African-American Education, Colonization,
and Abolition
• How are these topics related?
• What do we learn about African-Americans in higher
education in the 19th century?
• Colonization and education
• Colonization and anti-slavery
• Both movements at Middlebury College
Jehudi Ashmun
• 1794-1828
• Attended Middlebury 18121815
• Second governor of ACS
colony
• Ashmun Institute, first
university for AfricanAmericans incorporated in
Pennsylvania
Jehudi Ashmun, the founder of Liberia (from the
portrait in Gurley's "Life of Ashmun.")
John Hough
• Professor, Middlebury College
• A.B., Yale, 1802; A.M., Yale, 1805;
Williams, 1806; Middlebury,
1807; S.T.D., Middlebury,
1845. Professor of the Greek and
Latin Languages, 18121817. Professor of Theology,
1817-1825. Professor of the
Greek and Latin Languages, 18251838. Professor of Rhetoric and
English Literature, 18381839. Died, 1861.
• (http://blogs.middlebury.edu/mid
dhistory/2011/12/07/johnhough/, accessed 1/12/12)
The Colonization societies often were most strident
where blacks were fewest. Vermont, with only a
handful of blacks, had one of the most active in New
England. John Hough, professor of languages at
Middlebury College, preached this in a sermon to
colonizationists in Montpelier on Oct. 18, 1826:
The state of the free colored population of the United
States, is one of extreme and remediless degredation, of
gross irreligion, of revolting profligacy, and, of course,
deplorable wretchedness. Who can doubt ... the blacks
among us are peculiarly addicted to habits of low vice
and shameless profligacy? They are found in vast
numbers in the haunts of riot and dissipation and
intemperance where they squander in sin the scanty
earnings of their toil, contract habits of grosser iniquity
and are prepared for acts of daring outrage and of
enormous guilt. ... Squalid poverty, loathesome and
painful disease, fell and torturing passions, and
diversified and pitiable forms of misery are to be found
(there).
Slavery in the North: American Colonization Society
http://www.slavenorth.com/colonize.htm, accessed 1-12-12
Martin Henry Freeman
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Born Rutland, Vermont, 1826.
Graduated as salutatorian from
Middlebury College in 1849.
The following year he was appointed a
professor of mathematics and science at
the Allegheny Institute (later Avery
College) in Pennsylvania.
He was named president of the college
in 1856.
During the Civil War, Freeman became
active in the African emigration
movement.
He moved to Liberia in 1864 and
continued his work as a professor
at Liberia College
He was named as president of that
college shortly before his death in 1889.
Reverend Lemuel Haynes
•
•
By the 1780s, Haynes had become a leading
Calvinist minister in Vermont. His
contemporary — white republican and
abolitionist thinkers — saw slavery as a
liability to the new country, but most argued
for eventual slave expatriation to Africa. In
contrast, Haynes continued to passionately
argue along Calvinist lines that God’s
providential plan would defeat slavery and
lead to the harmonious integration of the
races as equals.
As the first black in America to serve as pastor
of a white congregation, Haynes ministered
to Rutland’s West Parish for thirty years
starting in 1783. Middlebury College granted
Haynes an honorary master of arts in 1804,
the first advanced degree ever bestowed
upon an African American.
More History at: http://www.accessiblearchives.com/2012/01/the-death-ofreverend-lemuel-haynes/#ixzz1jDGaXsx1
•
•
But Mr. Haynes was a man of color. Had he
not, therefore, a mind like that of other
men? Let those who listened to his thrilling
eloquence, answer! He suffered much in
consequence of cruel prejudice against
those of his color, but he never
complained. He was a spirit which soared
above such things. He knew there was a
heaven of joy where differences of color
would not exist, or if they did, it would be
no hindrance to the intimate union of
saints.
His love to the Saviour was supreme. He
said while his family surrounded his bed of
death, ‘I love my wife– I love my children–
but I love my Saviour better than all.’
