In class, we are going to learn some details of the life of this frenchman!
Many thanks to my friend Lawson Mabry for contributing to our understanding of this fascinating corner of Civil War history!
Friday, June 3, 2011
Friday, May 27, 2011
FINAL EXAM STUDY GUIDE:
We will take this test on Monday, 6/6 during normal class hours.
We will spend next week preparing for the exam, so be sure to begin studying and to bring notes and or outlines.
FINAL EXAM FORMAT:
The final exam this quarter will consist of one long essay.
The possible essay questions are below.
I will choose two; you will write on one.
1. War and History: What impact did war have on the nation? Choose at least three of the following: the French and Indian War, the Revolution, the War of 1812, the War with Mexico, and the Civil War
2. Sectionalism: How did this nation move from unity to disunion? In other words, what caused the Civil War?
3. Course Readings: Consider the key themes from The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, “Common Sense,” the book you read on slavery, and The Read Badge of Courage. Link each book to its time. For example, link Benjamin Franklin to the mid-century challenges or the American Enlightenment, or link The Red Badge of Courage to the Civil War discussion.
4. SURVEY OF COURSE: Considering the whole course, would you say that the history of the U.S. to 1865 is better characterized as a story of sorrow and oppression or one of success and freedom? Which point of view more aptly captures the history of this nation?
FOR ALL OF THESE ESSAYS, REMEMBER, PLAN TO WRITE FOR AT LEAST AN HOUR. THIS IS A COMPLETE AND THOROUGH ESSAY AND SHOULD HAVE NUMEROUS REFERENCES TO SPECIFIC DETAIL…NAMES, DATES, STORIES, EVENTS, LAWS, ETC.
We will spend next week preparing for the exam, so be sure to begin studying and to bring notes and or outlines.
FINAL EXAM FORMAT:
The final exam this quarter will consist of one long essay.
The possible essay questions are below.
I will choose two; you will write on one.
1. War and History: What impact did war have on the nation? Choose at least three of the following: the French and Indian War, the Revolution, the War of 1812, the War with Mexico, and the Civil War
2. Sectionalism: How did this nation move from unity to disunion? In other words, what caused the Civil War?
3. Course Readings: Consider the key themes from The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin, “Common Sense,” the book you read on slavery, and The Read Badge of Courage. Link each book to its time. For example, link Benjamin Franklin to the mid-century challenges or the American Enlightenment, or link The Red Badge of Courage to the Civil War discussion.
4. SURVEY OF COURSE: Considering the whole course, would you say that the history of the U.S. to 1865 is better characterized as a story of sorrow and oppression or one of success and freedom? Which point of view more aptly captures the history of this nation?
FOR ALL OF THESE ESSAYS, REMEMBER, PLAN TO WRITE FOR AT LEAST AN HOUR. THIS IS A COMPLETE AND THOROUGH ESSAY AND SHOULD HAVE NUMEROUS REFERENCES TO SPECIFIC DETAIL…NAMES, DATES, STORIES, EVENTS, LAWS, ETC.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Red Badge of Courage
This book must be read and ready to discuss on Wednesday, June 1.
As you read, consider the meaning of the following quotes. Don't search for them, just look at them now and notice what recurring themes they may suggest:
“War, the red animal, the blood-swollen god.” (23)
“The generals were idiots.” (23)
“Regarding death thus out of the corner of his eye, he conceived it
to be nothing but rest.” (26)
"A rather fat soldier tried to pilfer a horse from a dooryard…He was escaping with his
prize when a young girl rushed from the house and grabbed the animal’s mane…the young girl stood like a dauntless statue.”
“The observant regiment, standing at rest in the roadway, whopped at once, and whole whole-souled upon the side of the maiden…they entirely ceased to remember their own large war. They jeered the piratical private, and called attention to various defects of his personal appearance.” (60)
“The youth…began a long denunciation of the commander of the forces.” (87)
FINALLY, WHAT IS THE RED BADGE OF COURAGE?
As you read, consider the meaning of the following quotes. Don't search for them, just look at them now and notice what recurring themes they may suggest:
“War, the red animal, the blood-swollen god.” (23)
“The generals were idiots.” (23)
“Regarding death thus out of the corner of his eye, he conceived it
to be nothing but rest.” (26)
"A rather fat soldier tried to pilfer a horse from a dooryard…He was escaping with his
prize when a young girl rushed from the house and grabbed the animal’s mane…the young girl stood like a dauntless statue.”
“The observant regiment, standing at rest in the roadway, whopped at once, and whole whole-souled upon the side of the maiden…they entirely ceased to remember their own large war. They jeered the piratical private, and called attention to various defects of his personal appearance.” (60)
“The youth…began a long denunciation of the commander of the forces.” (87)
FINALLY, WHAT IS THE RED BADGE OF COURAGE?
Road to Civil War
I. COMPROMISE OF 1850
1845: 15-13 (Texas and Florida)
1846: 15-14 (Iowa)
1848: 15-15 (Wisconsin)
1. Fugitive Slave Act
2. Abolish slave trade in D.C.
3. Cali in as Free State
4. Popular Sovereignty in new territories
5. Resolved boundary dispute btw. Texas
and New Mexico
II. The Trouble Escalates:
A. Transcontinental Railroad
--Stephen Douglas
B. Kansas-Nebraska Act
C. “Bleeding Kansas”
--New England Emigrant Aid Company
--“Beecher’s Bibles”
--John Brown
--Pottawatomie Creek
D. The Caning of Sumner
IV. Party Politics
A. Decline of the Whigs
B. Rise and Fall of the "Know-Nothings"
C. Rise of the Republicans
--The Election of 1856--
V. On the Verge of War:
A. Dred Scott
B. Panic of 1857
C. Lincoln-Douglas Debates
D. John Brown's Raid
E. The Election of Lincoln
1845: 15-13 (Texas and Florida)
1846: 15-14 (Iowa)
1848: 15-15 (Wisconsin)
1. Fugitive Slave Act
2. Abolish slave trade in D.C.
3. Cali in as Free State
4. Popular Sovereignty in new territories
5. Resolved boundary dispute btw. Texas
and New Mexico
II. The Trouble Escalates:
A. Transcontinental Railroad
--Stephen Douglas
B. Kansas-Nebraska Act
C. “Bleeding Kansas”
--New England Emigrant Aid Company
--“Beecher’s Bibles”
--John Brown
--Pottawatomie Creek
D. The Caning of Sumner
IV. Party Politics
A. Decline of the Whigs
B. Rise and Fall of the "Know-Nothings"
C. Rise of the Republicans
--The Election of 1856--
V. On the Verge of War:
A. Dred Scott
B. Panic of 1857
C. Lincoln-Douglas Debates
D. John Brown's Raid
E. The Election of Lincoln
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
HISTORY 231/SCHMOLL/WAR WITH MEXICO WORK/FRIDAY, MAY 20
Friday is a special class where we will meet in spirit but not in person.
Manifest Destiny
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_introduction.html
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_native_american_displacement.html
War with Mexico
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/war/borderlands_overview.html
Plus, click on and read one more link on this page.
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/war/role_of_the_media_overview.html
Plus, click on and read one more link on this page.
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/war/battles_of_the_war_overview.html
Plus, click on and read one more link on this page.
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/war/wars_end_guadalupe.html
As you read about the War with Mexico, jot down anything that catches your attention or is new information. Use the space below for these notes:
Manifest Destiny
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_introduction.html
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/prelude/md_native_american_displacement.html
War with Mexico
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/war/borderlands_overview.html
Plus, click on and read one more link on this page.
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/war/role_of_the_media_overview.html
Plus, click on and read one more link on this page.
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/war/battles_of_the_war_overview.html
Plus, click on and read one more link on this page.
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo
http://www.pbs.org/kera/usmexicanwar/war/wars_end_guadalupe.html
As you read about the War with Mexico, jot down anything that catches your attention or is new information. Use the space below for these notes:
Monday, May 16, 2011
CHEROKEE REMOVAL TERMS
Treaty of Hopewell (1785) “talking leaves”
Election of 1828
Andrew Jackson
Five Civilized Tribes
Indian Removal Act of 1830
Chief John Ross
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831)
Worcester v. Georgia, (1832)
Black Hawk War (1832)
Treaty of New Echota (1835)
Trail of Tears
FOUR GROUPS:
• Cherokee
• White folks in Georgia
• Andrew Jackson and his Cabinet
• John Marshall and the Supreme Court
The Debate occurs in 1836, just prior to removal.
RULES OF THE DEBATE:
1. Each group will prepare a 5 minute opening statement arguing its position.
2. When arguing your case, you must use first person: "I, President Andrew Jackson, argue..." "We, the Supreme Court, believe..." "As good ol Georgia farmers, we reckon that..." "As a Cherokee woman, I firmly insist..."
3. After each group has made its case, each group will have another 2 minute rebuttal.
4. During these opening rounds, your group may ask questions of other groups and may refer to the statements made by other groups, but the other groups may not yet respond.
5. After the opening and the rebuttal, we will open the floor for comments.
6. Points will be tallied based on the number and quality of historical references mnade during all three parts. The points will be tallied and a winner will be announced at the close of the debate.
Election of 1828
Andrew Jackson
Five Civilized Tribes
Indian Removal Act of 1830
Chief John Ross
Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831)
Worcester v. Georgia, (1832)
Black Hawk War (1832)
Treaty of New Echota (1835)
Trail of Tears
FOUR GROUPS:
• Cherokee
• White folks in Georgia
• Andrew Jackson and his Cabinet
• John Marshall and the Supreme Court
The Debate occurs in 1836, just prior to removal.
RULES OF THE DEBATE:
1. Each group will prepare a 5 minute opening statement arguing its position.
2. When arguing your case, you must use first person: "I, President Andrew Jackson, argue..." "We, the Supreme Court, believe..." "As good ol Georgia farmers, we reckon that..." "As a Cherokee woman, I firmly insist..."
3. After each group has made its case, each group will have another 2 minute rebuttal.
4. During these opening rounds, your group may ask questions of other groups and may refer to the statements made by other groups, but the other groups may not yet respond.
5. After the opening and the rebuttal, we will open the floor for comments.
6. Points will be tallied based on the number and quality of historical references mnade during all three parts. The points will be tallied and a winner will be announced at the close of the debate.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES: Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831)
Motion for an injunction to prevent the execution of certain acts of the Legislature of the State of Georgia in the territory of the Cherokee Nation, on behalf of the Cherokee Nation, they claiming to proceed in the Supreme Court of the United States as a foreign state against the State of Georgia under the provision of the Constitution of the United States which gives to the Court jurisdiction in controversies in which a State of the United States or the citizens thereof, and a foreign state, citizens, or subjects thereof are parties.
The Cherokee Nation is not a foreign state in the sense in which the terms "foreign state" is used in the Constitution of the United States.
The third article of the Constitution of the United States describes the extent of the judicial power. The second section closes an enumeration of the cases to which it extends with "controversies between a State or the citizens thereof and foreign states, citizens or subjects." A subsequent clause of the same section gives the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in all cases in which a State shall be a party -- the State of Georgia may then certainly be sued in this Court.
The Cherokees are a State. They have been uniformly treated as a State since the settlement of our country. The numerous treaties made with them by the United States recognise them as a people capable of maintaining the relations of peace and war; of being responsible in their political character for any violation of their engagements, or for any aggression committed on the citizens of the United States by any individual of their community. Laws have [p2] been enacted in the spirit of these treaties. The acts of our Government plainly recognise the Cherokee Nation as a State, and the Courts are bound by those acts.
The condition of the Indians in relation to the United States is perhaps unlike that of any other two people in existence. In general, nations not owing a common allegiance are foreign to each other. The term "foreign nation" is with strict propriety applicable by either to the other. But the relation of the Indians to the United States is marked by peculiar and cardinal distinctions which exist nowhere else.
The Indians are acknowledged to have an unquestionable, and heretofore an unquestioned, right to the lands they occupy until that right shall be extinguished by a voluntary cession to our Government. It may well be doubted whether those tribes which reside within the acknowledged boundaries of the United States can, with strict accuracy, be denominated foreign nations. They may more correctly, perhaps, be denominated domestic dependent nations. They occupy a territory to which we assert a title independent of their will, which must take effect in point of possession when their right of possession ceases; meanwhile, they are in a state of pupilage. Their relations to the United States resemble that of a ward to his guardian. They look to our Government for protection, rely upon its kindness and its power, appeal to it for relief to their wants, and address the President as their Great Father.
The bill filed on behalf of the Cherokees seeks to restrain a State from forcible exercise of legislative power over a neighbouring people asserting their independence, their right to which the State denies. On several of the matters alleged in the bill, for example, on the laws making it criminal to exercise the usual power of self-government in their own country by the Cherokee Nation, this Court cannot interpose, at least in the form in which those matters are presented. That part of the bill which respects the land occupied by the Indians, and prays the aid of the Court to protect their possessions, may be more doubtful. The mere question of right might perhaps be decided by this Court in a proper case with proper parties. But the Court is asked to do more than decide on the title. The bill requires us to control the Legislature of Georgia, and to restrain the exertion of its physical force. The propriety of such an interposition by the Court may well be questioned. It savours too much of the exercise of political power to be within the proper province of the Judicial Department.
The Cherokee Nation is not a foreign state in the sense in which the terms "foreign state" is used in the Constitution of the United States.
The third article of the Constitution of the United States describes the extent of the judicial power. The second section closes an enumeration of the cases to which it extends with "controversies between a State or the citizens thereof and foreign states, citizens or subjects." A subsequent clause of the same section gives the Supreme Court original jurisdiction in all cases in which a State shall be a party -- the State of Georgia may then certainly be sued in this Court.
The Cherokees are a State. They have been uniformly treated as a State since the settlement of our country. The numerous treaties made with them by the United States recognise them as a people capable of maintaining the relations of peace and war; of being responsible in their political character for any violation of their engagements, or for any aggression committed on the citizens of the United States by any individual of their community. Laws have [p2] been enacted in the spirit of these treaties. The acts of our Government plainly recognise the Cherokee Nation as a State, and the Courts are bound by those acts.
The condition of the Indians in relation to the United States is perhaps unlike that of any other two people in existence. In general, nations not owing a common allegiance are foreign to each other. The term "foreign nation" is with strict propriety applicable by either to the other. But the relation of the Indians to the United States is marked by peculiar and cardinal distinctions which exist nowhere else.
The Indians are acknowledged to have an unquestionable, and heretofore an unquestioned, right to the lands they occupy until that right shall be extinguished by a voluntary cession to our Government. It may well be doubted whether those tribes which reside within the acknowledged boundaries of the United States can, with strict accuracy, be denominated foreign nations. They may more correctly, perhaps, be denominated domestic dependent nations. They occupy a territory to which we assert a title independent of their will, which must take effect in point of possession when their right of possession ceases; meanwhile, they are in a state of pupilage. Their relations to the United States resemble that of a ward to his guardian. They look to our Government for protection, rely upon its kindness and its power, appeal to it for relief to their wants, and address the President as their Great Father.
The bill filed on behalf of the Cherokees seeks to restrain a State from forcible exercise of legislative power over a neighbouring people asserting their independence, their right to which the State denies. On several of the matters alleged in the bill, for example, on the laws making it criminal to exercise the usual power of self-government in their own country by the Cherokee Nation, this Court cannot interpose, at least in the form in which those matters are presented. That part of the bill which respects the land occupied by the Indians, and prays the aid of the Court to protect their possessions, may be more doubtful. The mere question of right might perhaps be decided by this Court in a proper case with proper parties. But the Court is asked to do more than decide on the title. The bill requires us to control the Legislature of Georgia, and to restrain the exertion of its physical force. The propriety of such an interposition by the Court may well be questioned. It savours too much of the exercise of political power to be within the proper province of the Judicial Department.
