Dawain M. Wheatley
AHG 504 A: Civil War and Reconstruction
Tuesday 3-6:30 MST
Focus: How did the North and South view slavery as an institution?
In 1776 Thomas Jefferson clearly states the principle of equality in the Declaration of
Independence when telling the world:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life,
Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”1
In 1861 Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederacy, clearly states the principle of
inequality in the Cornerstone Speech:
“Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid,
its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man;
that. . .subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition.”2
The founding fathers established the view of slavery as a necessary evil; northerners would
continue this view and later view it as simply evil, which contrasts with the position, later
established by the south, that slavery is a positive good.
When the United States of America declared its independence, there had to be
compromise between the views regarding many topics. The view on slavery of the North and
South was one of the hot-button topics that forced compromise in the Constitution Convention.
Lincoln, in his Address at Cooper Institute on February 27, 1860, pointed out that most of the
Founding Fathers understood the question of slavery as a necessary evil and that over time
slavery would eventually be phased out. Many Northerners and Southerners had this view in the
early years of the nation, but as the nineteenth century unfolded, many Southerners began
1
Declaration of Independence – Constitution of the United States of America, (Ashland: John M. Ashbrook
Center for Public Affairs, Ashland University), 3.
2
Alexander H. Stephens, “Cornerstone Speech,” in AHG 504 A: Civil War and Reconstruction Course
Packet, ed. S. Tootle, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 307.
1
viewing slavery as a “positive good.”3 This view of slavery by the South was used to maintain
this institution, reinforcing the idea that the superior white race was indeed “caring for” the
inferior negro race. The North would continue to view slavery as a necessary evil, not wanting
to allow for its expansion into the territories, while leaving it alone in areas where it legally
existed. Eventually, the necessary evil and positive good views would result in civil war.
Many Founding Fathers were not fans of slavery. In fact, when Thomas Jefferson wrote
his original draft of the Declaration of Independence it included an argument to King George III
about the evils of slavery:
“. . .to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his
negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable
commerce.”4
There were some southerners who demanded a compromise of the principle of equality, and this
anti-slavery idea was removed from the final draft. During the Revolutionary War, Alexander
Hamilton wrote to John Jay in March of 1779 and promoted the raising of “battalions of
negroes;”5 saying, “that the negroes will make very excellent soldiers.”6 He also encouraged
allowing blacks their freedom for fighting in the war and it would eventually open, “a door to
their emancipation.”7 Thomas Jefferson continued to speak of the evils of slavery assuming that
it would eventually end.
“The spirit of the master is abating. . .the slave rising from the dust, his condition
mollifying. . .for a total emancipation [will be done] with the consent of the masters,
rather than by their extirpation.”8
3
John C. Calhoun, “Slavery a Positive Good,” in AHG 504 A: Civil War and Reconstruction Course Packet,
ed. S. Tootle, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 81.
4
Thomas Jefferson, “Rough Draft of the Declaration of Independence,” in AHG 503B: Sectionalism and
Civil War Course Packet, ed. M. Owens and K. Portteus, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 6.
5
Alexander Hamilton, “Letter to John Jay,” in AHG 503B: Sectionalism and Civil War Course Packet, ed. M.
Owens and K. Portteus, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 9.
6
Ibid.
7
Ibid, 10.
8
Thomas Jefferson, “Notes on the State of Virginia, Query XVIII: Manners,” in AHG 504 A: Civil War and
Reconstruction Course Packet, ed. S. Tootle, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 78.
2
Through compromise during the Constitutional Convention of 1787 a new Constitution
of the United States of America was established which addressed slavery issues that clearly show
opposing views on the institution. The Constitution is an example of the Founding Fathers view
of slaves as human beings, which is illustrated by negroes being termed “people” throughout:
[“We the people”9 (Preamble), “three fifths of all other Persons,”10 (Article I, Section, 2),
“The Migration or Importation. . .for each Person”11 (Article I, Section 9), and “No
Person held to Service or Labour”12 (Article IV).]
While no compromise is perfect this enabled both North and South to recognize slavery as a
necessary evil. It allowed for slavery to continue while the slave trade would eventually end.
When the Northwest Ordinance became law in 1787, it set a precedent that banned the
expansion of slavery in any new federal territory, showing the founding fathers view of slavery
as being on its way out. However, with the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the establishment
of a new slave state, slavery had been allowed to be legally expanded. Thomas Jefferson
recognized in his “wolf by the ears”13 letter to John Holmes in 1820 that the idea of slavery as a
necessary evil by “the generation of 1776”14 would now be thrown away by southerners. By the
1830s, as a result of insurrection and government actions slave states such as Delaware,
Maryland, and North Carolina ceased the freeing of slaves. White Southerners stopped referring
to the institution as a necessary evil, and instead began to defend slavery as a positive good.
Senator William Smith of South Carolina argued on the floor of the Senate in January
1820 with northern senators about the positive good of slavery when discussing the admission of
9
Declaration of Independence – Constitution of the United States of America, (Ashland: John M. Ashbrook
Center for Public Affairs, Ashland University), 9.
10
Ibid.
11
Ibid, 16.
12
Ibid, 23.
13
Thomas Jefferson, “Letter to John Holmes,” in AHG 503B: Sectionalism and Civil War Course Packet, ed.
M. Owens and K. Portteus, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 25.
14
Ibid, 26.
