Antebellum Slavery

The most recent topic we have been discussing in class is the resurge of slavery in the early 19th century. In doing this, two specific aspects were focused upon: how, economically and politically, slavery became entrenched in American society, and also the ways in which slavery has negative impacts on the human being. In order to complete this task, we examined the constitution, looked at slave population in relation to total revenue, and then discussed various individuals involved in the slave trade. In the end, slavery became entrenched in the United States due to the constitution and the economic benefit. In addition to this, slavery sacrifices human interest in exchange for profit, and slaves are treated in an inhumane way.

Slavery became entrenched in the United States for both political and economic reasons. In a political sense, slavery is a part of the constitution, and in several clauses slavery is specifically mentioned. For example, in Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3, it is stated that, “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”. Though this refers to slaves not having the ability to escape from their owners, others mention taxes relating to the slave trade as well as a slave’s representation in Congress. Due to all of these, slavery was simply a part of the United States, with as much importance as any other law or practice.

In addition to this political explanation, slavery also became entrenched through the economic benefits provided. A big factor of slavery’s contribution to the economy was the cotton gin, invented by Eli Whitney in 1792. The cotton gin removed seeds from cotton bolls, greatly increasing a process which had previously involved slaves hand-picking each individual seed. With the cotton gin came a greater need for slaves, however, due to the economic benefits of a greater cotton production. In 1790, close to the time when the cotton gin was invented, there were approximately 690,000 total slaves in the United States. In this period, 1.5 million pounds of cotton were produced. In 1860, 70 years later, there were around 3,954,000 total slaves, a 473% increase, with 2.28 billion pounds of cotton produced, a 151,900% increase. Cotton exports produced $191.8 million, 57% of the nation’s total export revenue. While the south clearly used slavery to their economic advantage, the north also benefitted from the abundance of cotton. Without the boom in cotton production, the industrial revolution may not have had such a strong effect, as the supply may not have been able to keep up with demand.

With the economic benefits of slavery comes a morality grey area, with many different viewpoints as to what is acceptable and what is not in regards to treatment. Four specific individuals of the antebellum period stand out as having four very different viewpoints: John Brown, George Fitzhugh, Frederick Douglass and Prince Abdul Rahman. John Brown was squarely on the side of anti-slavery, and led many violent protests in attempts to make change. He believed in using violent means to end slavery, with the intent of slave revolt. One particularly violent example of such an occurrence was the raid of the federal arsenal in Harper’s Island, Virginia. The raid was unsuccessful, and Brown was captured and hanged. Even so, the response from northerners and southerners speaks to the contrast in viewpoints. While those in the north supported Brown's actions and believed him to be a martyr for the anti-slavery cause, those in the south denounced his motive and were outraged by his actions.

Contrary to John Brown, George Fitzhugh grew up on a plantation and was pro-slavery. In Fitzhugh's mind, there was no moral issue surrounding slavery, because all slaves were content with what they were doing in their lives. In his book Cannibals Alll or Slaves Without Masters, he wrote, "The negro slaves of the south are the happiest, and in some sense, the freest people of the world. The children and the aged infirm work not at all, and yet have all the comforts and necessities of life provided for them". According to Fitzhugh, slaves were happy due to having no responsibilities and having everything given to them by their owners.

Unlike John Brown and George Fitzhugh, Frederick Douglass was not born a free man. He was born into slavery and had to educate himself, breaking the law in the process. He escaped from his owner twice, successful in his second attempt. After gaining freedom, Douglass became an active abolitionist, not afraid to voice his opinion and to spread his ideas to the public. In a speech he gave on July 5, 1882 in Rochester NY, Douglass proclaimed, “What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer, a day day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him your celebration is a scam... a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages”. By saying this, Douglass brings up a viewpoint that was seldom heard in the period, due to slaves having no say. That, despite efforts to free slaves, the nation as a whole is at extreme fault for being involved in the slave trade and using slaves to its advantage.

It is safe to say that Prince Abdul Rahman of Futa Jallon, Africa had an altogether unique perspective, as shown in the film Prince Among Slaves. Taken from his homeland and sold for food, guns and rum, he endured an unimaginable life filled with pain and struggle. He is an example of how slavery can rip away every shred of human dignity. Upon arriving to his owner’s plantation, he was forced to cut his hair, which in Africa had been a sign of nobility. Also, later in life, after escaping and then returning due to the realization that he had nowhere else to turn to, his owner’s wife put her foot on his face, which was a war symbol of submission. Lastly, even upon being granted freedom, Rahman had few options as to how he could reconstruct his life. While a slave he had married a woman named Isabella and had children. Later on, he and Isabella had been granted freedom, while their children had not been. In the attempt to earn money to free their children, Isabella and Prince Abdul became sick, and had only raised half of the funds necessary to free their children before they were put under pressure to leave the U.S.. Rahman died four months after departing, and never made it back to Futa Jallon.