“Our Hearts are Sickened”: Letter from Chief John Ross of the Cherokee, Georgia, 1836 [Red Clay Council Ground, Cherokee Nation, September 28, 1836]
It is well known that for a number of years past we have been harassed by a series of vexations, which it is deemed unnecessary to recite in detail, but the evidence of which our delegation will be prepared to furnish. With a view to bringing our troubles to a close, a delegation was appointed on the 23rd of October, 1835, by the General Council of the nation, clothed with full powers to enter into arrangements with the Government of the United States, for the final adjustment of all our existing difficulties. The delegation failing to effect an arrangement with the United States commissioner, then in the nation, proceeded, agreeably to their instructions in that case, to Washington City, for the purpose of negotiating a treaty with the authorities of the United States.
After the departure of the Delegation, a contract was made by the Rev. John F. Schermerhorn, and certain individual Cherokees, purporting to be a “treaty, concluded at New Echota, in the State of Georgia, on the 29th day of December, 1835, by General William Carroll and John F. Schermerhorn, commissioners on the part of the United States, and the chiefs, headmen, and people of the Cherokee tribes of Indians.” A spurious Delegation, in violation of a special injunction of the general council of the nation, proceeded to Washington City with this pretended treaty, and by false and fraudulent representations supplanted in the favor of the Government the legal and accredited Delegation of the Cherokee people, and obtained for this instrument, after making important alterations in its provisions, the recognition of the United States Government. And now it is presented to us as a treaty, ratified by the Senate, and approved by the President [Andrew Jackson], and our acquiescence in its requirements demanded, under the sanction of the displeasure of the United States, and the threat of summary compulsion, in case of refusal. It comes to us, not through our legitimate authorities, the known and usual medium of communication between the Government of the United States and our nation, but through the agency of a complication of powers, civil and military.
By the stipulations of this instrument, we are despoiled of our private possessions, the indefeasible property of individuals. We are stripped of every attribute of freedom and eligibility for legal self-defence. Our property may be plundered before our eyes; violence may be committed on our persons; even our lives may be taken away, and there is none to regard our complaints. We are denationalized; we are disfranchised. We are deprived of membership in the human family! We have neither land nor home, nor resting place that can be called our own. And this is effected by the provisions of a compact which assumes the venerated, the sacred appellation of treaty.
We are overwhelmed! Our hearts are sickened, our utterance is paralized, when we reflect on the condition in which we are placed, by the audacious practices of unprincipled men, who have managed their stratagems with so much dexterity as to impose on the Government of the United States, in the face of our earnest, solemn, and reiterated protestations.
The instrument in question is not the act of our Nation; we are not parties to its covenants; it has not received the sanction of our people. The makers of it sustain no office nor appointment in our Nation, under the designation of Chiefs, Head men, or any other title, by which they hold, or could acquire, authority to assume the reins of Government, and to make bargain and sale of our rights, our possessions, and our common country. And we are constrained solemnly to declare, that we cannot but contemplate the enforcement of the stipulations of this instrument on us, against our consent, as an act of injustice and oppression, which, we are well persuaded, can never knowingly be countenanced by the Government and people of the United States; nor can we believe it to be the design of these honorable and highminded individuals, who stand at the head of the Govt., to bind a whole Nation, by the acts of a few unauthorized individuals. And, therefore, we, the parties to be affected by the result, appeal with confidence to the justice, the magnanimity, the compassion, of your honorable bodies, against the enforcement, on us, of the provisions of a compact, in the formation of which we have had no agency.
In truth, our cause is your own; it is the cause of liberty and of justice; it is based upon your own principles, which we have learned from yourselves; for we have gloried to count your [George] Washington and your [Thomas] Jefferson our great teachers; we have read their communications to us with veneration; we have practised their precepts with success. And the result is manifest. The wildness of the forest has given place to comfortable dwellings and cultivated fields, stocked with the various domestic animals. Mental culture, industrious habits, and domestic enjoyments, have succeeded the rudeness of the savage state.
We have learned your religion also. We have read your Sacred books. Hundreds of our people have embraced their doctrines, practised the virtues they teach, cherished the hopes they awaken, and rejoiced in the consolations which they afford. To the spirit of your institutions, and your religion, which has been imbibed by our community, is mainly to be ascribed that patient endurance which has characterized the conduct of our people, under the laceration of their keenest woes. For assuredly, we are not ignorant of our condition; we are not insensible to our sufferings. We feel them! we groan under their pressure! And anticipation crowds our breasts with sorrows yet to come. We are, indeed, an afflicted people! Our spirits are subdued! Despair has well nigh seized upon our energies! But we speak to the representatives of a Christian country; the friends of justice; the patrons of the oppressed. And our hopes revive, and our prospects brighten, as we indulge the thought. On your sentence, our fate is suspended; prosperity or desolation depends on your word. To you, therefore, we look! Before your august assembly we present ourselves, in the attitude of deprecation, and of entreaty. On your kindness, on your humanity, on your compassion, on your benevolence, we rest our hopes. To you we address our reiterated prayers. Spare our people! Spare the wreck of our prosperity! Let not our deserted homes become the monuments of our desolation! But we forbear! We suppress the agonies which wring our hearts, when we look at our wives, our children, and our venerable sires! We restrain the forebodings of anguish and distress, of misery and devastation and death, which must be the attendants on the execution of this ruinous compact.
In conclusion, we commend to your confidence and favor, our well-beloved and trust-worthy brethren and fellow-citizens, John Ross, Principal Chief, Richard Taylor, Samuel Gunter, John Benge, George Sanders, Walter S. Adair, Stephen Foreman, and Kalsateehee of Aquohee, who are clothed with full powers to adjust all our existing difficulties by treaty arrangements with the United States, by which our destruction may be averted, impediments to the advancement of our people removed, and our existence perpetuated as a living monument, to testify to posterity the honor, the magnanimity, the generosity of the United States. And your memorialists, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Signed by Ross, George Lowrey, Edward Gunter, Lewis Ross, thirty-one members of the National Committee and National Council, and 2,174 others.
Source: John Ross, Letter from John Ross, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation of Indians, in Answer to Inquires from a Friend Regarding the Cherokee Affairs with the United States (Washington, D.C., 1836), 22–24.
After the departure of the Delegation, a contract was made by the Rev. John F. Schermerhorn, and certain individual Cherokees, purporting to be a “treaty, concluded at New Echota, in the State of Georgia, on the 29th day of December, 1835, by General William Carroll and John F. Schermerhorn, commissioners on the part of the United States, and the chiefs, headmen, and people of the Cherokee tribes of Indians.” A spurious Delegation, in violation of a special injunction of the general council of the nation, proceeded to Washington City with this pretended treaty, and by false and fraudulent representations supplanted in the favor of the Government the legal and accredited Delegation of the Cherokee people, and obtained for this instrument, after making important alterations in its provisions, the recognition of the United States Government. And now it is presented to us as a treaty, ratified by the Senate, and approved by the President [Andrew Jackson], and our acquiescence in its requirements demanded, under the sanction of the displeasure of the United States, and the threat of summary compulsion, in case of refusal. It comes to us, not through our legitimate authorities, the known and usual medium of communication between the Government of the United States and our nation, but through the agency of a complication of powers, civil and military.
By the stipulations of this instrument, we are despoiled of our private possessions, the indefeasible property of individuals. We are stripped of every attribute of freedom and eligibility for legal self-defence. Our property may be plundered before our eyes; violence may be committed on our persons; even our lives may be taken away, and there is none to regard our complaints. We are denationalized; we are disfranchised. We are deprived of membership in the human family! We have neither land nor home, nor resting place that can be called our own. And this is effected by the provisions of a compact which assumes the venerated, the sacred appellation of treaty.
We are overwhelmed! Our hearts are sickened, our utterance is paralized, when we reflect on the condition in which we are placed, by the audacious practices of unprincipled men, who have managed their stratagems with so much dexterity as to impose on the Government of the United States, in the face of our earnest, solemn, and reiterated protestations.
The instrument in question is not the act of our Nation; we are not parties to its covenants; it has not received the sanction of our people. The makers of it sustain no office nor appointment in our Nation, under the designation of Chiefs, Head men, or any other title, by which they hold, or could acquire, authority to assume the reins of Government, and to make bargain and sale of our rights, our possessions, and our common country. And we are constrained solemnly to declare, that we cannot but contemplate the enforcement of the stipulations of this instrument on us, against our consent, as an act of injustice and oppression, which, we are well persuaded, can never knowingly be countenanced by the Government and people of the United States; nor can we believe it to be the design of these honorable and highminded individuals, who stand at the head of the Govt., to bind a whole Nation, by the acts of a few unauthorized individuals. And, therefore, we, the parties to be affected by the result, appeal with confidence to the justice, the magnanimity, the compassion, of your honorable bodies, against the enforcement, on us, of the provisions of a compact, in the formation of which we have had no agency.
In truth, our cause is your own; it is the cause of liberty and of justice; it is based upon your own principles, which we have learned from yourselves; for we have gloried to count your [George] Washington and your [Thomas] Jefferson our great teachers; we have read their communications to us with veneration; we have practised their precepts with success. And the result is manifest. The wildness of the forest has given place to comfortable dwellings and cultivated fields, stocked with the various domestic animals. Mental culture, industrious habits, and domestic enjoyments, have succeeded the rudeness of the savage state.
We have learned your religion also. We have read your Sacred books. Hundreds of our people have embraced their doctrines, practised the virtues they teach, cherished the hopes they awaken, and rejoiced in the consolations which they afford. To the spirit of your institutions, and your religion, which has been imbibed by our community, is mainly to be ascribed that patient endurance which has characterized the conduct of our people, under the laceration of their keenest woes. For assuredly, we are not ignorant of our condition; we are not insensible to our sufferings. We feel them! we groan under their pressure! And anticipation crowds our breasts with sorrows yet to come. We are, indeed, an afflicted people! Our spirits are subdued! Despair has well nigh seized upon our energies! But we speak to the representatives of a Christian country; the friends of justice; the patrons of the oppressed. And our hopes revive, and our prospects brighten, as we indulge the thought. On your sentence, our fate is suspended; prosperity or desolation depends on your word. To you, therefore, we look! Before your august assembly we present ourselves, in the attitude of deprecation, and of entreaty. On your kindness, on your humanity, on your compassion, on your benevolence, we rest our hopes. To you we address our reiterated prayers. Spare our people! Spare the wreck of our prosperity! Let not our deserted homes become the monuments of our desolation! But we forbear! We suppress the agonies which wring our hearts, when we look at our wives, our children, and our venerable sires! We restrain the forebodings of anguish and distress, of misery and devastation and death, which must be the attendants on the execution of this ruinous compact.
In conclusion, we commend to your confidence and favor, our well-beloved and trust-worthy brethren and fellow-citizens, John Ross, Principal Chief, Richard Taylor, Samuel Gunter, John Benge, George Sanders, Walter S. Adair, Stephen Foreman, and Kalsateehee of Aquohee, who are clothed with full powers to adjust all our existing difficulties by treaty arrangements with the United States, by which our destruction may be averted, impediments to the advancement of our people removed, and our existence perpetuated as a living monument, to testify to posterity the honor, the magnanimity, the generosity of the United States. And your memorialists, as in duty bound, will ever pray. Signed by Ross, George Lowrey, Edward Gunter, Lewis Ross, thirty-one members of the National Committee and National Council, and 2,174 others.
Source: John Ross, Letter from John Ross, Principal Chief of the Cherokee Nation of Indians, in Answer to Inquires from a Friend Regarding the Cherokee Affairs with the United States (Washington, D.C., 1836), 22–24.
THE U.S. CONSTITUTION: Article IV - The States
Section 1 - Each State to Honor all others
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Section 2 - State citizens, Extradition
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.
(No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.) (This clause in parentheses is superseded by the 13th Amendment.)
Section 3 - New States
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
Section 2 - State citizens, Extradition
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.
(No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.) (This clause in parentheses is superseded by the 13th Amendment.)
Section 3 - New States
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new States shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.
