DELIBERATIVE SPEAKING IN ANTE-BELLUM SOUTH CAROLINA: THE IDIOM OF A CULTURE By WILLIAM MARTIN MYNOLDS A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA June, I960 ACKNOWI£DCa<ENTS IQie vrlter dealres to express his keen appreciation to all vho have assisted In the preparation of this study. In particular, he vlshes to acknowledge a special debt of gratitude to Professor Douglas W. Ehnlnger, Chairman of his Oraduate Committee. The vrlter Is In- debted to him not only for his Irclslve direction of this study, but for invaluable Instruction eu:d stimulation In the classroom. The vrlter also desires to thank Professor H. P. Constans, Professor Franklin A. Doty, Professor James dunt. Professor Leland L. Zlmaerman, and Profes- sor Roy Tev, the other members of his graduate committee, for their criticisms suggestions of the form and content of the study. Others vho have aided in the preparation of the manuscript are Mary Jeanette Taylor, Michael M. Osborne, Charles M. Statham, Gresdna Gc0.1ovay, and Gerald P. Mohrmann. Gratitude Is also esquressed to the staff of the Carollnlana Library, University of South Carolina, for permitting the vrlter to microfilm its extensive collection of ante-bellum South Carolina delibera- tive speeches. In addition, the library staff of the University of Florida deserves special thanka for their assistance. Finally, the vrlter vlshes to acknowledge the generous financial assistance received from the Department of Speech and the Graduate School during his period of residence at the University of Florida. 11 TABI£ OF CCMTEHTS Acloiowledgiaezrts 11 Ixxtroductlon. 1 I An Introduction to the Deliberative Speakers of Ante- Bellum South Ccux>Una 12 II Ante-Bellum South Carolina Deliberative Speaking 1820- 1860: A Rillosophlcal Defense of Slavery 72 in Ante-Bellum South Carolina Oratory: Barometer of Political Liberalism and Conservatism IO7 IV Ante-Bellum South Carolina Deliberative Speaklxig: An Expression of Cirovlng Sectional Bitterness 1^5 V Ante-Bellum South Carolina Deliberative Speaking: An Bxr pression of Ranantlclsm and Southern Ifatlonallsm. 177 VI Ante-Bellum South Carolina Deliberative Speaking: A Rhetorical Defense of a Way of Life 218 Bibliography 2h0 ill a INTRODUCTION On December 20, i860, amidst shouts of Jubilation that rocked St. Andrew's Hall in Charleston, the delegates to South Carolina's Secession Convention unanimously ratified the Ordinance that tore the Palmetto State from the Union and eventually led to the Civil War. The Carolina Ordinance of Secession climaxed a chain of events stretching back forty years to the debate in Congress in 1620 on the admission of Missouri— chain of events uhich gradually transferred the Carolinians fTOm a com- munity of staunch patriots and loyal vmlonlsts into a "conscious minor- ity," and eventually into a race of fire -eating distuaionists. After 1826, whether the issue was the tariff, internal improve- ments, the sale of Western lands, or slavery, Carolina invariably waved the banner of Southern sectionalism, exhorting the other states of the cotton and tobacco kingdcmi to follow her. Too far in the vanguard of the "Southern ri^ts" movement, too extreme in her reactions to the North, at the first Carolina's leadership was repudiated by her sister states of the South. Only in the l8U0's and 50's when they too per- ceived that the real issue of the intersectlonal struggle was the sur- vival of their agrarian and slave institutions, did they follow the trsdl blazed by the Carolinians. Because sectloneiLlsm and nationalism—the forces which together constituted the "Southern rights" movement—first developed in South Carolina, and, to a great extent, spread from there to the rest of Idle South, the history of the Palmetto State during the so-called Middle 1 2 Period has been extensively studied. In his History of South Carolina David Duncan Wallace devotes more than a volione to an analysis of this era. Charles S. Sydnor's The Development of Southern Sectionalism, I8l8-l848 and Avery 0. Craven's The Growth of Southern Nationalism, l848«-l86l pay particularly close attention to developments In South Carolina. John G. Van Dusen's The Economic Bases of Disunion In South Carollna j Chauncey S. Boucher's The nullification Controversy In South Carolina i and Harold S. Schultz's Nationalism and Sectionalism In South Carolina^ 18$2-1860 are among the many special histories dealing with events in Carolina during the ante-bellum period.