The Evolution of Gender Equality

In class recently, we have been learning about the women’s reform of the mid-19th century. In this period, women became more vocal with their demands for equality. However, society’s reactions to these demands were mixed in their acceptance level. In order to gain understanding on what a woman was expected of in this period, we examined the picture to the right. In it, a mother is shown taking care of her children, with her husband absent and presumably at work. Some of the roles shown in this picture that a woman was expected to fulfill were entertaining the children, educating them, making clothing, taking care of and training animals, and mending various household items. In addition to these roles, the curtain symbolizes the hidden nature of the woman’s job, and the little recognition she received.

In addition to this picture, we also examined the laws and practices of 1848 which related to women’s rights. A couple of these were: “It is improper for a woman to speak in public”, “In almost every state, the father can legally make a will appointing a guardian for his children in the event of his death”, and “In most states, it is legal for a man to beat his wife. New York courts ruled that, in order to keep his wife from nagging, a man could beat her with a horsewhip every few weeks”. As can be seen in just three of many laws and practices, a woman in those times had few to no rights in basically every aspect of life. Due to this, women began to stand up for themselves and give themselves a voice, both literally and figuratively. At the Seneca Falls Convention of July 1848, women finally began a movement, with the “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions”. In this document were such resolutions as, “Women is man’s equal - was intended to be so by the Creator, and the highest good of the race demands that she should be recognized as such”, and “The same amount of virtue, delicacy and refinement of behavior that is required if women - should also be required of men, and the same transgressions should be viewed with equal severity on both man and woman”. With these fairly modest requests, however, came both support and criticism.

The reactions to this demand for women’s rights ranged from supportive to disapproving. One disapproving newspaper, the “Oneida Whig”, wrote, "They should recollect however, the illustrious member of their bolting sisterhood who had not long worn the nether garments before she found it in her heart to disgrace her man's apparel and to cry like a woman." This shows that some thought that it was not possible for a woman to complete the role of a man. Other newspapers, one being “The Recorder”, mocked the movement. In “The Recorder”, it was written that, “The ‘Declaration’ adapts the language of that of “Independence” to the grievous bondage of woman in the nineteenth century. We need not say that we think the movement excessively silly; nevertheless many of our readers will have a curiosity..” This shows that some never gave the movement a chance, and wrote off the women without giving them a chance. Even with all of the negativity, however, there were supporters of the reform as well. One supportive newspaper, the “North Star”, wrote, “... there can be no reason in the world for denying to women the exercise of the elective franchise, or a hand in making and administering the laws of the land. Our doctrine is, that ‘Right is of no sex.’”. This newspaper may have had an unpopular opinion in supporting the reform, but it shows that the movement still had its support from some members of society.

The United States has come a long way in gender equality, and women and men mostly have the same rights now, contrary to the time of the reform. However, it can’t be said that men and women have equal opportunity and are judged equally. Even today, some men who work in the same positions as women are paid higher, and there are still stereotypes for what fields women should and shouldn’t start a career in. A video that shows these fairly common judgments made by many is a Pantene commercial from the Philippines. In the video, men and women are shown doing the same things, with the man’s actions championed while the female is judged and labeled. For example, while a man can be seen as a “boss”, a woman in the same position can be seen as “bossy”. In all, today’s society still reacts differently to men and women, just in a different, more subtle manner.

Works Cited:

The North Star. July 28, 1848. http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/images/vc006197.jpg. Feb. 2, 2015.

Rev. G.H. Hulin, Rev. J.A. Avery, The Recorder. August 3, 1848. http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/images/vc006198.jpg. Feb. 2, 2015.

Oneida Whig. August 1, 1848. http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/images/vc006199.jpg. Feb. 2, 2015.

The Key to Happiness

“Most of the luxuries, and many of the so-called comforts of life, are not only indispensable, but positive hindrances to the elevation of mankind. With respect to luxuries and comforts, the wisest have ever lived a more simple and meagre life than the poor. The ancient philosophers, Chinese, Hindoo, Persian, and Greek, were a class than which none has been poorer in outward riches, none so rich in inward.”

- Henry David Thoreau

Citation: Thoreau, Henry David. Walden. Boston: Ticknor and Fields, 1854.

