Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2005 Rights of humans, rights of states: the academic legacy of St. George Tucker in nineteenth-century Virginia Chad Vanderford Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Vanderford, Chad, "Rights of humans, rights of states: the academic legacy of St. George Tucker in nineteenth-century Virginia" (2005). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 3724. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/3724 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 Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. RIGHTS OF HUMANS, RIGHTS OF STATES: THE ACADEMIC LEGACY OF ST. GEORGE TUCKER IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY VIRGINIA A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of History by Chad Vanderford A.B., University of California at Berkeley, 1996 M.A., California State University Northridge, 2000 August 2005 ©Copyright 2005 Chad Vanderford All rights reserved ii Acknowledgments Many people have assisted my efforts in the researching and writing of this dissertation. The librarians and archivists were especially generous, even as I sometimes failed to return my books and interlibrary loans on time. Some of them pointed me to sources that I would otherwise have missed. The Louisiana State University Board of Regents Fellowship proved very useful during my graduate years, and I am grateful for that. I especially appreciate the support I have received from my family. My parents helped me in more ways than I can count, and my aunt and uncle gave me a nice place to stay during one of my otherwise unluxurious research trips. Thanks as well to the various members of the committee for agreeing to read the work, and for offering a variety of very insightful criticisms. As I revise for publication, their insights will be especially useful. Also I would like to thank two constitutionalists in the political science department who provided some much needed guidance. My dissertation advisor has helped me in innumerable ways, but perhaps the three most important things he taught me can be best phrased as imperatives: stop being sarcastic; stop using jargon; and stop writing sentences that read like they have been translated from the original German. And of course, my fiancé has helped me very much as well. I do not know how she ever managed to put up with my grouchiness while confronting the stress of finishing her own dissertation. iii Table of Contents Acknowledgments.……………………………………………………………………………….iii Abbreviations Used in Footnotes...……………………………………………………………….v Abstract………………………………………………………………………………………...…vi Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..1 Chapter One: Natural Rights and Slavery in St. George Tucker’s Virginia………………………7 Chapter Two: The Constitutional Orthodoxy of St. George Tucker………………………….…53 Chapter Three: Slavery and the Successors of St. George Tucker……………………………..103 Chapter Four: Constitutional Orthodoxy under Siege………………………………………….152 Chapter Five: Slavery and a “New System of Political Science”………………………………196 Chapter Six: Secession and the Fate of Constitutional Orthodoxy……………………………..241 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………...286 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………….………...289 Vita……………………………………………………………………………………………...318 iv Abbreviations Used in Footnotes AHS Alexander Hamilton Stephens ATB Albert Taylor Bledsoe DU Manuscript and Special Collections Department, William R. Perkins Library, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. GFH George Frederick Holmes GT George Tucker HW Henry Augustine Washington HSGT Henry St. George Tucker JHH James Henry Hammond JRT John Randolph Tucker JTC John Taylor of Caroline NBT Nathaniel Beverley Tucker RLD Robert Lewis Dabney SGT St. George Tucker SHC Southern Historical Collection, Wilson Library, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina TJ Thomas Jefferson TRD Thomas Roderick Dew UVA Special Collections Department, Alderman Library, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. W&M Special Collections Department, Earl Gregg Swem Library, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia. v Abstract College professors in the nineteenth-century South lavished a great deal of attention on the issues of slavery and constitutionalism, and they paid careful attention to the connections between these issues and the idea of natural rights. In this dissertation I offer an analysis of the lives and writings of three generations of college professors in nineteenth-century Virginia, focusing especially on St. George Tucker and his descendants. As a contemporary of Thomas Jefferson and as a delegate to the Annapolis convention, Tucker can rightly be considered as one of the founding fathers. But he is best known for inaugurating the academic discourse on the issues of slavery and constitutionalism in his capacity as professor of law at the College of William and Mary. His sons, Henry and Beverley Tucker, and his grandson John Randolph Tucker kept these academic traditions alive for three generations. Members of the Tucker family continuously espoused a modern theory of natural rights based upon a contractual understanding of how people come to exist in society. By the 1850s, however, some professors such as George Frederick Holmes had abandoned the philosophy of modern natural rights in favor of a re- articulation of classic or ancient natural right: a non-contractual conception of the right to rule. This recovery made possible the “positive good” defense of slavery, but it put a strain upon the orthodox theory of constitutional interpretation that had been at the center of Virginian political thought. This dissertation examines how the Tuckers and others strove to keep the philosophy of the founding generation alive throughout the various political upheavals of the nineteenth century. vi Introduction The people of the United States are proud of their democracy. Indeed they sometimes even try to export their type of government to other parts of the world. But they would do well to remember that without individual rights, and without the rights of groups, democracy can be dangerous. Unfortunately, human rights advocates often scoff at states’ rights advocates, and states’ rights advocates often return the favor. Although these two ways of protecting the rights of political minorities have been at odds at various times in the history of the United States, it is possible for them to exist in harmony. Indeed, they both stem from the same philosophy, the philosophy of modern natural rights. My dissertation examines the lives and writings of three generations of college professors in nineteenth-century Virginia and reveals a remarkable shift in the idea of natural rights held by these men. They began by espousing a modern theory of natural rights based upon a contractual understanding of how people come to exist in society. By the 1850s, however, some professors had abandoned these ideas in favor of a re-articulation of classic or ancient natural right: a non- contractual conception of the right to rule.1 This recovery made possible the “positive good” defense of slavery, but it put a strain upon the orthodox theory of constitutional interpretation that had been at the center of Virginian political thought. The dominant figure in this dissertation is St. George Tucker. As a member of Thomas Jefferson’s generation, Tucker understood the doctrine of equality expressed in the Declaration of Independence in a very restricted sense. To members of this generation equality meant 1 The distinction between modern natural rights and classic natural right finds its fullest development in: Leo Strauss, Natural Right and History (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1950). 1 equality in the state of nature.2 According to this understanding, a hypothetical state of nature preceded the entrance of the individual into the state of society. In the state of nature, one had complete freedom, but everyone else possessed complete freedom as well. Such a situation produced considerable danger, and humans usually left the state of nature in order to survive. By entering society, the individual gave up some of the liberties that would otherwise have been enjoyed, but thereby secured self-preservation.3 As chapter one demonstrates, the violent slave revolt that produced the modern nation of Haiti made it possible for St. George Tucker and other members of his generation to justify the continuance of slavery while still maintaining allegiance to the modern natural rights philosophy. In their defenses of slavery, members of St. George Tucker’s generation merely argued that premature abolition would produce a threat to their self-preservation. This early proslavery argument put less strain upon the modern theory of natural rights than has generally been supposed. A properly historical understanding of what the founding generation meant by equality makes this point clear, and chapter one aims to correct popular misconceptions of this issue. Chapter two offers an analysis