AGAINST REMOVAL
The following are excerpts from a speech made by Senator Peleg Sprague (Maine) on April 16, 1830, during the Senate's debate over the Indian Removal Bill. * * *This bill and amendment, and the discussion, which they have produced invoke the question of the rights and duties of the United States with respect to the Indian tribes generally, but more especially the Cherokees. With that people we have not less than fifteen treats, The first made in the year 1785, and the last in 1819. By several of these treaties, we hare unequivocally guarantied to them that they shall forever enjoy?1st. Their separate existence, as a poetical community:2d. Undisturbed possession and full enjoyment of their lands, within certain boundaries, which are duly defined and fully described;3d. The protection of the United States, against all interference with, or encroachments upon their rights by any people, state, or nation.For these promises, on our part, we received ample consideration---By the restoration and establishing of peace;By a large cessions of territory;By the promise on their part to treat with no other state or nation; and other important stipulations. These treaties were made with all the forms and solemnities which could give them forces and efficacy; by Commissioners, duly appointed with full power; ratified by the Senate; confirmed by the President' and announced to the world, by his proclamation, as the binding compact of the nation, and the4 supreme law of the land. * * *Much has been said of their [the Cherokees] being untutored savages, as if that could dissolve our treaties! No one pretends, that they are less cultivated now than when those treaties were made. Indeed, it is certain, that they have greatly advanced in civilization; we see it, in the very proofs introduced by the gentleman from Georgia, to show their barbarism. He produced to the Senate, a printed code of Cherokee laws; and a newspaper issued from a Cherokee press! Is there another instance of such productions from any Indian nation? I was surprised, that with all his scrutiny, he could find no more remnants of savage customs. I shall not dwell upon his selections from their laws. The first was; that if a horse should be stolen; and the owner, finding the thief in possession, should immediately kill him, in the excess of passion?it should rest upon his own conscience. It is to be observed that the person slain must have been guilty; and for such an offence, life is now taken by the laws of England. But this provision inserted in the Cherokee code, more than twenty years ago, has yielded to further light, and been since repealed. Time will not permit me to dwell upon their advances in the arts of civilized life. It is known to have been great. They till the ground, manufacture for themselves, have work-shops, a printing press, schools, churches, and a regularly organized Government. Indeed, the gentleman from Tennessee, himself, told us that some individuals of that nation were qualified for seats in this august assembly. * * *Whither are the Cherokees to go? What are the benefits of the change? What system has been matured for their security? What laws for their government? These questions are answered only by gilded promises in general terms; they are to become enlightened and civilized husbandmen. They now live by the cultivation of the soil, and the mechanic arts. It is proposed to send them from their cotton fields, their farms and their gardens; to a distant and an unsubdued wilderness?to make them tillers of the earth! ?to remove them from their looms, their work-shops, their printing press, their schools, and churches, near the white settlements; to frowning forests, surrounded with naked savages?that they may become enlightened and civilized! We have pledged to them our protection?and, instead of shielding them where they now are, within our reach, under our own arm, we send these natives of a southern clime to northern regions, amongst fierce and warlike barbarians. And what security do we propose to them? ?a new guarantee !! Who can look an Indian in the face; and say to him; we, and our fathers, for more than forty years, have made to you the most solemn promises; we now violate and trample upon them all; but offer you in their stead?another guarantee! ! Will they be in no danger of attack, from the primitive inhabitants of the regions to which they emigrate? How can it be otherwise? The official documents show us the fact, that some of the few, who have already gone, were involved in conflicts with the native tribes, and compelled to a second removal. How are they to subsist? Has not that country now, as great an Indian population, as it can sustain? What has become of the original occupants? Have we not already caused accessions to their numbers, and been compressing them more and more? Is not the consequence inevitable, that some must be stinted in the means of subsistence? Here too, we have the light of experience. By an official communication, from Governor Clark, the Superintendent of Indian affairs; we learn that the most powerful tribes, west of the Mississippi, are, every year, so distressed by famine, that many die for want of food. The scenes of their suffering are hardly exceeded by the sieges of Jerusalem, and Samaria. There might be seen the miserable mother, in all the tortures which hunger can inflict, giving her last morsel for the sustenance of her child, and then fainting, sinking, and actually dying of starvation! And the orphan? ?no one can spare it food?it is put alive into the grave of the parent, which thus closes over the quick and the dead ! And this not in a solitary instance only, bat repeatedly and frequently. "The living child is often buried with the dead mother." Mr. President: I am aware that their white neighbors desire the absence of the Indians; and if they can find safety and subsistence beyond the Mississippi, I should rejoice exceedingly at their removal, because it would relieve the States, of their presence. I would do much to effect a consummation so devoutly to be wished. But let it be by their own free choice, unawed by fear, unseduced by bribes. Let as not compel them, by withdrawing the protection, which we have pledged. Theirs must be the pain of departure, and the hazard of the change. They are men, and have the feelings and attachments of men; and if all the ties which bind them to their country, and their frames are to be rent asunder; let it be by their own free hand. If they are to leave forever the streams, at which they have drank, and the trees under which they have reclined: if the fires are nevermore to be Iighted up in the council house of their chiefs; and must be quenched forever upon the domestic hearth, by the tears of the inmates, who have there joined the nuptial feast, and the funeral wail: if they are to look for the last time upon the land of their birth?which drank up the blood of their fathers, shed in its defence?and is mingled with the sacred dust of children and friends?to turn their aching vision to distant regions enveloped in darkness and surrounded by dangers?let it be by their own, free choice, not by the coercion of a withdrawal of the protection of oar plighted faith. They can best appreciate the dangers and difficulties which beset their path. It is their fate which is impending; and it is their right to judge; while we have no warrant to falsify our promise. It is said that their existence cannot be preserved; that it is the doom of Providence, that they most perish. So indeed, must we all; but let it be in the course of nature; not by the hand of violence. If in truth, they are now in the decrepitude of age; let as permit them to live out all their days, and die in peace; not bring down their grey hairs in blood, to a foreign grave. Sprague, Peleg. "Speech of Mr. Peleg Sprague, of Maine: Delivered in The Senate of the United States, 16th April, 1830, In Reply to Messrs. White, McKiney, and Forsyth, Upon the Subject of The Removal of the Indians," (Washington: Office of the National Journal, 1830) pp. 1, 28, 34-35. The following excerpts are taken from a speech given by Representative Edward Everett (Massachusetts) on May 19th 1830, during a debate in the House of Representatives over the Indian Removal Bill. * * *Gentlemen, who favor the project, cannot have viewed it as it is. They think of a march of Indian warriors, penetrating with their accustomed vigor, the forest or the cane brake?they think of the youthful Indian hunter, going forth exultingly to the chase. Sir, it is no such thing. This is all past; it is matter of distant tradition, and poetical fancy. They have nothing now left of the Indian, but his social and political inferiority. They are to go in families, the old and the young, wives and children, the feeble, the sick. And how are they to go? Not in luxurious carriages; they are poor. Not in stagecoaches; they go to a region where there are none. Not even in wagons, nor on horseback, for they are to go in the least expensive manner possible. They are to go on foot: nay, they are to be driven by contract. The price has been reduced, and is still further to be reduced, and it is to be reduced, by sending them by contract. It is to be screwed down to the least farthing, to eight dollars per head. ? A community of civilized people, of all ages, sexes and conditions of bodily health, are to be dragged hundreds of miles, over mountains, rivers, and deserts, where there are no roads, no bridges, no habitations, and this is to be done for eight dollars a head; and done by contract. The question is to be, what is the least for which you will take so many hundred families, averaging so many infirm old men, so many little children, so many lame, feeble and sick? What will you contract for? The imagination sickens at the thought of what will happen to a company of these emigrants, which may prove less strong, less able to pursue the journey than was anticipated. ? Will the contractor stop for the old man to rest, for the sick to get well; for the fainting women and children to revive? He will not; he cannot afford to. And this process is to be extended to every family, in a population of seventy-five thousand souls. This is what we call the removal of the Indians! It is very easy to talk of this subject, reposing on these luxurious chairs, and protected by these massy walls, and this gorgeous canopy, from the power of the elements. Removal is a soft word, and words are delusive. ? But let gentlemen take the matter home to themselves and their neighbors. There are 75,000 Indians to be removed. This is not less than the population of two congressional districts. We are going, then, to take a population of Indians, of families, who live as we do in houses, work as we do in the field or the workshop, at the plough and the loom, who are governed as we are by laws, who send their children to school, and who attend themselves on the ministry of the Christian faith, to march them from their homes, and put them down in a remote unexplored desert. We are going to do it? this Congress is going to do it?this is a bill to do it. Now let any gentleman think how he would stand, were he to go home and tell his constituents, that they were to be removed, whole counties of them?they must fly before the wrath of insupportable laws?they must go to the distant desert, beyond Arkansas?go for eight dollars a head, by contract?that this was the policy of the Government?that the bill had passed?the money was voted?you had voted for it?and go they must. * *But, sir, these Indians could not live in this country, not even if your advancing population would let them alone, and the country itself were a pretty good one. It requires some of the highest qualities of civilized man to emigrate to advantage. I do not speak of great intellectual elevation; not of book learning, nor moral excellence; though this last is of great importance in determining the prosperity of a new settlement. But it is only the chosen portion of a community, its elite, that can perform this great work of building up a new country. The nervous, ardent young man, in the bloom of opening life, and the pride of health, can do if. It is this part of the population that has done it. This is the great drain of New England and the other Atlantic States. But to take up a whole population; the old, the feeble, the infant, the inefficient and helpless, that can hardly get through life any where, to take them tip by a sweeping operation, and scatter them over an unprepared wilderness, is madness. It is utterly impossible for them?I do not say to prosper?but even to subsist. Such a, thing was never heard of. How narrowly did the pilgrims of New England escape destruction, although their ranks were made up of men of the sternest moral qualities, well provided with pecuniary resources, and recruited for several years by new adventurers! The Indians are to be fed a year at our expense. So far is well, because they will not starve that year. But, are the prairies to be broken up, houses built, crops raised, and the timber brought forward, in one year? Sir, if a vigorous young man, going into the prairie and commencing a settlement, can raise a crop to support himself the second year, I take it he does well. To expect a community of Indian families to do it, is beyond all reason. The Chairman of the Committee tells us, it would be cruel to cast them off at the end of one year; they must be helped along. Doubtless they must. And, in the progress of this way of living, partly by the chase, partly by husbandry, and partly by alms, if a people naturally improvident do not speedily become degenerate and wretched, they will form an exception, not merely to all their brethren, with a single exception, who have preceded them In this coarse, but to the laws of nature. The earnest volition to go, is the great spring of the emigrant's success, ?He summons up his soul, and strains his nerves, to execute his own purpose; but drive a heart-sick family, against their will, from their native land, put them down in a distant wilderness, and bid them get their living, and there is not one chance in fifty that they would live two years. While you feed them they will subsist, and no longer. General Clark tells you, that those who were in comfort twenty years ago must now be fed. Sir, they cannot live in these dismal steppes. Everett, Edward. "Speech of Mr. Everett, of Massachusetts, on the Bill for Removing the Indians from the East to the West Side of the Mississippi. Delivered in the House of Representatives, On the 19th of May, 1830," (Boston: Office of the Daily Advertiser, 1830) pp. 28, 35.
IN FAVOR OF REMOVAL
Report from the Committee of Indian Affairs on the Removal of Indians, delivered to the House of Representatives on February 24, 1830. * * *The most active and extraordinary means have been employed to misrepresent the intentions of the Government, on the one hand, and the condition of the Indians on the other. The vivid representations of the progress of Indian civilization, which have been so industriously circulated by the party among themselves opposed to emigration and by their agents, have had the effect of engaging the sympathies, and exciting the zeal, of many benevolent individuals and societies, who have manifested scarcely less talents than perseverance in resisting the views of the Government. Whether those who have been thus employed, can claim to have been the most judicious friends of the Indians, remains to be tested by time. The effect of these indications of favor and protection has been to encourage them in the most extravagant pretensions. They have been taught to have new views of their rights. The Cherokees have decreed the integrity of their territory, and claimed to be as sovereign within their limits, as the States are in theirs. They have actually asserted such attributes of sovereignty, as, if indulged, must subvert the influence, and effect a radical change of the policy and interests of the Government, in relation to their affairs. Some of the States, within whose limits those tribes are situated, have determined, by the exercise of their rights of jurisdiction within their territorial limits, to repress, while it may be done with the least inconvenience, a spirit which they foresee, may, in time, produce the most serious mischiefs. This exercise of authority by the States has been remonstrated against by those who control the affairs of the Indians, and application has been made to the Federal Government to interpose its authority in defence of their claim to sovereignty. * * *No respectable jurist has ever gravely contended, that the right of the Indians to hold their reserved lands, could be supported in the courts of the country, upon any other ground than the grant or permission of the sovereignty or State in which such lands lie. The province of Massachusetts Bay, besides the subdued lands already mentioned, during the early period of its history, granted other lands to various friendly tribes of Indians. Gookin, the great protector and friend of the Indians, about the time these grants were made, was asked, why he thought it necessary to procure a grant from the General Court for such lands as the Indians needed, seeing that "they were the original lords of the soil?" He replied, that "the English claim right to the land by patent from their King." No title to lands, that has ever, been examined in the courts of the States, or of the United States, it is believed, has been admitted to-depend upon any Indian deed of relinquishment, except in those cases where, for some meritorious service, grants have been made to individual Indians to hold in fee-simple. * * *The Committee do not understand, that, either the States, or the Federal Government, ever acted upon the principle, that it was necessary to obtain the consent of the Indians, before the right to exclude all competitors from the market of their lands could be asserted. It is asserted, upon the ground of ownership and political sovereignty, and can be sustained upon no other principles than those which our ancestors supposed to be well founded, when they denied to the Indians any right to more land than they required for their subsistence by agriculture. The Indians are paid for their unimproved lands as much as the privilege of hunting and taking game upon them is supposed to be worth, and the Government sells them for what they are worth to the cultivator. The difference between those values is the profit made by asserting the original rights of discovery and conquest. The rigor of the original rule has been mitigated in the exercise of this right of pre-emption, in regard to such lands as have been improved by the Indians, for the same reason that their right to such as they had subdued, was respected by the colonists in the early period of their history. Improved lands, or small reservations in the States, are, in general, purchased at their full value to the cultivator. To pay an Indian tribe what their ancient hunting grounds are worth to them, after the game is fled pr destroyed, as a mode of appropriating wild lands, claimed by Indians, has been found more convenient, and certainly it is more agreeable to the forms of justice, as well as more merciful, than to assert the possession of them by the sword. Thus, the practice of buying Indian titles is but the substitute which humanity and expediency have imposed, in place of the sword, in arriving at the actual enjoyment of property claimed by the right of discovery, and sanctioned by the natural superiority allowed to the claims of civilized communities over those of savage tribes. * * *If the Committee have not wholly misstated the condition of the Southern Indians, It will be apparent, that the common feelings of humanity, besides the obligations incurred in the past intercourse of the Government with them, require, that whatever means may be constitutionally employed, should be liberally applied for their relief. If they remain where they are, the experience of two centuries has shown, that they eventually must perish. The assimilation of the two races, which has been commenced, cannot be relied on to save such masses as the Southern tribes present. The common Indian is already in danger of being regarded as a degraded caste in his own country. The experiments which have been made, do not furnish any very flattering evidence of the practicability of civilizing Indians, in large masses, under any circumstances; but the efforts commenced and superintended by such men as Elliot and the Mayhews appear to have been, seem to be conclusive, as to the fate of the Indian when in contact with the whites. If the past could be recalled, and the eight or ten thousand Indians, including children, who, it is said, at one time, in Massachusetts and New Plymouth colonies, attended church regularly and orderly, supplied many of their own teachers, and a great portion of them being able to read and write, could be transplanted into some territory upon the Western frontier, and there, under the protection of the whites, but free from the actual and constant presence of a superiority which dispirits them; and from those vices which have always been their worst enemies, the problem of Indian civilization might be solved, at last, under the most favorable circumstances. If the condition of the Southern tribes is not so flattering as that of the Indians of New England, at the period alluded to, still, the improved condition and habits of the mixed race would be a great advantage in any attempt to elevate the condition of the common Indian, in a new country. Whatever civilization may be found among them, and the more there is of it the better, may be made the basis of a society West of the Mississippi, which may have the happiest effects upon the condition of all the Western tribes. This plan, at all events, offers a prospect, which may never again occur, of atoning, at last, for any wrongs inevitably incident to the settlement of the country by the white race, in a manned worthy of the character of the Government. To give the experiment every advantage in the power of the Government, their new country should be secured to them in such a manner, that they would cease to be haunted with the prospect of future changes in their residence. The stimulant, so powerful and important in its effects upon the white man, of a separate and exclusive property in lands, with the privilege of transmitting it to their children, should be supplied to the Indians, in their new country, under such guards against the improvident disposition of them by the grantee, as prudence may dictate. To these provisions, it would seem, must be added ample means of moral instruction; without these, there can be little hope of reclaiming the present generation of the common Indians, or of securing the amelioration of the next. The country which has heretofore been designated as proper to be allotted to the Indians, although not exhibiting the same variety of features with some portion of the country now occupied by them, possesses, in the outlet which it affords to a great western common and hunting ground, not likely to become the early abode of the white race, an advantage and relief to the adult Indians of the present generation, which, in the opinion of the committee, cannot be supplied in any other shape. If this country is secured to the Indians, or such portions of it as shall be satisfactory to them, it is believed the greatest objection will be removed which has heretofore existed with any portion of the more sagacious Indians, having no more than a common interest in remaining where they are, to the plan of emigration. If such measures shall be resorted to as will satisfy the Indians generally, that the Government means to treat them with kindness, and to secure to them a country beyond the power of the white inhabitants to annoy them, the influence of their chiefs cannot longer prevent their emigration. Looking to this event, it would seem proper to make an ample appropriation, that any voluntary indication, on the part of the Indians, of a general disposition to remove, may be seconded efficiently by the Government. Committee on Indian Affairs. Removal of Indians, Delivered in the House of Representatives, 21st Congress, 1st Sesson, 24 February, 1830 pp. 2, 5-6, 25. The following is an excerpt from a speech given by Senator Robert Adams (Mississippi) in April, 1830 during a debate in the Senate over the Indian Removal Bill. * * *The question which is submitted to us by the bill itself, as reported to the Senate by the Chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs, is this: ?Whether Congress will authorize the President of the United States to exchange territory belonging to the United States, West of the river Mississippi, and not within the limits of any State or organized territory, with any tribe of Indians, or the individuals of such tribe, now residing within the limits of any State or Territory, and with whom the United States have any existing treaties, who may voluntarily choose to make such exchange for the lands which such tribe of Indians, or the individuals of such tribe, at present occupy ; to compensate individuals of those tribes for improvements made upon the lands they now occupy; to pay the expenses of their removal and settlement in the country West of the Mississippi, and provide them necessary subsistence for one year thereafter. The authority contemplated by the bill is to make the exchange of territory with those Indians, and with those only, who are willing to make it. The friends of this measure do not wish to vest power in the President of the United States to assign a district of country West of the Mississippi, and, by strong arm, to drive these unfortunate people from their present abode, and compel them to take up their residence in the country assigned to them. On the contrary, it is their wish that this exchange should be left to the free and voluntary choice of the Indians themselves. Is there any thing alarming in this proposition? any thing to cause that fear and trembling for the fate of the unfortunate Indian, which have been manifested in the opposition to this bill? Is there any thing to call forth those animated-denunciations against those who disregard and violate the faith of treaties? As if those who support this measure were ready to prostrate at the foot of their own sordid interest the honor of the nation, and inflict a stain upon her escutcheon that all the waters of the Mississippi could not wash out I confess, for my own part, I can see nothing in the provisions of the bill before us, unbecoming the character of a great, just, and magnanimous nation. And, indeed, if I had heard only so much of the eloquent speeches of those who oppose the passage of the bill as enjoined upon us the strictest good faith in the observance of treaties, I would have concluded that they were the warmest advocates of the proposed measure. As early as the year 1802, the United States entered into a compact with the Stale of Georgia, which compact was ratified in the most solemn manner, being approved by the Congress of the United States and by the Legislature of the State of Georgia. By this agreement, the United States obtained from the State of Georgia a cession of territory sufficient, in extent, to form two large States, and in part consideration for such an immense acquisition of territory, agreed, on their part, in the most solemn manner, to extinguish, for the use of Georgia, the Indian title to all the lands situated within the limits of that State, "as soon as the same could be done peaceably and upon reasonable terms," Although this is not, in the technical sense of the term, a treaty entered into by the United States with the State of Georgia, yet it is an agreement upon a full and valuable consideration, and good faith on the part of the United States requires its fulfilment, according to its true spirit and intent. The bill under consideration proposes a mode by which this agreement may be performed; by which the Indian title to all the lands within the boundaries of that State may be extinguished, peaceably, and upon reasonable terms. Peaceably, because it is only to operate upon those Indians who are willing to remove. And upon reasonable terms, because they are to receive other lands in exchange for those which they give up; just compensation for improvements made by them; the expenses of their removal and settlement paid, and subsistence for one year furnished them. Would it not, therefore, have been reasonable to suppose, that those who have said so much about the high and sacred obligation of treaties? and how essentially the great name of every nation depends upon their strict observance, would be amongst the foremost and warmest supporters of the bill under consideration? Adams, Robert Huntington. "Speech of Mr. Adams, of Mississippi, on the Bill to Remove the Indians West of the Mississippi. Delivered in the senate of the United States, April, 1830," (Washington: Duff Green, 1830) pp. 3-5.