Above is an excerpt from Henry David Thoreau’s Walden from the chapter entitled “Economy”. Thoreau was a renowned transcendentalist of the 1800’s who wrote many celebrated works; Walden is arguably his most famous. Thoreau spent two years and two months living in a house on Walden Pond in Concord MA, and wrote the majority of Walden while there. Due to this, it is a very trustworthy source to study. However, it was largely based on Thoreau’s opinions and beliefs, so it should not necessarily be believed in its entirety by the reader. In publishing his thoughts, Thoreau was attempting to get his beliefs to the public. Overall, this specific chapter focused on the common desire for wealth and things of luxury. In his writing, Thoreau exhibited many common transcendentalist beliefs relating to nature and spirituality, but he also had a few new ideas as well. As mentioned above, he spoke of the human desire for monetary success, and suggested that this desire was the reason for many people's unhappiness. Also, by living at Walden Pond for so long with so little, Thoreau used his own experiences as evidence for his arguments, at one point saying that the only necessities of life are food, shelter, fuel and clothing. Throughout the writing, Thoreau tried to convince readers to be rid of whatever material things not necessary for a comfortable life, and with this to not work so many hours; with this, they could achieve happiness.

Andrew Jackson: a President for the People?

Recently in class, we have been learning about Andrew Jackson’s presidency, which began with his election in 1829. In learning about Andrew Jackson as a leader, we answered the question, “Is Andrew Jackson’s long-standing reputation as “the people’s president” deserved?”. Our class was split into three groups, and each group focused on one of three specific aspects of his presidency: the Bank War, Spoils System and Indian Removal Act. Jackson started the Bank War by vetoing against the Second National Bank. In doing what he did, Jackson believed that he was protecting the average man from being taken advantage of, as he thought the bank favored the upper classes. However, this ended in economic collapse, with even his supporters against his decision. In addition to the Bank War, Jackson also made the decision to choose his government officials in a Spoils System, favoring those who supported him over those with ability. He fired 919 officials, opening positions for those whom he thought had more loyalty. This system backfired when Samuel Swartwout, one of Jackson’s supporters/officials, stole 1.2 million dollars from the government. This system was also unjust and unfair, due to political views being taken into account for positions that should be given to those with actual competence. Lastly, Andrew Jackson signed the Indian Removal Act, which is the topic our group focused on. He wanted to expand the country west, and in order to do this, he would encroach on Cherokee territory. The Cherokee tribe did not want to move west, due to the fact that they lived on the land of their ancestors. Also, they believed they would not fit in the west with the other tribes, who had lived there for many years. However, Andrew Jackson informed the tribe that they would be forced to abide by the same laws as the rest of the United States, due to the fact that they would be residing in their territory. Due to this, the tribe was forced to leave, and their journey west is known as the “trail of tears”. In moving, up to 10,000 Cherokee indians died. Due to all of these things, Andrew Jackson should not be known as a people’s president. He was too focused on helping his supporters and those of lower classes, compromising the rights of the upper classes and the indians. Even though they were more independent and not as needy of governmental support, the members of the upper class and the Cherokee tribe were people too, something Andrew Jackson did not take into account.

With the information we gathered about the Indian Removal Act, our group decided to perform a skit for the class. In our skit, we decided to focus on the motivation for and initial reactions of the Indian Removal Act. The script is below.

Narrator: In a nation, Andrew Jackson wants to expand the United States, but the Cherokee Indians are in his path. Looks into the distance.

Andrew Jackson rides his mighty steed into the scene.

Indians are mid powwow. (http://youtu.be/ZNuNsKwG1RI)

Indian chief: Hello, Jacksana.

Andrew Jackson: What does that mean?

Indian chief: Devil.

A: Why do you refer to me as such?

I: You try to take our land, demolish our people and move us west, yet before you were loyal to us. Why do you do this?

A: We wish to expand our territory. You shall move voluntarily, or you will be subject to the laws of the United States.

I: We wish to remain on the land of our fathers. We have a perfect and original right to remain without interruption or molestation.

A: Then we will have to use force.

I: The west is a mysterious place. There are other tribes there, who speak different languages. We will not fit in. If staying means dying, then so be it.

A: That is your choice.

I: We are an independent nation, we do not have to abide by your laws.

A: Yes you do.

Andrew Jackson turns to leave, rides away on horse.

Rise of Democracy

This week in class, we have been learning about the rise of democracy in the United States. The question we were to answer was, “How should we define democracy? How democratic was the United States in the early 1800s?”. The first thing we did to do this was to establish the definition of democracy, in order to have a concrete meaning to go off from when taking down notes. After this, we made notes from various sources, which ranged from art to charts and quotes. With the notes we made, we composed a poster. On the poster, shown below, are the sources we analyzed, as well as the actual analysis as to how democratic the United States was in the early 1800s.