^ But while the pre-war history of the Palmetto State has conmanded the attention of a formidable nunber of historians > the deliberative speaking \Alch took place as part of that history has not received special attention. The precise role tdilch oratory played In the develop- ment of the doctrines of sectionalism and nationalism remains, therefore, only Imperfectly understood. The purpose of this study Is to examine this body of oratory, with a view to demonstrating how deliberative speaking In Congress, in the state legislature, and on the hustings ex- pressed and reflected these doctrines, as they developed In South ^avid Duncan Wallace, The History of South Carolina , U vols. (New York: American Historical Assoc., 1933 Charles S. Sydnor, The Develop- ment of Southern Sectionalism , I8l8-1848 (Baton Kouge: Louisiana State Unlv. Press, 19**-S); Avery 0. Craven, The Growth of Southern Nationalism, l848-l86l (Baton Rovige: Louisiana State Unlv. Press, 1953); John G. Van Dusen, iSe EconoMc Bases of Disunion In South Carolina (Durham: Duke Unlv. Press, 1926 ); Chauncey S. Boucher, The Nullification Controversy In South Carolina (Chicago: Unlv. of Chicago Press, 19l6)j and Harold S. Schultz, NatloneSism and Sectionalism In South Carolina, l8$2-l86o (D\ir- ham: Duke Unlv, Press, 19^0 ). 3 Carolina during the Middle Period, Will a study of this deliberative speaking contribute to our understanding of Carolina history? The answer becomes clear 'lAen we realize (l) the importance of oratory in the society of ante-bellum South Carolina and (2) one of the basic requirements which must be met if this oratory is to be interpreted correctly. In the pre-Clvll War era Carolina society was to an uncommon degree oriented toward rhetoric rather than poetic—toward poleznics rather than literature. Rosser H. Taylor observes that "taste in read- ing among [Carollniana] ran somewhat to the classics and to treatises on science, agriculture, history, philosophy, and goveimment, A few men read novels, but the educated male never boasted of his conquests in the reedm of melodramatic fiction."^ As a consequence, Carolina authors such as William Gilmore Simms, Paul Hamilton Hayne, and Henry Timrod were never widely accepted by their Carolina contemporaries. In The South Old and Hew , Francis Butler Simpkins writes that Slums was always far more popular in the North than among his own people. ^ Nor did the Carolinians support the periodicals published in the Palmetto State. Of the scores of literary magazines founded in Charleston and Columbia, only a handful survived for eus long as a year. Writing of ante-bellum Charleston publications, Taylor says, "The Impact of [the] ^Rosser H. Taylor, Mte-3Bellum South Carollnat A Cultural and Social History (Chapel Hill: Univ. of N. Carolina Press, 191^2), pp. 141-1A2. Panels Butler Simpkins, The South Old and Hew (New York: Al- fred A. Knopf, 1947 ), pp. 98-99 . 5 4 Charleston periodicals iQ)on the rank and file was slight. Circulation ."^ was limited to a narrow circle. In his History of South Caro - lina Wallace interprets the Carolinians' lack of interest in poetic forms in this way: ’’Absorbed by a strxaggle over political and economic issues of the most desperate possibilities^ [the Carolinians] cultivated the arts best suited to that circumstance”—the rhetorical arts of pub- lic speaking, journalism, and pan^ihleteering. In short, they forsook the universal and permanent of poetic ”for the blight of the contro- versial and ten^xjrary" of rhetoric. Moreover, of the various rhetorical foarms, the ante-bellum Caro- linians leaned strongly toward oral rather than written discourse. Theirs was truly a "golden age" of oratory. Hot only was speech- making a popular pastime, but it ms the primary instrument for propagat- ing the political and economic doctrines that guided the destiny of the state. Sliq[^ins writes: The most flourishing literary art of the Old South was public speech. ... It was the main weapon of defense in the contTO- versles over Southern institutions and aroused widespread popular interest. Until the rise of the military leader in 1861, the orator-politician was almost the sole hero of the Sou^. ... The South (juallfled easily in an art that required colorful personalities and extravagant speech rather than the sensitive imagination and disciplined e^qtresslon.^ Daniel Walker HOllls says of oratory in South Carolina: "No accOTiplish- ment was more highly respected. ... [Oratory] smoothed the path to Baylor, Ante-BelliAm South Carolina, p. lUl. Wallace, History of South Carolina . Ill, 56, 63. ^Slntpkins, South Old and Hew , p. 96. 5 success for the politician, and If the Carolinian contemplated a career In lav and politics, it was Imperative that he learn to speak vell."'^ Oratory, as the most favored form of communication amcnig the Carolinians, was the conmon carrier of their political, economic, and social concepts and beliefs. In extant speeches the Carolinians have left a rich repositoiry of information concerning their attitudes on the major Issues of the Middle Period and on the. nature of the society In which they lived. It seems apparent, therefore, that an adequate descrip- tion of South Carolina and her people dvirlng the ante-bellum era must take these si)eeche8 Into accotint. Especially, we must study the de- liberative speeches, slixce it Is legislative or policy-detesrminlng address rather than forensic or epldelctlc, that bears most directly on the solu- tion of public Issues and the development of a consnon way of life.