CHEROKEE NATION DOCUMENTS
Excerpts are from the closing paragraphs of an address of a council of the Cherokee Nation to the people of the United States, written in July of 1830.
* * *Before we close this address, permit us to state what we conceive to be our relations with the United States. After the peace of 1783, the Cherokees were an independent people; absolutely so, as much as any people on earth. They had been allies to Great Britain, and as a faithful ally took a part in the colonial war on her side. They had placed themselves under her protection, and had they, without cause, declared hostility against their protector, and had the colonies been subdued, what might not have been their fate? But her [Great Britain's] power on this continent was broken. She acknowledged the independence of the United States, and made peace. The Cherokees therefore stood alone; and, in these circumstances, continued the war. They were then under no obligations to the United States any more than to Great Britain, France or Spain. The United States never subjugated the Cherokees; on the contrary, our fathers remained in possesion of their country, and with arms in their hands. * * *We are aware, that some persons suppose it will be for our advantage to remove beyond the Mississippi. We think otherwise. Our people universally think otherwise. Thinking that it would be fatal to their interests, they have almost to a man sent their memorial to congress, deprecating the necessity of a removal. This question was distinctly before their minds when they signed their memorial. Not an adult person can be found, who has not an opinion on the subject, and if the people were to understand distinctly, that they could be protected against the laws of the neighboring states, there is probably not an adult person in the nation, who would think it best to remove; though possibly a few might emigrate individually. * * *We are not willing to remove; and if we could be brought to this extremity, it would be not by argument, not because our judgment was satisfied, not because our condition will be improved; but only because we cannot endure to be deprived of our national and individual rights and subjected to a process of intolerable oppression. We wish to remain on the land of our fathers. We have a perfect and original right to remain without interruption or molestation. The treaties with us, and laws of the United States made in pursuance of treaties, guaranty our residence, and our privileges and secure us against intruders. Our only request is, that these treaties may be fulfilled, and these laws executed. But if we are compelled to leave our country, we see nothing but ruin before us. The country west of the Arkansas territory is unknown to us. From what we can learn of it, we have no prepossessions in its favor. All the inviting parts of it, as we believe, are preoccupied by various Indian nations, to which it has been assigned. They would regard us as intruders, and look upon us with an evil eye. The far greater part of that region is, beyond all controversy, badly supplied with wood and water; and no Indian tribe can live as agriculturists without these articles. All our neighbers, in case of our removal, though crowded into our near vicinity, would speak a language totally different from ours, and practice different customs. The original possessors of that region are now wandering savages lurking for prey in the neighborhood. They have always been at war, and would be easily tempted to turn their arms against peaceful emigrants. Were the country to which we are urged much better than it is represented to be and were it free from the objections which we have made to it, still it is not the land of our birth, nor of our affections. It contains neither the scenes of our childhood, nor the graves of our fathers. Cherokee Nation. "Cherokee Address," Niles' Weekly Register, 21 August, 1830 pp. 455-456. The following is a memorial from the Cherokee nation in sent to the U.S. Congress in December of 1829 and published in their newspaper, the Phoenix, on January 20, 1830. To the honorable the senate and house of representatives of the United States of America, in congress assembled: The undersigned memorialists, humbly make known to your honorable bodies, that they are free citizens of the Cherokee nation. Circumstances of late occurrence have troubled our hearts, and induced us at this time to appeal to you, knowing that you are generous and just. As weak and poor children are accustomed to look to their guardians and patrons for protection, so we would come and make our grievances known. Will you listen to us? Will you have pity on us? You are great and renowned?the nation, which you represent, is like a mighty man who stands in his strength. But we are small?our name is not renowned. You are wealthy, and have need of nothing; but we are poor in life, and have not the arm and power of the rich. By the will of our Father in heaven, the governor of the whole world, the red man of America has become small, and the white man great and renowned. When the ancestors of the people of these United States first came to the shores of America, they found the red man strong?though he was ignorant and savage, yet he received them kindly, and gave them dry land to rest their weary feet. They met in peace, and shook hands in token of friendship. Whatever the white man wanted and asked of the Indian, the latter willingly gave. At that time the Indian was the lord, and the white man the suppliant. But now the scene has changed. The strength of the red man has become weakness. As his neighbors increased in numbers, his power became less, and now, of the many and powerful tribes who once covered these United States, only a few are to be seen?a few whom a sweeping pestilence has left. The northern tribes, who were once so numerous and powerful, are now nearly extinct. Thus it has happened to the red man of America. Shall we, who are remnants, share the same fate? Brothers?we address you according to usage adopted by our forefathers, and the great and good men who have successfuIly directed the councils of the nation you represent?we now make known to you our grievances. We are troubled by some of your own people. Our neighbor, the state of Georgia, is pressing hard upon us, and urging us to relinquish our possessions for her benefit. We are told, if we do not leave the country, which we dearly love, and betake ourselves to the western wilds, the laws of the state will be extended over us, and the time, 1st of June, 1830, is appointed for the execution of the edict. When we first heard of this we were grieved and appealed to our father, the president, and begged that protection might be extended over us. But we were doubly grieved when we understood, from a letter of the secretary of war to our delegation, dated March of the present year, that our father the president had refused us protection, and that he had decided in favor of the extension of the laws of the state over us. ?This decision induces us to appeal to the immediate representatives of the American people. We love, we dearly love our country, and it is due to your honorable bodies, as well as to us, to make known why we think the country is ours, and why we wish to remain in peace where we are. The land on which we stand, we have received as an inheritance from our fathers, who possessed it from time immemorial, as a gift from our common father in heaven. We have already said, that when the white man came to the shores of America, our ancestors were found in peaceable possession of this very land. They bequeathed it to us as their children, and we have sacredly kept it as containing the remains of our beloved men. This right of inheritance we have never ceded, nor ever forfeited. Permit us to ask, what better right can a people have to a country, than the right of inheritance and immemorial peaceable possession? We know it is said of late by the state of Georgia, and by the executive of the United States, that we have forfeited this right?but we think this is said gratuitously. At what time have we made the forfeit? What crime have we committed, whereby we must forever be divested of our country and rights? Was it when we were hostile to the United States, and took part with the king of Great Britain, during the struggle for independence? If so, why was not this forfeiture declared in the first treaty of peace between the United States and our beloved men? Why was not such an article as the following inserted in the treaty: "The United States give peace to the Cherokees, but, for the part they took in the late war, declare them to be but tenants at will, to be removed when the convenience of the states within whose chartered limits they live shall require it." This was the proper lime to assume such a position. But it was not thought of, nor would our forefathers have agreed to any treaty, whose tendency was to deprive them of their rights and their country. All that they have conceded and relinquished are inserted in the treaties open to the investigation of all people. We would repeat, then, the right of inheritance and peaceable possession which we claim, we have never ceded nor forfeited. In addition to that first of all rights, the right of inheritance and peaceable possession, we have the faith and pledge of the U. States, repealed over and over again, in treaties made at various times. By these treaties our rights as a separate people are distinctly acknowledged, and guarantees given that they shall be secured and protected. So we have always understood the treaties The conduct of the government towards us, from its organization until very lately, the talks given to our beloved men by the presidents of the United States, and the speeches of the agents and commissioners, all concur to show that we are not mistaken in our interpretation. ? Some of our beloved men who signed the treaties are still leaving, and their testimony tends to the same conclusion. We have always supposed that this understanding of the treaties was in accordance with the views of the government; nor have we ever imagined that any body would interpret them otherwise. In what light shall we view the conduct of the United States and Georgia, in their intercourse with us, in urging us to enter into treaties, and cede lands? If we were but tenants at will, why was it necessary that our consent must be obtained before these governments could take lawful possession of our lands? The answer is obvious. These governments perfectly understood our rights our right to the country, and our right to self government. Our understanding of the treaties is further supported by the intercourse law of the United States, which prohibits all encroachments upon our territory. The undersigned memorialists humbly represent, that if their interpretation of the treaties has been different from that of the government, then they have ever been deceived as to how the government regarded them, and what she asked and promised. Moreover, they have uniformly misunderstood their own acts. In view of the strong ground upon which their rights are founded, your memorialists solemnly protest against being considered as tenants at will, or as mere occupants of the soil, without possessing the sovereignty. We have already stated to your honorable bodies, that our forefathers were found in posseision of this soil in full sovereignty, by the first European settlers; and as we have never ceded nor forfeited the occupancy of the soil and the sovereignly over it, we do solemnly protest against being forced to leave it, either direct or by indirect measures. To the land of which we are now in possession we are attached?it is our fathers' gift?it contains their ashes?it is the land of our nativity, and the land of our intellectual birth. We cannot consent to abandon it, for another far inferior, and which holds out to us no inducements. We do moreover protest against the arbitrary measures of our neighbor, the state of Georgia, in her attempt to extend her laws over us, in surveying our lands without our consent and in direct opposition to treaties and the intercourse law of the United States, and interfering with our municipal regulations in such a manner as to derange the regular operations of our own laws. To deliver and protect them from all these and every encroachment upon their rights, the undersigned memorialists do most earnestly pray your honorable bodies. Their existence and future happiness are at stake?divest them of their liberty and country, and you sink them in degradation, and put a check, if not a final stop, to their present progresss in the arts of civilized life, and in the knowledge of the Christian religion. Your memorialists humbly conceive, that such an act would be in the highest defree oppressive. From the people of these United States, who perhaps, of all men under heaven, are the most religious and free, it cannot be expected.? Your memorialists, therefore, cannot anticipate such a result. You represent a virtuous, intelligent and Christian nation. To you they willingly submit their cause for your righteous decision. Cherokee nation, Dec. 1829. Cherokee Nation. "Memorial of the Cherokee Indians," Niles' Weekly Register vol. 38 no. 3, pp 53-54.