Is Race Still an Issue?

In class recently, we have been learning about the Latin American Revolutions. In doing this, we were given the question, “Why is it essential to acknowledge human value regardless of race? How are the events in the Latin American revolutions evidence of this social imperative?”. The first step to answering this question was making a pie chart, showing all of the different races in Latin America (peninsulares, Creoles, Mestizos, Mulattoes and free blacks, Indian peoples and slaves), with the percent of the population that the race consisted of. In addition to this chart, we made another chart that showed the races based on their social class. With this background information, the class split into three large groups, and each group chose a revolution to focus on. The choices were the revolutions of Mexico, Brazil and Gran Colombia. With an article about the information, each group made a timeline of important events that occurred during the revolution. After the timelines were completed, each of the larger groups split up into four smaller groups, with each smaller group containing at least one “representative” from one of the larger groups. In these smaller groups, the representatives presented the information they had gathered with the members of other timeline groups. The last thing each group did was find two similarities and two differences between the three revolutions.

A timeline of the Mexican Revolution

One commonality between the three revolutions is that all three were fought in order to be independent of European nations. Brazil revolted against Portuguese rule while both Gran Colombia and Mexico revolted against Spanish rule. Another similarity shared by all three revolutions is the fact that they all occurred in a close proximity to one another, in the early 1800’s. One difference between the revolutions is the level of violence employed. Brazil was very peaceful, Gran Colombia was very violent and closer to war, and Mexico was somewhere between the two with both physical rebellion and verbal negotiation. Another difference is what kind of government the independent nations used. Gran Colombia became a republic, and both Brazil and Mexico became constitutional monarchies (soon after, Mexico also became a republic). Despite all of the commonalities and differences of the revolutions, they all boil down to one issue: race. In Mexico, mestizos and slaves fought alongside Miguel Higaldo y Costilla for racial equality. Brazilians of different races were displeased when their ruler Pedro, a peninsular, would only have cabinet members who were also penisulares. Lastly, Gran Columbia’s revolution involved Simon Bolivar, a creole, fighting for races that were low on the social chart.

Sadly, the issue of race still exists in society today, and there are many controversial occurrences based on race that happen each day. A high profile example of such an occurrence was in Ferguson, Missouri, where police officer Darren Wilson shot and killed Michael Brown, an unarmed teenager. A grand jury recently decided not to indict Wilson, which resulted in outrage from many across the country. Riots have erupted not just in Ferguson, but in many cities spanning the country; even so, there are outspoken supporters on both sides. It is important to consider the issue of race in our lives today, as the world will never be fully rid of racism.

How Should We Remember Toussaint Louverture?

Most people want to be remembered for something. Whatever it is, be it for inventing something, being a world-class athlete or a musician, or just being someone people want to be around, it is important to leave the world having made a mark on it. Toussaint Louverture of 18th century Haiti is certainly an individual who made his mark on the world. In the 1700s, Haiti was known as Saint Domingue, under French control, and producing 40 percent of the world’s coffee and half of the world’s sugar. Louverture grew up a slave, one of 500,000 slaves in all of Haiti, and was later granted freedom by his master. In the summer of 1789, in the midst of the French Revolution, news arrived in Saint Domingue that the French were fighting for liberty, fraternity and equality. The slaves of Saint Domingue realized that they deserved equal rights as well. However, after demands for the abolition of slavery were turned down by white plantation owners, a rebellion was under way. Louverture played an integral role in the rebellion and the events after, remembered as a military commander and a ruler of Saint Domingue. However, he should be remembered most as a liberator of slaves because of his undying will and commitment to the cause.