“The Death of Reverend Lemuel Haynes,” The
Liberator, 1833
http://www.accessiblearchives.com/2012/01/the-death-ofreverend-lemuel-haynes/#ixzz1jDHb8Hfi
Lemuel Haynes in the Pulpit
• 1816: The American Colonization Society is
founded to resettle free blacks in Africa.
1817: James Forten leads a protest meeting of
3,000 blacks in Philadelphia against
colonization.
Early National Context of Antislavery
Movement
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1777-1804: Long slow death of slavery begins in Northern states; gradual emancipation
achieved by constitutional or judicial enactment
1787: U.S. Constitution protects slavery/gives slave states disproportionate political power
based on non-voting slave population
1787: Northwest Ordinance abolishes slavery in the area north of the Ohio River known as
the Northwest Territory, including present states of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and
Wisconsin.
1793: Fugitive Slave Act becomes a federal law. Allows slaveowners, their agents or attorneys
to seize fugitive slaves in free states and territories.
1800: Haitian Revolution/Gabriel’s Conspiracy in Virginia generate interest in state-sponsored
colonization of free blacks and newly manumitted slaves
1812-1817: Slavery’s expansion into the new Gulf States (Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama);
emergence of cotton as major export; rise of interstate/domestic slave trade
1820: Missouri Compromise maintains balance of power in Senate by admitting Missouri as a
slave state and Maine as a free states; temporarily settles argument over slavery in the
western territories
1822: Denmark Vesey’s Conspiracy, Charleston, S.C.
1829: Cincinnati Riots lead to expulsion of hundreds; many take refuge in Canada
New western states extend democracy to whites; limit black suffrage/restrict immigration
Early Support for Colonization
African colonization enjoyed some support among prominent African
Americans in the North before 1817.
Prince Hall, Boston -- founder of the African Lodge of the Honorable Society
of Free and Accepted Masons; sent a petition in 1787 to the general court
of Boston to provide "Africans ... one day a week to work for themselves"
to purchase themselves and transport themselves "to some part of the
Coast of African, where we propose a settlement."
Paul Cuffe, Massachusetts – merchant, ship owner -- led expeditions to British
free black settlement in Sierra Leone
James Forten, Philadelphia – sailmaker, friend of Cuffee’s, early supporter of
African colonization
Founding of
American Colonization Society (1817)
Chairman Henry Clay of Kentucky insisted on constitutional
guarantees that the group would not “touch or agitate, in the
slightest degree,” the issue of slavery. “It was upon that
condition alone, he was sure, that many gentlemen from the
south and the west, whom he saw present, had attended, or
could be expected to cooperate. It was on that condition,
only, that he himself had attended.”
Founding of
American Colonization Society (1817)
John Randolph of Roanoke (proslavery advocate) makes case for
removal of free blacks only:
“It was a notorious fact, he said, that the existence of this mixed
and intermediate population of free negroes was viewed by
every slave holder as one of the greatest sources of the
insecurity, as well as the unprofitableness, of slave property;
that they serve to excite in their fellow beings a feeling of
discontent, of repining at their situation, and that they act as
channels of communication not only between different slaves,
but between slaves of different districts; that they are the
depositories of stolen goods, and the promoters of mischief.”
• With the founding of the American
Colonization Society in 1817, African
Americans increasingly spoke out against
efforts schemes for the removal of free blacks
and manumitted slaves.
Black Philadelphians Respond to
Founding of ACS (1817)
On January 15, 1817, James Forten and other black leaders called a
meeting at Bethel to discuss the ACS and the idea of colonization. Almost
3,000 black men packed the church. Three prominent black ministers,
Richard Allen, Absalom Jones and John Gloucester, spoke in favor of
immigrating to Africa. However, when Forten called for those in favor to
say "yea," not a single voice was heard. When he called for those opposed,
one tremendous "no" rang out that seemed "as it would bring down the
walls of the building." As Forten wrote to Paul Cuffe on January 25, "there
was not one sole [sic] that was in favor of going to Africa."