* * *Before we close this address, permit us to state what we conceive to be our relations with the United States. After the peace of 1783, the Cherokees were an independent people; absolutely so, as much as any people on earth. They had been allies to Great Britain, and as a faithful ally took a part in the colonial war on her side. They had placed themselves under her protection, and had they, without cause, declared hostility against their protector, and had the colonies been subdued, what might not have been their fate? But her [Great Britain's] power on this continent was broken. She acknowledged the independence of the United States, and made peace. The Cherokees therefore stood alone; and, in these circumstances, continued the war. They were then under no obligations to the United States any more than to Great Britain, France or Spain. The United States never subjugated the Cherokees; on the contrary, our fathers remained in possesion of their country, and with arms in their hands. * * *We are aware, that some persons suppose it will be for our advantage to remove beyond the Mississippi. We think otherwise. Our people universally think otherwise. Thinking that it would be fatal to their interests, they have almost to a man sent their memorial to congress, deprecating the necessity of a removal. This question was distinctly before their minds when they signed their memorial. Not an adult person can be found, who has not an opinion on the subject, and if the people were to understand distinctly, that they could be protected against the laws of the neighboring states, there is probably not an adult person in the nation, who would think it best to remove; though possibly a few might emigrate individually. * * *We are not willing to remove; and if we could be brought to this extremity, it would be not by argument, not because our judgment was satisfied, not because our condition will be improved; but only because we cannot endure to be deprived of our national and individual rights and subjected to a process of intolerable oppression. We wish to remain on the land of our fathers. We have a perfect and original right to remain without interruption or molestation. The treaties with us, and laws of the United States made in pursuance of treaties, guaranty our residence, and our privileges and secure us against intruders. Our only request is, that these treaties may be fulfilled, and these laws executed. But if we are compelled to leave our country, we see nothing but ruin before us. The country west of the Arkansas territory is unknown to us. From what we can learn of it, we have no prepossessions in its favor. All the inviting parts of it, as we believe, are preoccupied by various Indian nations, to which it has been assigned. They would regard us as intruders, and look upon us with an evil eye. The far greater part of that region is, beyond all controversy, badly supplied with wood and water; and no Indian tribe can live as agriculturists without these articles. All our neighbers, in case of our removal, though crowded into our near vicinity, would speak a language totally different from ours, and practice different customs. The original possessors of that region are now wandering savages lurking for prey in the neighborhood. They have always been at war, and would be easily tempted to turn their arms against peaceful emigrants. Were the country to which we are urged much better than it is represented to be and were it free from the objections which we have made to it, still it is not the land of our birth, nor of our affections. It contains neither the scenes of our childhood, nor the graves of our fathers. Cherokee Nation. "Cherokee Address," Niles' Weekly Register, 21 August, 1830 pp. 455-456. The following is a memorial from the Cherokee nation in sent to the U.S. Congress in December of 1829 and published in their newspaper, the Phoenix, on January 20, 1830. To the honorable the senate and house of representatives of the United States of America, in congress assembled: The undersigned memorialists, humbly make known to your honorable bodies, that they are free citizens of the Cherokee nation. Circumstances of late occurrence have troubled our hearts, and induced us at this time to appeal to you, knowing that you are generous and just. As weak and poor children are accustomed to look to their guardians and patrons for protection, so we would come and make our grievances known. Will you listen to us? Will you have pity on us? You are great and renowned?the nation, which you represent, is like a mighty man who stands in his strength. But we are small?our name is not renowned. You are wealthy, and have need of nothing; but we are poor in life, and have not the arm and power of the rich. By the will of our Father in heaven, the governor of the whole world, the red man of America has become small, and the white man great and renowned. When the ancestors of the people of these United States first came to the shores of America, they found the red man strong?though he was ignorant and savage, yet he received them kindly, and gave them dry land to rest their weary feet. They met in peace, and shook hands in token of friendship. Whatever the white man wanted and asked of the Indian, the latter willingly gave. At that time the Indian was the lord, and the white man the suppliant. But now the scene has changed. The strength of the red man has become weakness. As his neighbors increased in numbers, his power became less, and now, of the many and powerful tribes who once covered these United States, only a few are to be seen?a few whom a sweeping pestilence has left. The northern tribes, who were once so numerous and powerful, are now nearly extinct. Thus it has happened to the red man of America. Shall we, who are remnants, share the same fate? Brothers?we address you according to usage adopted by our forefathers, and the great and good men who have successfuIly directed the councils of the nation you represent?we now make known to you our grievances. We are troubled by some of your own people. Our neighbor, the state of Georgia, is pressing hard upon us, and urging us to relinquish our possessions for her benefit. We are told, if we do not leave the country, which we dearly love, and betake ourselves to the western wilds, the laws of the state will be extended over us, and the time, 1st of June, 1830, is appointed for the execution of the edict. When we first heard of this we were grieved and appealed to our father, the president, and begged that protection might be extended over us. But we were doubly grieved when we understood, from a letter of the secretary of war to our delegation, dated March of the present year, that our father the president had refused us protection, and that he had decided in favor of the extension of the laws of the state over us. ?This decision induces us to appeal to the immediate representatives of the American people. We love, we dearly love our country, and it is due to your honorable bodies, as well as to us, to make known why we think the country is ours, and why we wish to remain in peace where we are. The land on which we stand, we have received as an inheritance from our fathers, who possessed it from time immemorial, as a gift from our common father in heaven. We have already said, that when the white man came to the shores of America, our ancestors were found in peaceable possession of this very land. They bequeathed it to us as their children, and we have sacredly kept it as containing the remains of our beloved men. This right of inheritance we have never ceded, nor ever forfeited. Permit us to ask, what better right can a people have to a country, than the right of inheritance and immemorial peaceable possession? We know it is said of late by the state of Georgia, and by the executive of the United States, that we have forfeited this right?but we think this is said gratuitously. At what time have we made the forfeit? What crime have we committed, whereby we must forever be divested of our country and rights? Was it when we were hostile to the United States, and took part with the king of Great Britain, during the struggle for independence? If so, why was not this forfeiture declared in the first treaty of peace between the United States and our beloved men? Why was not such an article as the following inserted in the treaty: "The United States give peace to the Cherokees, but, for the part they took in the late war, declare them to be but tenants at will, to be removed when the convenience of the states within whose chartered limits they live shall require it." This was the proper lime to assume such a position. But it was not thought of, nor would our forefathers have agreed to any treaty, whose tendency was to deprive them of their rights and their country. All that they have conceded and relinquished are inserted in the treaties open to the investigation of all people. We would repeat, then, the right of inheritance and peaceable possession which we claim, we have never ceded nor forfeited. In addition to that first of all rights, the right of inheritance and peaceable possession, we have the faith and pledge of the U. States, repealed over and over again, in treaties made at various times. By these treaties our rights as a separate people are distinctly acknowledged, and guarantees given that they shall be secured and protected. So we have always understood the treaties The conduct of the government towards us, from its organization until very lately, the talks given to our beloved men by the presidents of the United States, and the speeches of the agents and commissioners, all concur to show that we are not mistaken in our interpretation. ? Some of our beloved men who signed the treaties are still leaving, and their testimony tends to the same conclusion. We have always supposed that this understanding of the treaties was in accordance with the views of the government; nor have we ever imagined that any body would interpret them otherwise. In what light shall we view the conduct of the United States and Georgia, in their intercourse with us, in urging us to enter into treaties, and cede lands? If we were but tenants at will, why was it necessary that our consent must be obtained before these governments could take lawful possession of our lands? The answer is obvious. These governments perfectly understood our rights our right to the country, and our right to self government. Our understanding of the treaties is further supported by the intercourse law of the United States, which prohibits all encroachments upon our territory. The undersigned memorialists humbly represent, that if their interpretation of the treaties has been different from that of the government, then they have ever been deceived as to how the government regarded them, and what she asked and promised. Moreover, they have uniformly misunderstood their own acts. In view of the strong ground upon which their rights are founded, your memorialists solemnly protest against being considered as tenants at will, or as mere occupants of the soil, without possessing the sovereignty. We have already stated to your honorable bodies, that our forefathers were found in posseision of this soil in full sovereignty, by the first European settlers; and as we have never ceded nor forfeited the occupancy of the soil and the sovereignly over it, we do solemnly protest against being forced to leave it, either direct or by indirect measures. To the land of which we are now in possession we are attached?it is our fathers' gift?it contains their ashes?it is the land of our nativity, and the land of our intellectual birth. We cannot consent to abandon it, for another far inferior, and which holds out to us no inducements. We do moreover protest against the arbitrary measures of our neighbor, the state of Georgia, in her attempt to extend her laws over us, in surveying our lands without our consent and in direct opposition to treaties and the intercourse law of the United States, and interfering with our municipal regulations in such a manner as to derange the regular operations of our own laws. To deliver and protect them from all these and every encroachment upon their rights, the undersigned memorialists do most earnestly pray your honorable bodies. Their existence and future happiness are at stake?divest them of their liberty and country, and you sink them in degradation, and put a check, if not a final stop, to their present progresss in the arts of civilized life, and in the knowledge of the Christian religion. Your memorialists humbly conceive, that such an act would be in the highest defree oppressive. From the people of these United States, who perhaps, of all men under heaven, are the most religious and free, it cannot be expected.? Your memorialists, therefore, cannot anticipate such a result. You represent a virtuous, intelligent and Christian nation. To you they willingly submit their cause for your righteous decision. Cherokee nation, Dec. 1829. Cherokee Nation. "Memorial of the Cherokee Indians," Niles' Weekly Register vol. 38 no. 3, pp 53-54.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
JEFFERSON’S WORLD
I. Jeffersonian Republicans
acting like Federalists
A. Louisiana Purchase/
Lewis and Clark
B. National Bank
C. High Tariff
D. Strong Military
II. Foreign Entanglements:
War of 1812
III. The Transportation Revolution
1. Canals http://www.eriecanal.org/locks.html
2. Turnpikes
3. Steamboats
IV. The “Knell” of the Union
The Missouri Compromise: 1821
acting like Federalists
A. Louisiana Purchase/
Lewis and Clark
B. National Bank
C. High Tariff
D. Strong Military
II. Foreign Entanglements:
War of 1812
III. The Transportation Revolution
1. Canals http://www.eriecanal.org/locks.html
2. Turnpikes
3. Steamboats
IV. The “Knell” of the Union
The Missouri Compromise: 1821
Friday, May 6, 2011
SLAVE REBELLIONS:
Rebellion
In addition to the slave revolts listed below, remember that the slave insurrection in Haiti in 1801, led by Toussaint L'Ouverture, struck fear into the hearts of southern slaveholders.
* Gabriel Prosser's rebellion--Virginia, 1800
o Word of slave revolt in Haiti gradually spread to mainland
o Gabriel Prosser, a slave blacksmith who enjoyed a modest amount of freedom because of his position, plotted with his brother to lead an insurrection to free blacks in tidewater Virginia
o Prosser managed to gain support of about 50-60 slaves--perhaps as many as 1,000 other slaves knew about it
o Plans to burn Richmond failed because of wet weather
o Whites learned of the plan, and executed a number of the leaders, including both Prossers
o Not all blacks were executed -- many sold away to Deep South
o Failed revolt left many whites in the area very nervous for a long time
* Denmark Vesey
o free black -- won freedom in a lottery
o conspired to lead a rebellion in Charleston in 1822
o many slaves from leading families involved (maybe as many as 3,000)
o rebellion harshly put down
* Nat Turner's Rebellion
o Southampton County, Virginia--Aug. 1831
o Turner somewhat educated as a child, became a preacher
o Planned for a long time on how to revolt
o led group of about 100 slaves on rebellion--tried to get more to join, but they were scared
o killed sixty whites, men and women, young and old
o nearly 200 blacks executed, including many who knew of rebellion but did not join
SOURCE: Prof. David McGee, Central VA Community College...thanks, prof!
In addition to the slave revolts listed below, remember that the slave insurrection in Haiti in 1801, led by Toussaint L'Ouverture, struck fear into the hearts of southern slaveholders.
* Gabriel Prosser's rebellion--Virginia, 1800
o Word of slave revolt in Haiti gradually spread to mainland
o Gabriel Prosser, a slave blacksmith who enjoyed a modest amount of freedom because of his position, plotted with his brother to lead an insurrection to free blacks in tidewater Virginia
o Prosser managed to gain support of about 50-60 slaves--perhaps as many as 1,000 other slaves knew about it
o Plans to burn Richmond failed because of wet weather
o Whites learned of the plan, and executed a number of the leaders, including both Prossers
o Not all blacks were executed -- many sold away to Deep South
o Failed revolt left many whites in the area very nervous for a long time
* Denmark Vesey
o free black -- won freedom in a lottery
o conspired to lead a rebellion in Charleston in 1822
o many slaves from leading families involved (maybe as many as 3,000)
o rebellion harshly put down
* Nat Turner's Rebellion
o Southampton County, Virginia--Aug. 1831
o Turner somewhat educated as a child, became a preacher
o Planned for a long time on how to revolt
o led group of about 100 slaves on rebellion--tried to get more to join, but they were scared
o killed sixty whites, men and women, young and old
o nearly 200 blacks executed, including many who knew of rebellion but did not join
SOURCE: Prof. David McGee, Central VA Community College...thanks, prof!
The "Oligarchic" South?
--1860: 5.6 million whites
--1700 own around 100 slaves
--46,274 own around 20 slaves
--slave population was 3.84 million
--26,000 free blacks in the South
--36% of families in South own
slaves in 1830
--25% of families in South own
slaves in 1860
--"Cotton is King!"...75% of Britain's cotton came from the South.
--between 1820 and 1860, around 2 million African Americans were either forcibly moved by their owners or sold to others in the Gulf states region
--Traveling the 1,460 miles from Baltimore to New Orleans in 1850 meant riding five different railroads, two stage coaches, and two steamboats.
--In 1850, 20 percent of adult white southerners could not read or write, compared to a national figure of 8 percent.
--According to economic historians Jeremy Atack and Peter Passell, "After 1815 much of the nation's growth was generated by increased British demand for cotton and Midwestern settlement that created opportunities for regional specialization and trade."
A SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA CASE GIVES SLAVEOWNERS IMMUNITY FOR ATTACKING THEIR SLAVES...
State v. Mann: 1829
SIGNIFICANCE: A Southern judge with little sympathy for slavery rendered a powerful and logical pro-slavery opinion, further entrenching Southern slavery, while opening it to Northern attack.
North Carolina had fewer slaves than most other states in the future Confederacy. But in the two decades leading up to the Civil War, that state's Supreme Court produced one of the most notorious pro-slavery opinions in American history.
In 1829 Elizabeth Jones, who owned a slave named Lydia, hired her out for a year to John Mann of Chowan County. Lydia was unhappy with the arrangement, and at one point Mann decided to punish her, possibly by whipping her. But Lydia escaped during the punishment, and began to run away. Mann shouted to her, ordering her to stop, but Lydia continued to run. Mann then shot and wounded her. Such, at least, was Mann's story.
The rest of Ruffin's opinion, in fact, was one of the most readable, logical, and capable defenses of slavery that a Southerner ever wrote. Ruffin observed that although Mann did not own Lydia, and that Elizabeth Jones might well be able to sue him for damaging her property, Mann still had the right to use as much force to control Lydia as Jones herself would have had, since Lydia was legally under his control. The question, then, was how much force a master could use against his slave.
Ruffin's conclusion was blunt. Slavery was designed for the good of the master, and not for the good of the slave, he wrote. In order for the master to have the full benefit of the slave, he had to be able to break the slave's will, to make the slave obey him. "Such obedience," wrote Ruffin, "is the consequence only of uncontrolled authority over the body. There is nothing else which can operate to produce the effect." The court could not interfere with the master's power over his slave, continued Ruffin. "The slave, to remain a slave, must be made sensible, that there is no appeal from the master." In short, Ruffin held, the law gave the master absolute power over the slave. He recognized that this was unjust, but clearly it was the law.
The Mann opinion came down just as abolitionism was gaining ground in the North. It highlighted the tension between law and justice, and the fact that more and more people were coming to see that slavery was wrong, even though it was both legal and constitutional.
SOURCE: http://law.jrank.org/pages/2446/State-v-Mann-1829.html
WRITTEN BY AUTHOR Buckner F. Melton, Jr.
--1700 own around 100 slaves
--46,274 own around 20 slaves
--slave population was 3.84 million
--26,000 free blacks in the South
--36% of families in South own
slaves in 1830
--25% of families in South own
slaves in 1860
--"Cotton is King!"...75% of Britain's cotton came from the South.
--between 1820 and 1860, around 2 million African Americans were either forcibly moved by their owners or sold to others in the Gulf states region
--Traveling the 1,460 miles from Baltimore to New Orleans in 1850 meant riding five different railroads, two stage coaches, and two steamboats.
--In 1850, 20 percent of adult white southerners could not read or write, compared to a national figure of 8 percent.
--According to economic historians Jeremy Atack and Peter Passell, "After 1815 much of the nation's growth was generated by increased British demand for cotton and Midwestern settlement that created opportunities for regional specialization and trade."
A SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA CASE GIVES SLAVEOWNERS IMMUNITY FOR ATTACKING THEIR SLAVES...
State v. Mann: 1829
SIGNIFICANCE: A Southern judge with little sympathy for slavery rendered a powerful and logical pro-slavery opinion, further entrenching Southern slavery, while opening it to Northern attack.
North Carolina had fewer slaves than most other states in the future Confederacy. But in the two decades leading up to the Civil War, that state's Supreme Court produced one of the most notorious pro-slavery opinions in American history.
In 1829 Elizabeth Jones, who owned a slave named Lydia, hired her out for a year to John Mann of Chowan County. Lydia was unhappy with the arrangement, and at one point Mann decided to punish her, possibly by whipping her. But Lydia escaped during the punishment, and began to run away. Mann shouted to her, ordering her to stop, but Lydia continued to run. Mann then shot and wounded her. Such, at least, was Mann's story.
The rest of Ruffin's opinion, in fact, was one of the most readable, logical, and capable defenses of slavery that a Southerner ever wrote. Ruffin observed that although Mann did not own Lydia, and that Elizabeth Jones might well be able to sue him for damaging her property, Mann still had the right to use as much force to control Lydia as Jones herself would have had, since Lydia was legally under his control. The question, then, was how much force a master could use against his slave.
Ruffin's conclusion was blunt. Slavery was designed for the good of the master, and not for the good of the slave, he wrote. In order for the master to have the full benefit of the slave, he had to be able to break the slave's will, to make the slave obey him. "Such obedience," wrote Ruffin, "is the consequence only of uncontrolled authority over the body. There is nothing else which can operate to produce the effect." The court could not interfere with the master's power over his slave, continued Ruffin. "The slave, to remain a slave, must be made sensible, that there is no appeal from the master." In short, Ruffin held, the law gave the master absolute power over the slave. He recognized that this was unjust, but clearly it was the law.