Louverture’s role as a liberator of slaves was his most important not only for the accomplishments he made, but also for his strong devotion and passion. Despite his accomplishments, however, he was not always the outspoken leader that he came to be. During the slave revolt in 1792, Louverture served as a doctor for the slave troops, and was also head to a small group of soldiers (Document A). Even though his role was not as significant then, it shows that he always felt the same way and was always wanting to help the cause. In 1794, slavery was abolished in Saint Domingue by the revolutionary government. Later, in 1795, The French Directory replaced the existing government, and the citizens of Saint Domingue feared that this new government would reinstate slavery. In a letter to the French Directory, Louverture used such language as, “Could men who have once enjoyed the benefits of liberty look on calmly while it is taken from them!” and “... if they had a thousand lives, they would sacrifice them all rather than be subjected again to slavery” (Document B). This shows that Louverture was truly emotionally invested in the cause, because of the fact that he had been a slave as well. In addition to those strong words, Louverture also had something else to say to the French Directory; he wrote, “We have known how to confront danger to our liberty, and we will know how to confront death to preserve it” (Document B). This exhibits Louverture’s courage, as he was willing to stand up the French government, and put everything on the line, for what he believed was right. In addition to his letter to the French Directory, Louverture also exhibits his role as a liberator of slaves in the Saint Domingue Constitution of 1801. In article 3 of the constitution, he states "There cannot exist slaves in this territory, servitude is therein forever abolished. All men are born, live and die free and French" (Document C). By including this, Louverture states clearly that slavery in Saint Domingue is will forever by nonexistent, as long as he has a say in the matter, that is. Also, in articles 15 and 16, Louverture states, "Each plantation... Shall represent the quiet haven of an active and constant family, of which the owner of the land... Shall be the father", and "Each cultivator and each worker is a member of the family and is entitled to a share in the revenues" (Document C). In this statement, Louverture makes it clear that slave labor is no longer tolerable, and that all workers will receive the compensation that they deserve. Without Louverture, slaves would never have had a voice to stand up for them, and it would likely have been many more years until they had finally been liberated. That is why this was his most important role.

Even though it may not have been his most important role, Louverture also had a major impact as a ruler of Saint Domingue. In 1801, Louverture was nominated as the General in Chief of Saint Domingue, and was to remain the general for the rest of his life (Document C). In having this position, Louverture headed and assembled the commission that created Saint Domingue’s constitution of 1801. In article 14 of the constitution, it is stated that “The colony being essentially agricultural cannot suffer the least disruption in the works of its cultivation” (Document C). This shows that Louverture was aware of what the country needed in order for the economy to thrive, as well as stay afloat. A few months after the Constitution, Louverture also wrote a Proclamation. In this Proclamation, Louverture wrote, “As soon as a child can walk, he should be employed on the plantation according to his strength in some useful work” (Document D). In demanding this, Louverture was making sure that the country’s agriculture did as well as it could, which would make the country as a whole a greater power. In addition to this, he also wrote, “All male and female citizens... must obtain a security card. Such card shall contain the family name, address... age and sex of the person who bears it”, in order to prevent vagabond farmers (Document D). Louverture again was trying to sustain the agricultural success of the country, due to it being the main power of the country, with it producing 40 percent of the world’s coffee and half of the world’s sugar. Due to these reasons, Louverture’s role as a ruler of Saint Domingue was important, but not of the same significance as his liberating the country’s slaves.

In addition to his roles as a liberator of slaves and a ruler of Saint Domingue, Louverture was also a respected military commander. As a military commander, Louverture is described as having, “superior knowledge of the character of his race, his humanity, generosity, and courage, and had gained the confidence of all whom he had under his command” (Document F). However, that doesn’t mean he’s unwilling to make sacrifices for the greater good. Hyacinth Mouse, Louverture’s nephew, was part of a rebellion that broke out due to former slaves being against Saint Domingue’s new farming policies (Document E). In response to the rebellion, Louverture forced many men of varying ranks who were part of the rebellion to shoot themselves, and ordered a firing squad on his nephew (Document E). By doing this, Louverture showed that he was willing to do whatever it takes to maintain order, and in that case, he was suppressing a rebellion. In addition to this, Louverture was able to defeat the French army at Samana, with an army of only former slaves against France’s army (Document F). This victory shows Louverture’s ability to come out on top when it is most important. For these reasons, Louverture was an able military commander, but this role was less important than his role as a liberator of slaves.

Louverture was able to accomplish a lot in his lifetime. He was the Chief General of Saint Domingue, proving himself as a good ruler by maintaining the country’s power and strengthening the economy. Apart from ruling Saint Domingue, Louverture also served as a military commander, crushing a rebellion and defeating the French army. Despite these achievements, however, Louverture’s most important work was as a liberator of slaves. At first, he fought on the side of the rebels, but later he made sure no person was working without pay, threatening the French to ensure they wouldn’t reinstate slavery. Due to these reasons, Louverture should be most remembered as a liberator of slaves.

Document A: Created from various sources.

Document B: Toussaint Louverture, “Letter to the French Directory, November 1797.”

Document C:The Saint Domingue Constitution of 1801. Signed by Toussaint Louverture in July 1801.

Document D: Toussaint Louverture, “Proclamation, 25 November 1801.”

Document E: Madison Smartt Bell, Toussaint Louverture: A Biography, 2007

Document F: William Wells Brown, “A Description of Toussaint Louverture”, from The Black Man, His Antecedents, His Genius, and His Achievements, 2nd edition, 1863. Engraving of Toussaint Louverture, 1802.