Black Philadelphians Respond
to Founding of ACS (1817)
“Whereas our ancestors (not of choice) were the first successful
cultivators of the wilds of America, we their descendants feel
ourselves entitled to participate in the blessings of her
luxuriant soil, which their blood and sweat manured; and that
any measure or system of measures, having a tendency to
banish us from her bosom, would not only be cruel, but in
direct violation of those principles, which have been the boast
of this republic.”
Black Richmonders Respond to
Founding of ACS (1817)
“At a meeting of a respectable portion of the free people of color of the city
of Richmond, on Friday, January 24, 1817, William Bowler was appointed
chairman, and Lentey Craw, secretary. The following preamble and
resolution were read, unanimously adopted, and ordered to be printed.
Whereas a Society has been formed at the seat of government, for the
purpose of colonizing, with their own consent, the free people of color of
the United States; therefore, we, the free people of color of the city of
Richmond, have thought it advisable to assemble together under the
sanction of authority, for the purpose of making a public expression of our
sentiments on a question in which we are so deeply interested.
Black Richmonders Respond to Founding of ACS
(cont’d)
“We perfectly agree with the Society, that it is not only proper, but would ultimately tend to
the benefit and advantage of a great portion of our suffering fellow creatures, to be
colonized; but while we thus express our approbation of a measure laudable in its purposes,
and beneficial in its designs, it may not be improper in us to say, that we prefer being
colonized in the most remote corner of the land of our nativity, to being exiled to a foreign
country -and whereas the president and board of managers of the said Society have been
pleased to leave it to the entire discretion of Congress to provide a suitable place for carrying
these laudable intentions into effect -- Be it therefore
“Resolved, That we respectfully submit to the wisdom of Congress whether it would not be an act
of charity to grant us a small portion of their territory, either on the Missouri river, or any
place that may seem to them most conducive to the public good and our future welfare,
subject, however, to such rules and regulations as the government of the United States may
think proper to adopt.”
Bishop Richard Allen on
African Colonization (1827)
From Freedom's Journal, Nov., 1827
Dear Sir, I have been for several years trying to reconcile my
mind to the Colonizing of Africans in Liberia, but there have
always been, and there still remain great and insurmountable
objections against the scheme.
We are an unlettered people, brought up in ignorance, not one
in a hundred can read or write, not one in a thousand has a
liberal education; is there any fitness for such to be sent into a
far country, among heathens, to convert or civilize them,
when they themselves are neither civilized or Christianized?
Bishop Richard Allen on
African Colonization (1827)
“We were stolen from our mother country, and brought here. We have tilled the ground and
made fortunes for thousands, and still they are not weary of our services. But they who stay
to till the ground must be slaves. Is there not land enough in America, or 'corn enough in
Egypt?' Why should they send us into a far country to die? See the thousands of foreigners
emigrating to America every year: and if there be ground sufficient for them to cultivate, and
bread for them to eat, why would they wish to send the first tillers of the land away? Africans
have made fortunes for thousands, who are yet unwilling to part with their services; but the
free must be sent away, and those who remain, must be slaves.
“I have no doubt that there are many good men who do not see as I do, and who are for sending
us to Liberia; but they have not duly considered the subject--they are not men of colour.--This
land which we have watered with our tears and our blood, is now our mother country, and
we are well satisfied to stay where wisdom abounds and the gospel is free."
RICHARD ALLEN
Bishop of the African Methodist Episcopal
"Church in the United States
David Walker on African Colonization
(1829)
Will any of us leave our homes and go to Africa? I hope not. Those who are
ignorant enough to go to Africa, the coloured people ought to be glad to
have them go, for if they are ignorant enough to let the whites fool them
off to Africa, they would be no small injury to us if they reside in this
country.
Let them commence their attack upon us as they did on our brethren in Ohio,
driving and beating us from our country, and my soul for theirs, they will
have enough of it. Let no man of us budge one step, and let slave-holders
come to beat us from our country. America is more our country, than it is
the whites--we have enriched it with our blood and tears. The greatest
riches in all America have arisen from our blood and tears:--and will they
drive us from our property and homes, which we have earned with our
blood? They must look sharp or this very thing will bring swift destruction
upon them. The Americans have got so fat on our blood and groans, that
they have almost forgotten the God of armies. But let them go on.
