY 1843-1861 A CRITICAL STUDY By James Coleman Pfautz Submitted to the Faculty of the School of International Service of The American University in P artial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS Signature of Committee: Chairman Date: /sT j Dean ofthe^School AMERICAN UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Date: 1968 JUL181968 The American University Washington, D.C. WASHINGTON. O. C TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. INTRODUCTION . ......................................................................... 1 I I. THE WEBS TER-ASHBURTON TREATY AND ARTICLE EIGHT .............................................................. 5 III. THE AFRICAN SQUADRON.............................................................. 16 Operations of the Squadron......................................................... 16 The Issue of Health ............................................................................. 23 Squadron Equipm ent ........................................................................ 32 Squadron Leadership .............................. 7 .......................... 48 IV . THE BRITISH SQUADRON AND JOINT CR.TTISING . 67 V. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND THE SQUADRON MISSION........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Eugenics Eugenics
    “I am still at the mercy of words, though sometimes now, knowing a little of their behavior very well, I think I can influence them slightly and have even learned to beat them now and then, which they appear to enjoy.” - Dylan Thomas HDT WHAT? INDEX EUGENICS EUGENICS 1785 We who are accustomed to the present “one-drop rule” convention, whereby anyone with any black ancestry at all is categorized as “a black,” need to remind ourselves that in colonial Virginia the conventional distinction between black and white had been considered to be 1/8th black ancestry. In this year that social and legal convention was altered from 1/8th to 1/4th, which meant that in the state of Virginia in this year there would have been some enslaved individuals who were to be considered white, and over and above that there would have been free white citizens who nevertheless had noticeable African heritage. After Nat Turner’s insurrection, there would be legislation in Virginia to allow “white” citizens who had some African ancestry, if they were free (which wasn’t necessarily the case, as it was quite all right under Virginia statutes for a white person to be a slave of someone else), to obtain a document from a county court, certifying to the fact that whatever they looked like they were “not a negro.” By Thomas Jefferson’s own explication of this convention, it appears ambiguous whether he considered his sex slave Sally Hemings to be black or to be white, although, black or white, she would be nevertheless for life his slave (he would not release her from slavery, although he did honor the bargain he had made with her that some of their children would in his will be granted manumission documents).1“It is simply crazy that there should ever have come into being a world with such RACISM a sin in it, in which a man is set apart because of his color — the superficial fact about a human being.
    [Show full text]
  • The Moral and Political Economy of Northeastern Abolitionism, 1763–1833
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 2-2019 Human Capital: The Moral and Political Economy of Northeastern Abolitionism, 1763–1833 Michael Crowder The Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/3025 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] HUMAN CAPITAL: THE MORAL AND POLITICAL ECONOMY OF NORTHEASTERN ABOLITIONISM, 1763-1833 by MICHAEL A. CROWDER A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in History in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York 2019 © 2019 MICHAEL A. CROWDER All Rights Reserved ii Human Capital: The Moral and Political Economy of Northeastern Abolitionism, 1763-1833 by Michael A. Crowder This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in History in satisfaction of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. 1/16/2019 Date James Oakes Chair of Examining Committee 1/16/2019 Date Joel Allen Executive Officer Supervisory Committee: David Waldstreicher Richard Newman Jonathan Sassi Andrew Shankman THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii Abstract HUMAN CAPITAL: THE MORAL AND POLITICAL ECONOMY OF NORTHEASTERN ABOLITIONISM, 1763-1833 by Michael A. Crowder Advisor: James Oakes “Human Capital” explores the relationships between the moral imperatives of the antislavery movement in the New England and the mid- Atlantic, and their connections to evolving manufacturing and agricultural political economies premised on free labor regimes.