3
Maine and Missouri. He is one of the first Southerners to articulate the positive good argument
for slavery:
“This people are so domesticated, or so kindly treated by their masters, and their
situations so improved. . .”15
“There is no class of laboring people in any country upon the globe, except the United
States, that are better clothed, better fed, or are more cheerful, or labor less, or who are
more happy, or, indeed, who have more liberty and indulgence, than the slaves of the
Southern and Western States.”16
He refutes what Thomas Jefferson says in his “Notes on Virginia” by saying Jefferson must have
been trying to placate some foreigner about slavery or must have been an hypocrite because he
continued to own slaves himself. Senator Smith’s opinion became a dominant view of white
southerners, slave owners in particular.
As the South and North began to disagree more and more over tariffs, states’ rights, and
the economic and moral issue of slavery, Senator John C. Calhoun of South Carolina addressed
the Senate asserting that slavery was, “instead of an evil, a good – a positive good.”17 He
continued the argument that blacks, “attained a condition so civilized and so improved”18
through the kindness of the slave owner. He then contrasted them with the poor and wretched
paupers of civilized Europe who were suffering. Calhoun articulated the Southern view of
slavery as being a positive good, a moderate approach on slavery, and tried to show the world the
benefits of slavery.
It was not just the Southern politicians that promoted the positive good of slavery.
Individual slave owners, newspaper editors, religious leaders, and early Southern pseudo
15
William Smith, “History of Congress,” in AHG 503B: Sectionalism and Civil War Course Packet, ed. M.
Owens and K. Portteus, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 55.
16
Ibid.
17
John C. Calhoun, “Slavery a Positive Good,” in AHG 504 A: Civil War and Reconstruction Course Packet,
ed. S. Tootle, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 79.
18
Ibid, 81.
4
sociologists19 advocated the goodness of white caretakers over a black slave. James Henry
Hammond, a large plantation owner and sectionalist newspaper editor, wrote to a British
opponent of slavery, Thomas Clarkson. In his lengthy letter, he used several types of arguments
to justify “Slavery [as] the corner-stone of our republican edifice.”20 Hammond felt the slave
owner had a religious responsibility to, “treat humanely the fellow-creatures whom God has
entrusted to [his] charge.”21 He also the poor laboring class of Great Britain with the slaves of
the South to show how much better off the black slave is than those free shite men saying, “I
believe our slaves are the happiest three millions of human beings on whom the sun shines.”22
This glorious view of slavery is substantiated in, Sociology for the South, or the Failure of Free
Society written by George Fitzhugh in 1854 – slavery is good for everyone!
Northerners developed an aversion to slavery, beyond thinking of it as a necessary evil,
and sought the abolishment of the practice. A challenge to this idea was what to do with the
slaves once they were free? They did not want slavery to continue to exist in the South; but if
freed blacks were to move north there would be competition for jobs with whites.23 The
practicality of abolishing slavery was not ready to be widely accepted so many continued with
the Founding Father’s idea of not letting it expand into new territories, following precedence of
the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 and Missouri compromise. However, as California became a
state and the Territory of Nebraska was being organized, the potential of slavery spreading into
new territories was not liked by abolitionists and others. Politicians argued that expanding
19
Stephen Tootle, “AHG 504A: Civil War and Reconstruction” (lecture, Ashland University, Ashland,
October 16, 2012).
20
James Henry Hammond, “Letter to an English Abolitionist,” in AHG 503B: Sectionalism and Civil War
Course Packet, ed. M. Owens and K. Portteus, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 166.
21
Ibid, 172.
22
Ibid, 175.
23
Stephen Tootle, “AHG 504A: Civil War and Reconstruction” (lecture, Ashland University, Ashland,
October 16, 2012).
5
slavery was a “gross violation of a sacred pledge”24 to keep out slaves and masters in the
Missouri Compromise free lands. This action was against “the original national policy”25 for
slavery in new lands. It was a clear statement that many Northerners, particularly those who
would form the Republican Party had as the “fundamental maxim of Democracy—EQUAL
RIGHTS AND EXACT JUSTICE FOR ALL MEN.”26
By the election of 1856 Republicans had clearly captured many adherents because of the
intent to expand slavery to the territories of Kansas and Nebraska by Democrats. The
Republican Party clearly showed that the principles of freedom, “promulgated in the Declaration
of Independence, and embodied in the Federal Constitution”27 had to be protected if
representative government was going to survive in the world. Not allowing expansion of slavery
was an integral part of the platform in 1856 and remained on the platform of 1860 because
carrying slavery into territories was “subversive [to] the peace and harmony of the country.”28
Allowing the abhorrent practice of slavery, in areas where it legally existed, was the compromise
Republicans were willing to come to in the effort to keep the country together.
When Civil War broke out both Abraham Lincoln of the Union and Alexander Stephens,
of the Confederate States reflected on the early history of the nation and expressed the view
which best fit his political agenda.
24
S.P. Chase, “Appeal of the Independent Democrats,” in AHG 504A: Civil War and Reconstruction Course
Packet, ed. S. Tootle, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 30.
25
Ibid, 31.
26
Ibid, 33.
27
“Republican Party Platform of 1856,” in AHG 504A: Civil War and Reconstruction Course Packet, ed. S.
Tootle, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 54.
28
“Republican Party Platform of 1856,” in AHG 504A: Civil War and Reconstruction Course Packet, ed. S.
Tootle, (Ashland, Ashland University, 2012), 65.
6