The Mann opinion came down just as abolitionism was gaining ground in the North. It highlighted the tension between law and justice, and the fact that more and more people were coming to see that slavery was wrong, even though it was both legal and constitutional.
SOURCE: http://law.jrank.org/pages/2446/State-v-Mann-1829.html
WRITTEN BY AUTHOR Buckner F. Melton, Jr.
IN CLASS HISTORY ESSAY WRITING
...argue something. Even on an in-class essay, you should not be thinking about this essay in terms of only describing a bunch of historical data. You should find something compelling to argue. I hate to call it a thesis, but it is basically a thesis, the controlling idea of your essay.
...use direct examples from the sources you used. If you do, be sure to put any quotes in quotes. Identify the source in the text so that it is obvious from whence it comes. For example, say something like this: As former slave Charley Williams wrote, "you can smell de sow belly frying down at the cabins." You may also say something like the following: According to source #8 in our packet, the price of slaves was increasing in the last ten years of the 17th century.
...organize your thoughts. Have an introduction, body, and conclusion. This is first draft writing, so these will not be perfect, but in general it will help you organize your thinking, something that you have plenty of time to do before the essay.
...revise. Leave a few minutes at the end to re-read your essay and write in double-space so that you can easily make corrections. It is an in-class essay, so that standards for grammar, punctuation, and spelling are not as stringent. Nevertheless, as a university student, someone devoted to clarity of thought, you should be able to express your thoughts in standard English even on a first draft.
...ask questions. Come on up and ask.
...use direct examples from the sources you used. If you do, be sure to put any quotes in quotes. Identify the source in the text so that it is obvious from whence it comes. For example, say something like this: As former slave Charley Williams wrote, "you can smell de sow belly frying down at the cabins." You may also say something like the following: According to source #8 in our packet, the price of slaves was increasing in the last ten years of the 17th century.
...organize your thoughts. Have an introduction, body, and conclusion. This is first draft writing, so these will not be perfect, but in general it will help you organize your thinking, something that you have plenty of time to do before the essay.
...revise. Leave a few minutes at the end to re-read your essay and write in double-space so that you can easily make corrections. It is an in-class essay, so that standards for grammar, punctuation, and spelling are not as stringent. Nevertheless, as a university student, someone devoted to clarity of thought, you should be able to express your thoughts in standard English even on a first draft.
...ask questions. Come on up and ask.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
ESSAY QUESTIONS FOR SLAVERY ESSAY
ESSAY QUESTIONS:
1. What was more severe, the physical or psychological chains of slavery?
2. Explain gender in the slave system. For this question you may discuss what it was like to be a male slave, a female slave, a male owner, or a female owner?
3. Based on the numbers, was slavery as a system dying out? What was happening to the economic system of slavery?
4. Assess the arguments for and against slavery.
5. What are some of the distinctions within the slave system? Was a slave a slave, or could slavery be better in some circumstances and worse in others? Discuss.
OR, COME UP WITH YOUR OWN QUESTION TO EXPLORE THESE DOCUMENTS AND YOUR BOOK: CLEAR THIS QUESTION WITH ME…EMAIL OR IN PERSON, ANYTIME BEFORE CLASS ON MONDAY.
1. What was more severe, the physical or psychological chains of slavery?
2. Explain gender in the slave system. For this question you may discuss what it was like to be a male slave, a female slave, a male owner, or a female owner?
3. Based on the numbers, was slavery as a system dying out? What was happening to the economic system of slavery?
4. Assess the arguments for and against slavery.
5. What are some of the distinctions within the slave system? Was a slave a slave, or could slavery be better in some circumstances and worse in others? Discuss.
OR, COME UP WITH YOUR OWN QUESTION TO EXPLORE THESE DOCUMENTS AND YOUR BOOK: CLEAR THIS QUESTION WITH ME…EMAIL OR IN PERSON, ANYTIME BEFORE CLASS ON MONDAY.
DOCUMENT BASED WORK ON SLAVERY
SCHMOLL/HISTORY 231
The key to working with these documents is to get a sense first of all of what they say and only then of what they mean. Once you go through each of the sources, try to start grouping the documents by theme. Then you can start to make some assertions. Try to make historical claims that are backed up by the documents. You may use some of the following language if it helps you to make your historical arguments:
Based on documents __, __, and __, it seems clear that…
Document __ seems to stand on its own and does not fit into categories.
Documents __ and __ seem to suggest that slavery was
Documents __ and __ illustrate
What we learn about labor in Virginia from documents __ and __ is
The role of slaves in Virginia society is clear from documents __ and __ and __. Slaves functioned in the historical trajectory in the following ways:
NOW, LET’S SEE WHAT BRILLIANT ARGUMENT YOU COME UP WITH BELOW:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
SCHMOLL/HISTORY231/DOCUMENT BASED WORK ON SLAVERY
1. One Englishman, William Harrison, wrote, (wm harrison) "As for slaves and bondmen, we have none, naie such is the privilege of our countrie, by the especiall grace of God and bountie of our princes, that if anie come hither from other realms, so soone as they set foot on land they become so free of condition as their master , whereby all note of servile bondage is removed from them." (1577, written about England)
2. Sarah Frances Shaw Graves, Age 87 "I was born March 23, 1850 in Kentucky, somewhere near Louisville. I am goin' on 88 years right now. (1937). I was brought to Missouri when I was six months old, along with my mama, who was a slave owned by a man named Shaw, who had allotted her to a man named Jimmie Graves, who came to Missouri to live with his daughter Emily Graves Crowdes. I always lived with Emily Crowdes."
The matter of allotment was confusing to the interviewer and Aunt Sally endeavored to explain.
"Yes'm. Allotted? Yes'm. I'm goin' to explain that, " she replied. "You see there was slave traders in those days, jes' like you got horse and mule an' auto traders now. They bought and sold slaves and hired 'em out. Yes'm, rented 'em out. Allotted means somethin' like hired out. But the slave never got no wages. That all went to the master. The man they was allotted to paid the master."
"I was never sold. My mama was sold only once, but she was hired out many times. Yes'm when a slave was allotted, somebody made a down payment and gave a mortgage for the rest. A chattel mortgage. . . ."
"Allotments made a lot of grief for the slaves," Aunt Sally asserted. "We left my papa in Kentucky, 'cause he was allotted to another man. My papa never knew where my mama went, an' my mama never knew where papa went." Aunt Sally paused a moment, then went on bitterly. "They never wanted mama to know, 'cause they knowed she would never marry so long she knew where he was. Our master wanted her to marry again and raise more children to be slaves. They never wanted mama to know where papa was, an' she never did," sighed Aunt Sally.
3. Sarah Gudger, Age 121
I 'membahs de time when mah mammy wah alive, I wah a small chile, afoah dey tuck huh t' Rims Crick. All us chillens wah playin' in de ya'd one night. Jes' arunnin' an' aplayin' lak chillun will. All a sudden mammy cum to de do' all a'sited. "Cum in heah dis minnit," she say. "Jes look up at what is ahappenin'," and bless yo' life, honey, da sta's wah fallin' jes' lak rain.* Mammy wah tebble skeered, but we chillen wa'nt afeard, no, we wa'nt afeard. But mammy she say evah time a sta' fall, somebuddy gonna die. Look lak lotta folks gonna die f'om de looks ob dem sta's. Ebbathin' wah jes' as bright as day. Yo' cudda pick a pin up. Yo' know de sta's don' shine as bright as dey did back den. I wondah wy dey don'. Dey jes' don' shine as bright. Wa'nt long afoah dey took mah mammy away, and I wah lef' alone.
4. Charley Williams, Age 94
When de day begin to crack de whole plantation break out wid all kinds of noises, and you could tell what going on by de kind of noise you hear.
Come de daybreak you hear de guinea fowls start potracking down at the edge of de woods lot, and den de roosters all start up 'round de barn and de ducks finally wake up and jine in. You can smell de sow belly frying down at the cabins in de "row," to go wid de hoecake and de buttermilk.
Den purty soon de wind rise a little, and you can hear a old bell donging way on some plantation a mile or two off, and den more bells at other places and maybe a horn, and purty soon younder go old Master's old ram horn wid a long toot and den some short toots, and here come de overseer down de row of cabins, hollering right and left, and picking de ham out'n his teeth wid a long shiny goose quill pick.
Bells and horns! Bells for dis and horns for dat! All we knowed was go and come by de bells and horns!
5. SOME SLAVERY STATISTICS:
Slaves as a percentage of Virginia's total population in 1680: 7
Slaves as a percentage of Virginia's total population in 1720: 30
Slaves as a percentage of Virginia's total population in 1770: 42
Number of slaves in Virginia in 1750: 100,000
Number of slaves in Virginia in 1850: 200,000
6. no photo
7. no photo
8. no photo
9.
Charles City County, VA Slave Schedule - 1860 Census
(Number next to name is number of slaves owned - names are listed in order of appearance in census)
Valentine Walker, 7
William H. Hearwood, 7
John L. Parsons, 3
Anthony H. Lamb, 15
Junius Lamb, 3
Jacob Vaiden, 9
Ann E. Vaiden, 9
Thomas H. Wilcox, 1
Thomas J. Mocock, 2
William J. Billifont, 4
Adolphus Goddin, 4
Wyatt B. Walker, 8
Edward T. Haynes, 3
William H. A. Southall, 17
James E. Holdcraft, 3
William F. Walker, 17
Beverly F. Harwood, 3
John M. Harwood, 3
George W. Vaiden, 7
Susan A. Martin, 1
Pleasant D. Ellett, 3
Edward H. Marable, 7
Ann E. Lamb, 14
William S. Graves, 12
Joseph T. Brown, 4
Albert G. Brown, 9
Letitia A. Brown, 4
Robert J. Vaiden, 25
Susan Gregory, 8
Sarah E. Townley, 4
James H. Lipscomb, 3
B. E. Graves, 5
Morris F. Vaiden, 7
James H. Christian, 29
James H. Pierce (in trust), 13
Jerome M. Vaiden, 2
Elizabeth T. Vaiden, 11
Edmund A Sanders, 1
Marieva Sanders, 1
Marietta Sanders, 1
Essy Walker, 4
Robert W. Graves, 4
William F. Graves, 3
Thomas S. Christian, 2
Thomas Bowry, 14
Richard M. Graves, 16
John S. Vaiden, 7
Susan Barrow, 2
Henry B. Hopkins, 22
Henry P. Barrow, 12
Mildred Lacy, 2
Alfred Finch, 5
John Smith, 22
Sarah E. Coleman, 18
Thomas P. Harrison, 10
C. A. M. Harrison, 13
Nanny B. Harrison, 12
Josiah C. Wilson, 60
Charles J. Major, 2
Mary M. Major, 1
Joseph L. New, 6
B. P. Binns, 15
Ann K. C. Otey, 15
Bettie J. Lipscomb, 1
John M. Lamb, 18
Henry M. Clay, 2
James Hubbard, 4
Frances A. Ware, 3
Samuel Waddell, 17
Joyce Binns, 1
William Jordon, 89
Mary A. C. Walker, 23
Sam Brown, 1
L. W. Vaiden, 11
A. M. Ferguson, 28
E. A. Adams, 2
John M. Ferguson, 1
William H. Clopaton (?), 25
John Tyler, 44
George Major, 27
Elizabeth Marable, 1
Anderson Wade, 10
Thomas H. Wilcox, 31
Thomas W. Wilcox, 15
F. L. Douthat, 29
Robert Douthat, 47
Eleanor Douthat, 11
P. F. Gary, 15
William H. Seldon, 44
E. M. Gordon, 5
Tabitha Christian, 14
Edmund Waddell, 3
Richard Christian, 9
George Walker, 10
William H. Taylor, 15
Wm. H. Taylor, 2
Isaac H. Christian, 3
Selden C. Slater, 1
Franklin Gary, 6 Vernon J. M. Castle, 1
Thomas Christian, 39
Philip Haxall, 7
Goerge G. Bowry, 2
Lucy Kezee, 6
Thomas Stagg, 6
Mary A. Mumford, 3
Thomas W. Bradley, 41
Robert T. Epps, 10
B. A. Nance, 16
L. A. Marston, 7
Martha Butler, 13
William A. Marston, 9
Thomas H. Marston, 14
Susan A. Epps, 6
Robert Maddox, 2
Edwin L. Ware, 9
Christopher Maddox, 10
John H. Bowry, 11
Marion Gary, 1
Mary A. Gary, 7
William Otey, 5
R S. C. Robbins, 2
James Lawrence, 8
Nat Lawrence, 8
William A. Pearman, 6
Mary A. Bradly, 1
William Pemberton, 11
Rubin Moss, 3
William M. Warinner, 6
William Warinner, 3
Philip C. Buffet, 2
John M. Barlow, 1
John Rock 3
Priscilla Fauqua, 2
James B. Wayanack, 5
William Waddell, 1
John L. Walker, 10
Lucy Barnes, 7
A. Barnes, 1
James Nance, 2
Patric Pearman, 10
James A. Ladd, 8
Sam Hampton, 1
Isiah Bradly, 1
Allen Bradly, 23
Robert Bradly, 2
Patsy & Rebecca Pierce, 1
Ed James ward R. Phillips, 17
Joseph Gentry, 5
Daniel J. Adams, 7
Alexander A. Bugleston, 43
(agent for Edmund Ruffin)
William E. Christian, 17
Conellum C.Folkes, 8
R. W. Christian, 7
Phillip Christian, 4
Mary Christian, 1
Elizabeth Christian, 5
William H. Hayes, 5
Richard Hayes, 5
Rebecca Hayes, 2
John A. Clark, 2
Archer Taylor, 20
Augustus T. Crenshaw, 22
Gideon Christian, 1
Martha A. Taylor, 9
William E. Gill, 14
Matthew Gentry, 5
Benn Ladd, 1
William H. Pearman, 1
Feeling W. Binnsaft, 1
G. A. Crenshaw, 11
John D. Clark, 10
William H. T. clark, 1
David Haxall, 36
William H. Alexander, 2
John P. Royal, 36
Hill Carter, 142
W. L. Crawford, 42
(agent for Rich Epps)
William L, Shaw, 29
(agent for William M.Harrison)
William Taylor, 2
Del Clark, 1
Miles K. Crenshaw, 13
H. P. Barrow, 1
Richard Folkes, 1
James E. Roane, 31
Powhatan B. Stark, 10
P.B. Stark, 19
Mary M. Orgain, 9
Mary Minge, 6
William A. Harrison, 45
William White, 3
(agent for William Bishop)
Edward Major, 2
George E. Waddell, 16
John A. Selden, 25
Edward Wilcox, 75
William J. Upshaw, 29
Martha A. Taylor, 9
William E. Gill, 14
Matthew Gentry, 5
Benn Ladd, 1
William H. Pearman, 1
Feeling W. Binnsaft, 1
G. A. Crenshaw, 11
John D. Clark, 10
William H. T. clark, 1
John J. Clark, 16
John R. Armistead, 45
John Selden, 53
James M. Wilcox, 82
Edward L. Young, 24
M. P. Barker, 9
employeed. by J. Parker, 6
(owners, William Marable, C. Harrison, E. B.