Black abolitionism’s influence:
William Lloyd Garrison
on African Colonization (1832)
Garrison’s abolitonist indictment of the American Colonization of Society
(which he supported until 1829)
The ACS
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Is pledged not to oppose the system of slavery
Apologizes for slavery and slaveholders
Recognizes slaves as property
Increases the value of slaves
Is the enemy of immediate abolition
Is nourished by fear and selfishness
Aims at the utter expulsion of the blacks
Is the disparager of the free blacks
Denies the possibility of elevating the blacks in this country
Deceives and misleads the nation
Second Annual Convention for the Improvement of the Free
People of Color
Philadelphia, June 1832.
While generally opposed to colonization, committee members acknowledged “that
the rigid oppression abroad in the land is such, that a part of our suffering brethren
cannot live under it.” Delegates to the Convention resolved, at the urging of the
committee, to establish an agent in Upper Canada “for the purpose of purchasing
lands and contributing to the wants of our people generally who may be, by
oppressive legislative enactments, obliged to flee from these United States and
take up residence within her borders.”
2.
Rise of a Northern Interracial
Campaign to Abolish Slavery
(1830s)
-- early phase of national movement dominated
by whites
-- paternalist ethos; former slaves counseled on
how best to present themselves and their
experience of slavery
-- earlier work of black abolitionists
minimized/obscured
American Antislavery Society Founded in
Philadelphia (December 1833)
--- 66 delegates from eleven northern states; only three
of them were African Americans
-- dedicated to “the entire abolition of slavery in the
United States” and the elevation of “the character
and condition of the people of color”
-- no stated commitment to “social equality”
African Americans took active part in
organization of AAS state and local affiliates
Black and white women join interracial female
auxiliaries
• Philadelphia – daughters of James Forten
• Boston– Sarah and Angelina Grimke of
S.Carolina
Antislavery/Abolitionist Newspapers
•
•
•
•
•
•
Freedom’s Journal (New York)
Genius of Universal Emancipation (Baltimore/DC)
The Liberator (Boston)
The Antislavery Standard
Northern Star and Freedmen’s Advocate (Albany)
The Colored American (New York)
Published speeches, poetry, news of noteworthy AfricanAmericans, ads for businesses
Several of these papers are available on line:
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/accessible/afrnews/
Repression/Mob Violence
Against Abolitionists
• 1835: Efforts to close the Southern mails to
abolitionist literature
• 1836-44: U.S. House adopts “gag rule” against
all anti-slavery petitions
• 1837: Illinois newspaper editor Elijah Lovejoy’s
presses thrown into river; Lovejoy shot and
killed by a mob
• Riots in Boston, Philadelphia, other Northern
cities
By the late 1830s, as mob violence against
abolitionists in the North increased, some
antislavery activists openly questioned the
Garrisonian doctrine of non-resistance.
Schisms within the Movement
Disagreement over Garrison’s ideological and tactical positions
• His pacifist strategy/philosophy of non-resistance (Elijah Lovejoy had
armed himself in self-defense; viewed by many as martyr to cause)
• His interpretation of the Constitution as a pro-slavery document/calls for
disunion
• His rejection of political action (including voting and office-holding) in
favor of moral suasion
• His support of woman suffrage (refusal to participate in 1840 World AntiSlavery Convention because women were excluded)
The Sectional Crisis
of the 1840s and 1850s
American expansionism under the doctrine of
“Manifest Destiny” widened the sectional
divide over slavery in the 1840s and 1850s.
The annexation of Texas in 1845 thrust the
United States into war with Mexico and fueled
abolitionist suspicions of a plot to expand the
South’s slaveholding empire across the
continent.
At war’s end, a defeated Mexico ceded its vast western
holdings to the United States, reopening a debate
over slavery’s borders that had been quelled since
the Missouri Compromise.