    [Show full text]
  • Princeton Seminary and Slavery: Context
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Princeton Seminary and Slavery: Context 4 The Seminary Founders and Their Involvement with Slavery 6 Slavery and the Seminary as Institution 10 Princeton Seminary, Slavery, and Colonization 15 Alumni: The Range of Opinion and Action on Slavery 28 Lessons, Implications, and Recommendations 49 Bibliography 54 Moving Forward.................................................... 58 Appendix A: Student Demographics, 1812-1865 60 Appendix B: Financial History, 1811-1861...........................................................90 Introduction When Princeton Theological Seminary was founded in 1812, it was part of a national culture and a local community that were deeply entangled in slavery. The faculty and students at Princeton Seminary in its early years through the Civil War would have encountered slavery as a familiar aspect of life. It was part of the context of their theological studies in this place. Just as they were shaped by their context, the faculty and graduates of Princeton Seminary also shaped the town of Princeton and other communities around the country where they served. As theologians and religious leaders, they spoke with moral authority about the questions of their day. But they were not of one mind about the ethical evaluation of slavery. Nor did their personal practices always align with their professions of theological conviction. The following report begins to trace the complicated story of Princeton Seminary and its relationship to slavery. From its founding aspirations, Princeton Seminary has placed high value on both rigorous scholarship and Christian faith, and a commitment to these values informs our present study of the Seminary’s history, which is both an act of faith and scholarly investigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Slavery, Economic Development, and Modernization on Louisiana Sugar Plantations, 1820-1860
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School 1997 The uS gar Masters: Slavery, Economic Development, and Modernization on Louisiana Sugar Plantations, 1820-1860. Richard J. Follett Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses Recommended Citation Follett, Richard J., "The uS gar Masters: Slavery, Economic Development, and Modernization on Louisiana Sugar Plantations, 1820-1860." (1997). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 6540. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/6540 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI films the text direct^ from the oiigmal or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter fiice; while others may be from any type o f computer printer. The qonlityr of this reprodaction is dependent upon the qnalityr of the copy subm itted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photogr^hs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversety afifect reproductiofL In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, b^inning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing fi*om left to right in equal sections with small overiaps.
    [Show full text]
  • The Suppression of the African Slave-Trade to the United States of America, 1638-1870
    HARVARD HISTORICAL STUDIES PUBLISHED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY AND GOVERNMENT FROM THE INCOME OF enrr Warren Corre^ Jfunn VOLUME I. HUS VGG>=, THE SUPPRESSION OF THE AFRICAN SLAVE-TRADE TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1638-1870 BY W. E. BURGHARDT Du BOIS, PH.D. (HARV.) SOMETIME FELLOW OF HARVARD UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR IN WILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY NEW IMPRESSION NEW YORK LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. LONDON AND BOMBAY 1904 Copyright, 1896, BY THE PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE. First Edition, October, 1896 Reprinted February, 1904 UNIVERSITY PRESS: JOHN WILSON AND SON, CAMBRIDGE, U.S.A. PREFACE. monograph was begun during my residence as THISRogers Memorial Fellow at Harvard University, and is based mainly upon a study of the sources, i. e., national, State, and colonial statutes, Congressional doc- uments, reports of societies, personal narratives, etc. The collection of laws available for this research was, I on the other facts and think, nearly complete ; hand, statistics bearing on the economic side of the study have been difficult to find, and my conclusions are conse- quently liable to modification from this source. The question of the suppression of the slave-trade is so intimately connected with the questions as to its rise, the system of American slavery, and the whole colonial policy of the eighteenth century, that it is difficult to isolate at it, and the same time to avoid superficiality on the one hand, and unscientific narrowness of view on the other. While I could not hope entirely to overcome a such difficulty, I nevertheless trust that I have suc- ceeded in rendering this monograph a small contribu- tion to the scientific study of slavery and the American Negro.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Civil War and African American Emancipation: a Documentary Analysis
    The American Civil War and African American Emancipation: A Documentary Analysis Keysiah Middleton Eugene Washington Rhodes Middle School Overview Rationale Objective Strategies Lesson Plans Annotated Bibliography Appendix Content Standards Overview Did Abraham Lincoln free the American slaves? A large majority will contend that he did, while others may say he did not. Regardless of what the common belief is, African Americans were freed from centuries of forced bondage. Scholars have spent a countless amount of time researching and debating this same topic because the Emancipation Proclamation did not free all of the slaves. The complex details surrounding Lincoln’s emancipation are not generally known, so there is a common misconception that this document freed all the slaves. Eric Foner, in his book, The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery, reminds us that the “proclamation had no bearing on the nearly half million slaves in the four border states and West Virginia. It applied only to the Confederacy and almost exclusively to areas outside Union control. It exempted a number of areas occupied by the Union army. So, the proclamation did not apply to approximately 800,000 slaves in areas such as Tidewater, Virginia, several parishes in southern Louisiana and the entire state of Tennessee.”1 Few American History curriculums and textbooks teach that Emancipation Proclamation “accomplished nothing because it was intended to accomplish nothing ‘beyond its propaganda value’.”2 As a 1 Foner, Eric, 2010, The Fiery Trial: Abraham Lincoln and American Slavery, New York, W.W. Norton & Company, pages 241-242 2 Guelzo, Allen C., 2004, Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation: The End of Slavery in America, New York, Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, page 2 result, Lincoln’s intentions and motives regarding race, African Americans, slavery and emancipation have always come into question.
    [Show full text]