Anderson, Mary Mumford, Elizabeth Warren)
Theodrick Lipscomb, 182
(agent for Richard Baylor)
Ben Harrison, 32
employeed. by Ben Harrison, 3
(H. D. Gordon, owner)
Archer Harrison, 6
John T. Holt, 9
William R. Stagg, 14
Gideon Christian, 13 (Mary Christian,
owned 4, B. L. Christian owned 7)
Thomas F. Pollard, 9
employeed. by Thomas F. Pollard, 4
(Alfred Finch, owned 2, B. L. Christian
owned 1, L. Royston owned 1)
William A. Winston, 3
James H. Crump, 3
Sam Hampton, 1
Isiah Bradly, 1
Allen Bradly, 23
Robert Bradly, 2
Patsy & Rebecca Pierce, 1
Ed James ward R. Phillips, 17
Joseph Gentry, 5
Daniel J. Adams, 7
Alexander A. Bugleston, 43
(agent for Edmund Ruffin)
William E. Christian, 17
Conellum C.Folkes, 8
R. W. Christian, 7
Phillip Christian, 4
Mary Christian, 1
Elizabeth Christian, 5
William H. Hayes, 5
Richard Hayes, 5
Rebecca Hayes, 2
John A. Clark, 2
Archer Taylor, 20
Augustus T. Crenshaw, 22
Gideon Christian, 1
David Haxall, 36
William H. Alexander, 2
John P. Royal, 36
Hill Carter, 142
W. L. Crawford, 42
(agent for Rich Epps)
William L, Shaw, 29
(agent for William M.Harrison)
William Taylor, 2
Del Clark, 1
Miles K. Crenshaw, 13
H. P. Barrow, 1
Richard Folkes, 1
James E. Roane, 31
Powhatan B. Stark, 10
P.B. Stark, 19
Mary M. Orgain, 9
Mary Minge, 6
William A. Harrison, 45
William White, 3 (agent for William Bishop)
Edward Major, 2
George E. Waddell, 16
John A. Selden, 25
Edward Wilcox, 75
William J. Upshaw, 29
John J. Clark, 16
John R. Armistead, 45
John Selden, 53
James M. Wilcox, 82
Edward L. Young, 24
M. P. Barker, 9
employeed. by J. Parker, 6
(owners, William Marable, C.Harrison, E. B.
Anderson, Mary Mumford, Elizabeth Warren)
Theodrick Lipscomb, 182
(agent for Richard Baylor)
Ben Harrison, 32
employeed. by Ben Harrison, 3
(H. D. Gordon, owner)
Archer Harrison, 6
John T. Holt, 9
William R. Stagg, 14
Gideon Christian, 13 (Mary Christian,
owned 4, B. L. Christian owned 7)
Thomas F. Pollard, 9
employeed. by Thomas F. Pollard, 4
(Alfred Finch, owned 2, B. L. Christian
owned 1, L. Royston owned 1)
William A. Winston, 3
James H. Crump, 3
10.
Slavery In Early America's Colonies: Seeds of Servitude Rooted in The Civil Law of Rome
by Charles P.M. Outwin (1996)
The question of definable humanity in the slave continued to plagued the courts. Though his Negroes were impersonally "salable," an owner was not allowed arbitrarily to kill one "as he could an ox." Indeed, in 1706 it was determined that "the common law takes no notice of negroes (sic) for being different from other men. By common law no man can have property in another, except in special instances ....” The opinion handed down by Sir Philip Yorke, Attorney-General of the realm at the end of 1729, stated that
a slave, by coming from the West Indies, either with or without his master, to Great Britain or Ireland, doth not become free; and that his master's property or right in him is not thereby determined or varied; and baptism doth not bestow freedom on him, nor make any alteration in his temporal condition in these kingdoms.This was an unfortunate decision, because by then American and British legal practice had already begun to diverge along the lines of economic expediency, supported by resort to Roman civil code. American courts in the South were to look more and more to Roman law concerning propertied interest for antecedents. The common law, then, had become victim of its own flexibility.
11. no photo
12. no photo
13. “The Universal Law of Slavery," by George Fitzhugh (most important advocate of slavery) 1857
He the Negro is but a grown up child, and must be governed as a child, not as a lunatic or criminal. The master occupies toward him the place of parent or guardian. We shall not dwell on this view, for no one will differ with us who thinks as we do of the negro's capacity, and we might argue till dooms-day in vain, with those who have a high opinion of the negro's moral and intellectual capacity.
Secondly. The negro is improvident; will not lay up in summer for the wants of winter; will not accumulate in youth for the exigencies of age. He would become an insufferable burden to society. Society has the right to prevent this, and can only do so by subjecting him to domestic slavery. In the last place, the negro race is inferior to the white race, and living in their midst, they would be far outstripped or outwitted in the chaos of free competition. Gradual but certain extermination would be their fate. We presume the maddest abolitionist does not think the negro's providence of habits and money-making capacity at all to compare to those of the whites. This defect of character would alone justify enslaving him, if he is to remain here. In Africa or the West Indies, he would become idolatrous, savage and cannibal, or be devoured by savages and cannibals. At the North he would freeze or starve.
We would remind those who deprecate and sympathize with negro slavery, that his slavery here relieves him from a far more cruel slavery in Africa, or from idolatry and cannibalism, and every brutal vice and crime that can disgrace humanity; and that it christianizes, protects, supports and civilizes him; that it governs him far better than free laborers at the North are governed. There, wife-murder has become a mere holiday pastime; and where so many wives are murdered, almost all must be brutally treated. Nay, more; men who kill their wives or treat them brutally, must be ready for all kinds of crime, and the calendar of crime at the North proves the inference to be correct. Negroes never kill their wives. If it be objected that legally they have no wives, then we reply, that in an experience of more than forty years, we never yet heard of a negro man killing a negro woman. Our negroes are not only better off as to physical comfort than free laborers, but their moral condition is better.
The negro slaves of the South are the happiest, and, in some sense, the freest people in the world. The children and the aged and infirm work not at all, and yet have all the comforts and necessaries of life provided for them. They enjoy liberty, because they are oppressed neither by care nor labor. The women do little hard work, and are protected from the despotism of their husbands by their masters. The negro men and stout boys work, on the average, in good weather, not more than nine hours a day. The balance of their time is spent in perfect abandon. Besides' they have their Sabbaths and holidays. White men, with so much of license and liberty, would die of ennui; but negroes luxuriate in corporeal and mental repose. With their faces upturned to the sun, they can sleep at any hour; and quiet sleep is the greatest of human enjoyments. "Blessed be the man who invented sleep." 'Tis happiness in itself--and results from contentment with the present, and confident assurance of the future.
A common charge preferred against slavery is, that it induces idleness with the masters. The trouble, care and labor, of providing for wife, children and slaves, and of properly governing and administering the whole affairs of the farm, is usually borne on small estates by the master. On larger ones, he is aided by an overseer or manager. If they do their duty, their time is fully occupied. If they do not, the estate goes to ruin. The mistress, on Southern farms, is usually more busily, usefully and benevolently occupied than any one on the farm. She unites in her person, the offices of wife, mother, mistress, housekeeper, and sister of charity. And she fulfills all these offices admirably well. The rich men, in free society, may, if they please, lounge about town, visit clubs, attend the theatre, and have no other trouble than that of collecting rents, interest and dividends of stock. In a well constituted slave society, there should be no idlers. But we cannot divine how the capitalists in free society are to put to work. The master labors for the slave, they exchange industrial value. But the capitalist, living on his income, gives nothing to his subjects. He lives by mere exploitations.
The Black American A Documentary History, Third Edition, by Leslie H. Fishel, Jr. and Benjamin Quarles, Scott, Foresman and Company, Illinois, 1976,1970
14. Theodore Dwight Weld, 1839, Slavery as it Really Is
Reader, you are empaneled as a juror to try a plain case and bring in an honest verdict. The question at issue is not one of law, but of fact--"What is the actual condition of the slaves in the United States?" A plainer case never went to a jury. Look at it. Twenty seven hundred thousand persons in this country, men, women, and children, are in slavery. Is slavery, as a condition for human beings, good, bad, or indifferent?...
Two millions seven hundred thousand persons in these States are in this condition. They are made slaves and are held such by force, and by being put in fear, and this for no crime!...
As slaveholders and their apologists are...flooding the world with testimony that their slaves are kindly treated; that they are well fed, well clothed, well housed, well lodged, moderately worked, and bountifully provided with all things needful for their comfort, we propose--first, to disprove their assertions by the testimony of a multitude of impartial witnesses, and then to put slaveholders themselves through a course of cross-questioning which shall draw their condemnation out of their own mouths. We will prove that the slaves in the United States are treated with barbarous inhumanity; that they are overworked, underfed, wretchedly clad and lodged, and have insufficient sleep; that they are often made to wear round their necks iron collars armed with prongs, to drag heavy chains and weights at their feet while working in the field, and to wear yokes, and bells, and iron horns; that they are often kept confined in the stocks day and night for weeks together, made to wear gags in their mouths for hours or days, have some of their front teeth torn out or broken off, that they may be easily detected when they run away; that they are frequently flogged with terrible severity, have red pepper rubbed into their lacerated flesh, and hot brine, spirits of turpentine, &c., poured over the gashes to increase the torture; that they are often stripped naked, their backs and limbs cut with knives, bruised and mangled by scores and hundreds of blows with the paddle, and terribly torn by the claws of cats, drawn over them by their tormenters; that they are often hunted with blood hounds and shot down like beasts, or torn in pieces by dogs; that they are often suspended by the arms and whipped and beaten till they faint, and when revived by restoratives, beaten again till they faint, and sometimes till they die; that their ears are often cut off, their eyes knocked out, their bones broken, their flesh branded with red hot irons; that they are maimed, mutilated, and burned to death over slow fires.... We will establish all these facts by the testimony of scores and hundreds of eye witnesses, by the testimony of slaveholders in all parts of the slave states, by slaveholding members of Congress and of state legislatures, by ambassadors to foreign courts, by judges, by doctors of divinity, and clergy men of all denominations, by merchants, mechanics, lawyers and physicians, by presidents and professors in colleges and professional seminaries, by planters, overseers and drivers.
The key to working with these documents is to get a sense first of all of what they say and only then of what they mean. Once you go through each of the sources, try to start grouping the documents by theme. Then you can start to make some assertions. Try to make historical claims that are backed up by the documents. You may use some of the following language if it helps you to make your historical arguments:
Based on documents __, __, and __, it seems clear that…
Document __ seems to stand on its own and does not fit into categories.
Documents __ and __ seem to suggest that slavery was
Documents __ and __ illustrate
What we learn about labor in Virginia from documents __ and __ is
The role of slaves in Virginia society is clear from documents __ and __ and __. Slaves functioned in the historical trajectory in the following ways:
NOW, LET’S SEE WHAT BRILLIANT ARGUMENT YOU COME UP WITH BELOW:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
SCHMOLL/HISTORY231/DOCUMENT BASED WORK ON SLAVERY
1. One Englishman, William Harrison, wrote, (wm harrison) "As for slaves and bondmen, we have none, naie such is the privilege of our countrie, by the especiall grace of God and bountie of our princes, that if anie come hither from other realms, so soone as they set foot on land they become so free of condition as their master , whereby all note of servile bondage is removed from them." (1577, written about England)
2. Sarah Frances Shaw Graves, Age 87 "I was born March 23, 1850 in Kentucky, somewhere near Louisville. I am goin' on 88 years right now. (1937). I was brought to Missouri when I was six months old, along with my mama, who was a slave owned by a man named Shaw, who had allotted her to a man named Jimmie Graves, who came to Missouri to live with his daughter Emily Graves Crowdes. I always lived with Emily Crowdes."
The matter of allotment was confusing to the interviewer and Aunt Sally endeavored to explain.
"Yes'm. Allotted? Yes'm. I'm goin' to explain that, " she replied. "You see there was slave traders in those days, jes' like you got horse and mule an' auto traders now. They bought and sold slaves and hired 'em out. Yes'm, rented 'em out. Allotted means somethin' like hired out. But the slave never got no wages. That all went to the master. The man they was allotted to paid the master."
"I was never sold. My mama was sold only once, but she was hired out many times. Yes'm when a slave was allotted, somebody made a down payment and gave a mortgage for the rest. A chattel mortgage. . . ."
"Allotments made a lot of grief for the slaves," Aunt Sally asserted. "We left my papa in Kentucky, 'cause he was allotted to another man. My papa never knew where my mama went, an' my mama never knew where papa went." Aunt Sally paused a moment, then went on bitterly. "They never wanted mama to know, 'cause they knowed she would never marry so long she knew where he was. Our master wanted her to marry again and raise more children to be slaves. They never wanted mama to know where papa was, an' she never did," sighed Aunt Sally.
3. Sarah Gudger, Age 121
I 'membahs de time when mah mammy wah alive, I wah a small chile, afoah dey tuck huh t' Rims Crick. All us chillens wah playin' in de ya'd one night. Jes' arunnin' an' aplayin' lak chillun will. All a sudden mammy cum to de do' all a'sited. "Cum in heah dis minnit," she say. "Jes look up at what is ahappenin'," and bless yo' life, honey, da sta's wah fallin' jes' lak rain.* Mammy wah tebble skeered, but we chillen wa'nt afeard, no, we wa'nt afeard. But mammy she say evah time a sta' fall, somebuddy gonna die. Look lak lotta folks gonna die f'om de looks ob dem sta's. Ebbathin' wah jes' as bright as day. Yo' cudda pick a pin up. Yo' know de sta's don' shine as bright as dey did back den. I wondah wy dey don'. Dey jes' don' shine as bright. Wa'nt long afoah dey took mah mammy away, and I wah lef' alone.
4. Charley Williams, Age 94
When de day begin to crack de whole plantation break out wid all kinds of noises, and you could tell what going on by de kind of noise you hear.
Come de daybreak you hear de guinea fowls start potracking down at the edge of de woods lot, and den de roosters all start up 'round de barn and de ducks finally wake up and jine in. You can smell de sow belly frying down at the cabins in de "row," to go wid de hoecake and de buttermilk.
Den purty soon de wind rise a little, and you can hear a old bell donging way on some plantation a mile or two off, and den more bells at other places and maybe a horn, and purty soon younder go old Master's old ram horn wid a long toot and den some short toots, and here come de overseer down de row of cabins, hollering right and left, and picking de ham out'n his teeth wid a long shiny goose quill pick.
Bells and horns! Bells for dis and horns for dat! All we knowed was go and come by de bells and horns!
5. SOME SLAVERY STATISTICS:
Slaves as a percentage of Virginia's total population in 1680: 7
Slaves as a percentage of Virginia's total population in 1720: 30
Slaves as a percentage of Virginia's total population in 1770: 42
Number of slaves in Virginia in 1750: 100,000
Number of slaves in Virginia in 1850: 200,000
6. no photo
7. no photo
8. no photo
9.