When newly acquired California bypassed the
formation of a territorial government and applied for
admission as a free state, the two major political
parties – the Whigs and Democrats - fractured along
sectional lines.
The Compromise of 1850, negotiated by Henry Clay, included a mix of
antislavery and proslavery legislation designed to appease the Northern and
Southern factions in each party.
Under the terms of the compromise:
• California was to be admitted as a free state
• Utah and New Mexico territories were to be organized with no explicit ban
on slavery
• Slave trading was to be abolished in the District of Columbia
• Slave hunting would be encouraged under a new fugitive slave law.
Link to exhibit on Compromise of 1850 and Fugitive Slave Acts (PBS)
Fugitive Slave Act of 1850
Allowed slaveholders to more easily reach into any state to retrieve runaways
• An accused fugitive need no longer be brought before a court. A
slaveholder or his representative could simply present an affidavit with a
physical description of the runaway, and federal commissioners could turn
over any person presumed to be that slave
• Empowered federal marshals to compel bystanders to assist in the capture
of a fugitive.
• Stiff fines and imprisonment for those who obstructed the application of
the law.
• Federal funds provided to pay costs of recovering a fugitive.
• Fugitives denied right to speak in own defense; no right of habeas corpus.
Reaction to Fugitive Slave Act
Militant abolitionists vowed to
prevent the kidnapping and
return of fugitive slaves
through acts of civil
disobedience and, if
necessary, mob violence.
Despite several wellpublicized rescues, more
than three hundred alleged
fugitives were hauled into
federal courts and forcibly
re-enslaved.
Link to “The Attempted Rescue of
Anthony Burns”
The sectional crisis escalated with passage of the
Kansas-Nebraska Act, which erased the
geographical line between free states and slave
states established under the Missouri
Compromise.
The act, sponsored by Democratic presidential
hopeful Stephen A. Douglas, provided for the
establishment of territorial governments on the
basis of “popular sovereignty,” leaving “all
questions pertaining to slavery” to the inhabitants
of the territories.
Link to text of Kansas-Nebraska Act (Avalon Project at Yale)
By the late 1850s, the nation had become, in the words
of Abraham Lincoln, a “house divided” – politically
and culturally – along sectional lines. The Supreme
Court’s Dred Scott decision, which denied U.S.
citizenship to all persons of African descent and
invalidated the Missouri Compromise, left
abolitionists and Republicans convinced that the
“slave power conspiracy” extended to the highest
court in the land.
Dred Scott Case (1856):
U.S. Supreme Court Rules that Persons of African Descent are
Permanently Barred from U.S. Citizenship
Key clauses in majority decision:
•
•
•
“A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this
country and sold as slaves, is not a "citizen" within the meaning of the
Constitution of the United States.
“When the Constitution was adopted, they were not regarded in any of the
States as members of the community which constituted the State, and were
not numbered among its "people or citizens." Consequently, the special rights
and immunities guarantied to citizens do not apply to them. And not being
"citizens" within the meaning of the Constitution, they are not entitled to sue
in that character in a court of the United States, and the Circuit Court has not
jurisdiction in such a suit.”
“The only two clauses in the Constitution which point to this race treat them
as persons whom it was morally lawful to deal in as articles of property and to
hold as slaves.”
Dred Scott ruling (cont’d)
“The change in public opinion and feeling in relation to the African race which
has taken place since the adoption of the Constitution cannot change its
construction and meaning, and it must be construed and administered now
according to its true meaning and intention when it was formed and
adopted.”
Judge Curtis’s dissent in Dred Scott case
“The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the
United States through the action, in each state, of those persons who
were qualified by its laws to act thereon in behalf of themselves and
all other citizens of the state. In some of the states, as we have seen,
colored persons were among those qualified by law to act on the
subject. These colored persons were not only included in the body of
"the people of the United States" by whom the Constitution was
ordained and established, but in at least five of the states they had
the power to act, and doubtless did act, by their suffrages, upon the
question of its adoption.”