Charles City County, VA Slave Schedule - 1860 Census
(Number next to name is number of slaves owned - names are listed in order of appearance in census)
Valentine Walker, 7
William H. Hearwood, 7
John L. Parsons, 3
Anthony H. Lamb, 15
Junius Lamb, 3
Jacob Vaiden, 9
Ann E. Vaiden, 9
Thomas H. Wilcox, 1
Thomas J. Mocock, 2
William J. Billifont, 4
Adolphus Goddin, 4
Wyatt B. Walker, 8
Edward T. Haynes, 3
William H. A. Southall, 17
James E. Holdcraft, 3
William F. Walker, 17
Beverly F. Harwood, 3
John M. Harwood, 3
George W. Vaiden, 7
Susan A. Martin, 1
Pleasant D. Ellett, 3
Edward H. Marable, 7
Ann E. Lamb, 14
William S. Graves, 12
Joseph T. Brown, 4
Albert G. Brown, 9
Letitia A. Brown, 4
Robert J. Vaiden, 25
Susan Gregory, 8
Sarah E. Townley, 4
James H. Lipscomb, 3
B. E. Graves, 5
Morris F. Vaiden, 7
James H. Christian, 29
James H. Pierce (in trust), 13
Jerome M. Vaiden, 2
Elizabeth T. Vaiden, 11
Edmund A Sanders, 1
Marieva Sanders, 1
Marietta Sanders, 1
Essy Walker, 4
Robert W. Graves, 4
William F. Graves, 3
Thomas S. Christian, 2
Thomas Bowry, 14
Richard M. Graves, 16
John S. Vaiden, 7
Susan Barrow, 2
Henry B. Hopkins, 22
Henry P. Barrow, 12
Mildred Lacy, 2
Alfred Finch, 5
John Smith, 22
Sarah E. Coleman, 18
Thomas P. Harrison, 10
C. A. M. Harrison, 13
Nanny B. Harrison, 12
Josiah C. Wilson, 60
Charles J. Major, 2
Mary M. Major, 1
Joseph L. New, 6
B. P. Binns, 15
Ann K. C. Otey, 15
Bettie J. Lipscomb, 1
John M. Lamb, 18
Henry M. Clay, 2
James Hubbard, 4
Frances A. Ware, 3
Samuel Waddell, 17
Joyce Binns, 1
William Jordon, 89
Mary A. C. Walker, 23
Sam Brown, 1
L. W. Vaiden, 11
A. M. Ferguson, 28
E. A. Adams, 2
John M. Ferguson, 1
William H. Clopaton (?), 25
John Tyler, 44
George Major, 27
Elizabeth Marable, 1
Anderson Wade, 10
Thomas H. Wilcox, 31
Thomas W. Wilcox, 15
F. L. Douthat, 29
Robert Douthat, 47
Eleanor Douthat, 11
P. F. Gary, 15
William H. Seldon, 44
E. M. Gordon, 5
Tabitha Christian, 14
Edmund Waddell, 3
Richard Christian, 9
George Walker, 10
William H. Taylor, 15
Wm. H. Taylor, 2
Isaac H. Christian, 3
Selden C. Slater, 1
Franklin Gary, 6 Vernon J. M. Castle, 1
Thomas Christian, 39
Philip Haxall, 7
Goerge G. Bowry, 2
Lucy Kezee, 6
Thomas Stagg, 6
Mary A. Mumford, 3
Thomas W. Bradley, 41
Robert T. Epps, 10
B. A. Nance, 16
L. A. Marston, 7
Martha Butler, 13
William A. Marston, 9
Thomas H. Marston, 14
Susan A. Epps, 6
Robert Maddox, 2
Edwin L. Ware, 9
Christopher Maddox, 10
John H. Bowry, 11
Marion Gary, 1
Mary A. Gary, 7
William Otey, 5
R S. C. Robbins, 2
James Lawrence, 8
Nat Lawrence, 8
William A. Pearman, 6
Mary A. Bradly, 1
William Pemberton, 11
Rubin Moss, 3
William M. Warinner, 6
William Warinner, 3
Philip C. Buffet, 2
John M. Barlow, 1
John Rock 3
Priscilla Fauqua, 2
James B. Wayanack, 5
William Waddell, 1
John L. Walker, 10
Lucy Barnes, 7
A. Barnes, 1
James Nance, 2
Patric Pearman, 10
James A. Ladd, 8
Sam Hampton, 1
Isiah Bradly, 1
Allen Bradly, 23
Robert Bradly, 2
Patsy & Rebecca Pierce, 1
Ed James ward R. Phillips, 17
Joseph Gentry, 5
Daniel J. Adams, 7
Alexander A. Bugleston, 43
(agent for Edmund Ruffin)
William E. Christian, 17
Conellum C.Folkes, 8
R. W. Christian, 7
Phillip Christian, 4
Mary Christian, 1
Elizabeth Christian, 5
William H. Hayes, 5
Richard Hayes, 5
Rebecca Hayes, 2
John A. Clark, 2
Archer Taylor, 20
Augustus T. Crenshaw, 22
Gideon Christian, 1
Martha A. Taylor, 9
William E. Gill, 14
Matthew Gentry, 5
Benn Ladd, 1
William H. Pearman, 1
Feeling W. Binnsaft, 1
G. A. Crenshaw, 11
John D. Clark, 10
William H. T. clark, 1
David Haxall, 36
William H. Alexander, 2
John P. Royal, 36
Hill Carter, 142
W. L. Crawford, 42
(agent for Rich Epps)
William L, Shaw, 29
(agent for William M.Harrison)
William Taylor, 2
Del Clark, 1
Miles K. Crenshaw, 13
H. P. Barrow, 1
Richard Folkes, 1
James E. Roane, 31
Powhatan B. Stark, 10
P.B. Stark, 19
Mary M. Orgain, 9
Mary Minge, 6
William A. Harrison, 45
William White, 3
(agent for William Bishop)
Edward Major, 2
George E. Waddell, 16
John A. Selden, 25
Edward Wilcox, 75
William J. Upshaw, 29
Martha A. Taylor, 9
William E. Gill, 14
Matthew Gentry, 5
Benn Ladd, 1
William H. Pearman, 1
Feeling W. Binnsaft, 1
G. A. Crenshaw, 11
John D. Clark, 10
William H. T. clark, 1
John J. Clark, 16
John R. Armistead, 45
John Selden, 53
James M. Wilcox, 82
Edward L. Young, 24
M. P. Barker, 9
employeed. by J. Parker, 6
(owners, William Marable, C. Harrison, E. B.
Anderson, Mary Mumford, Elizabeth Warren)
Theodrick Lipscomb, 182
(agent for Richard Baylor)
Ben Harrison, 32
employeed. by Ben Harrison, 3
(H. D. Gordon, owner)
Archer Harrison, 6
John T. Holt, 9
William R. Stagg, 14
Gideon Christian, 13 (Mary Christian,
owned 4, B. L. Christian owned 7)
Thomas F. Pollard, 9
employeed. by Thomas F. Pollard, 4
(Alfred Finch, owned 2, B. L. Christian
owned 1, L. Royston owned 1)
William A. Winston, 3
James H. Crump, 3
Sam Hampton, 1
Isiah Bradly, 1
Allen Bradly, 23
Robert Bradly, 2
Patsy & Rebecca Pierce, 1
Ed James ward R. Phillips, 17
Joseph Gentry, 5
Daniel J. Adams, 7
Alexander A. Bugleston, 43
(agent for Edmund Ruffin)
William E. Christian, 17
Conellum C.Folkes, 8
R. W. Christian, 7
Phillip Christian, 4
Mary Christian, 1
Elizabeth Christian, 5
William H. Hayes, 5
Richard Hayes, 5
Rebecca Hayes, 2
John A. Clark, 2
Archer Taylor, 20
Augustus T. Crenshaw, 22
Gideon Christian, 1
David Haxall, 36
William H. Alexander, 2
John P. Royal, 36
Hill Carter, 142
W. L. Crawford, 42
(agent for Rich Epps)
William L, Shaw, 29
(agent for William M.Harrison)
William Taylor, 2
Del Clark, 1
Miles K. Crenshaw, 13
H. P. Barrow, 1
Richard Folkes, 1
James E. Roane, 31
Powhatan B. Stark, 10
P.B. Stark, 19
Mary M. Orgain, 9
Mary Minge, 6
William A. Harrison, 45
William White, 3 (agent for William Bishop)
Edward Major, 2
George E. Waddell, 16
John A. Selden, 25
Edward Wilcox, 75
William J. Upshaw, 29
John J. Clark, 16
John R. Armistead, 45
John Selden, 53
James M. Wilcox, 82
Edward L. Young, 24
M. P. Barker, 9
employeed. by J. Parker, 6
(owners, William Marable, C.Harrison, E. B.
Anderson, Mary Mumford, Elizabeth Warren)
Theodrick Lipscomb, 182
(agent for Richard Baylor)
Ben Harrison, 32
employeed. by Ben Harrison, 3
(H. D. Gordon, owner)
Archer Harrison, 6
John T. Holt, 9
William R. Stagg, 14
Gideon Christian, 13 (Mary Christian,
owned 4, B. L. Christian owned 7)
Thomas F. Pollard, 9
employeed. by Thomas F. Pollard, 4
(Alfred Finch, owned 2, B. L. Christian
owned 1, L. Royston owned 1)
William A. Winston, 3
James H. Crump, 3
10.
Slavery In Early America's Colonies: Seeds of Servitude Rooted in The Civil Law of Rome
by Charles P.M. Outwin (1996)
The question of definable humanity in the slave continued to plagued the courts. Though his Negroes were impersonally "salable," an owner was not allowed arbitrarily to kill one "as he could an ox." Indeed, in 1706 it was determined that "the common law takes no notice of negroes (sic) for being different from other men. By common law no man can have property in another, except in special instances ....” The opinion handed down by Sir Philip Yorke, Attorney-General of the realm at the end of 1729, stated that
a slave, by coming from the West Indies, either with or without his master, to Great Britain or Ireland, doth not become free; and that his master's property or right in him is not thereby determined or varied; and baptism doth not bestow freedom on him, nor make any alteration in his temporal condition in these kingdoms.This was an unfortunate decision, because by then American and British legal practice had already begun to diverge along the lines of economic expediency, supported by resort to Roman civil code. American courts in the South were to look more and more to Roman law concerning propertied interest for antecedents. The common law, then, had become victim of its own flexibility.
11. no photo
12. no photo
13. “The Universal Law of Slavery," by George Fitzhugh (most important advocate of slavery) 1857
He the Negro is but a grown up child, and must be governed as a child, not as a lunatic or criminal. The master occupies toward him the place of parent or guardian. We shall not dwell on this view, for no one will differ with us who thinks as we do of the negro's capacity, and we might argue till dooms-day in vain, with those who have a high opinion of the negro's moral and intellectual capacity.
Secondly. The negro is improvident; will not lay up in summer for the wants of winter; will not accumulate in youth for the exigencies of age. He would become an insufferable burden to society. Society has the right to prevent this, and can only do so by subjecting him to domestic slavery. In the last place, the negro race is inferior to the white race, and living in their midst, they would be far outstripped or outwitted in the chaos of free competition. Gradual but certain extermination would be their fate. We presume the maddest abolitionist does not think the negro's providence of habits and money-making capacity at all to compare to those of the whites. This defect of character would alone justify enslaving him, if he is to remain here. In Africa or the West Indies, he would become idolatrous, savage and cannibal, or be devoured by savages and cannibals. At the North he would freeze or starve.
We would remind those who deprecate and sympathize with negro slavery, that his slavery here relieves him from a far more cruel slavery in Africa, or from idolatry and cannibalism, and every brutal vice and crime that can disgrace humanity; and that it christianizes, protects, supports and civilizes him; that it governs him far better than free laborers at the North are governed. There, wife-murder has become a mere holiday pastime; and where so many wives are murdered, almost all must be brutally treated. Nay, more; men who kill their wives or treat them brutally, must be ready for all kinds of crime, and the calendar of crime at the North proves the inference to be correct. Negroes never kill their wives. If it be objected that legally they have no wives, then we reply, that in an experience of more than forty years, we never yet heard of a negro man killing a negro woman. Our negroes are not only better off as to physical comfort than free laborers, but their moral condition is better.
The negro slaves of the South are the happiest, and, in some sense, the freest people in the world. The children and the aged and infirm work not at all, and yet have all the comforts and necessaries of life provided for them. They enjoy liberty, because they are oppressed neither by care nor labor. The women do little hard work, and are protected from the despotism of their husbands by their masters. The negro men and stout boys work, on the average, in good weather, not more than nine hours a day. The balance of their time is spent in perfect abandon. Besides' they have their Sabbaths and holidays. White men, with so much of license and liberty, would die of ennui; but negroes luxuriate in corporeal and mental repose. With their faces upturned to the sun, they can sleep at any hour; and quiet sleep is the greatest of human enjoyments. "Blessed be the man who invented sleep." 'Tis happiness in itself--and results from contentment with the present, and confident assurance of the future.
A common charge preferred against slavery is, that it induces idleness with the masters. The trouble, care and labor, of providing for wife, children and slaves, and of properly governing and administering the whole affairs of the farm, is usually borne on small estates by the master. On larger ones, he is aided by an overseer or manager. If they do their duty, their time is fully occupied. If they do not, the estate goes to ruin. The mistress, on Southern farms, is usually more busily, usefully and benevolently occupied than any one on the farm. She unites in her person, the offices of wife, mother, mistress, housekeeper, and sister of charity. And she fulfills all these offices admirably well. The rich men, in free society, may, if they please, lounge about town, visit clubs, attend the theatre, and have no other trouble than that of collecting rents, interest and dividends of stock. In a well constituted slave society, there should be no idlers. But we cannot divine how the capitalists in free society are to put to work. The master labors for the slave, they exchange industrial value. But the capitalist, living on his income, gives nothing to his subjects. He lives by mere exploitations.
The Black American A Documentary History, Third Edition, by Leslie H. Fishel, Jr. and Benjamin Quarles, Scott, Foresman and Company, Illinois, 1976,1970
14. Theodore Dwight Weld, 1839, Slavery as it Really Is
Reader, you are empaneled as a juror to try a plain case and bring in an honest verdict. The question at issue is not one of law, but of fact--"What is the actual condition of the slaves in the United States?" A plainer case never went to a jury. Look at it. Twenty seven hundred thousand persons in this country, men, women, and children, are in slavery. Is slavery, as a condition for human beings, good, bad, or indifferent?...
Two millions seven hundred thousand persons in these States are in this condition. They are made slaves and are held such by force, and by being put in fear, and this for no crime!...
As slaveholders and their apologists are...flooding the world with testimony that their slaves are kindly treated; that they are well fed, well clothed, well housed, well lodged, moderately worked, and bountifully provided with all things needful for their comfort, we propose--first, to disprove their assertions by the testimony of a multitude of impartial witnesses, and then to put slaveholders themselves through a course of cross-questioning which shall draw their condemnation out of their own mouths. We will prove that the slaves in the United States are treated with barbarous inhumanity; that they are overworked, underfed, wretchedly clad and lodged, and have insufficient sleep; that they are often made to wear round their necks iron collars armed with prongs, to drag heavy chains and weights at their feet while working in the field, and to wear yokes, and bells, and iron horns; that they are often kept confined in the stocks day and night for weeks together, made to wear gags in their mouths for hours or days, have some of their front teeth torn out or broken off, that they may be easily detected when they run away; that they are frequently flogged with terrible severity, have red pepper rubbed into their lacerated flesh, and hot brine, spirits of turpentine, &c., poured over the gashes to increase the torture; that they are often stripped naked, their backs and limbs cut with knives, bruised and mangled by scores and hundreds of blows with the paddle, and terribly torn by the claws of cats, drawn over them by their tormenters; that they are often hunted with blood hounds and shot down like beasts, or torn in pieces by dogs; that they are often suspended by the arms and whipped and beaten till they faint, and when revived by restoratives, beaten again till they faint, and sometimes till they die; that their ears are often cut off, their eyes knocked out, their bones broken, their flesh branded with red hot irons; that they are maimed, mutilated, and burned to death over slow fires.... We will establish all these facts by the testimony of scores and hundreds of eye witnesses, by the testimony of slaveholders in all parts of the slave states, by slaveholding members of Congress and of state legislatures, by ambassadors to foreign courts, by judges, by doctors of divinity, and clergy men of all denominations, by merchants, mechanics, lawyers and physicians, by presidents and professors in colleges and professional seminaries, by planters, overseers and drivers.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
HOMEWORK FOR FRIDAY...
Read the following Ten Amendments. Decide which one is most important. You will answer this question as you enter class on Friday...not by email, not written, just be ready to answer on Friday.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment III
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment VII
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)