difference between slave states and free states

Unit 7 Primary Sources

John C. Calhoun on South as disadvantaged minority, 1850

Calhoun delivered this speech during debates over the so-called “Compromise of 1850,” which many historians more accurately refer to simply as the “Truce of 1850.”

I have, Senators, believed from the first that the agitation of the subject of slavery would…end in disunion….the Union is in danger….[And one of the causes for this] is undoubtedly to be traced to the long-continued agitation of the slave question on the part of the North, and the many aggressions which they have made on the rights of the South during that time…[and now] the great equilibrium between the two sections has been destroyed….The great increase of Senators, added to the great increase of the House of Representatives and the electoral college on the part of the North, which must take place in the next decade, will effectually and irretrievably destroy the equilibrium which existed when this Government was created….As the North has the absolute control over the Government, it is manifest that on all questions between it and the South…that the interests of the latter will be sacrificed to the former, however oppressive the effects may be…How can the Union be saved? To this I answer there is but one way by which it can be, and that is be adopting such measures as will satisfy the States belonging to the Southern section that they can remain in the Union consistently with their honor and their safety.

Frederick Douglass speaks on behalf of radical abolitionists, 1852:

This oration was delivered by the famous former slave and abolitionist lecturer at a time when even many free blacks in the North felt unsafe in the United States, since under the terms of the strengthened fugitive slave act, blacks had little ability to contest a slave owners’ attempt to sell them back into slavery

Fellow citizens, pardon me, allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I, or those [black] people I represent to do with your national independence?.... I am not included within the pale of glorious anniversary! Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance [between white and black Americans]…The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity, and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared by you, not by me. The sunlight that brought light and healing to you, has brought striped and death to me. His Fourth [of] July is yours, not mine….Go where you may, search where you will, roam through all the monarchies and despotisms of the Old World, travel through South America, search out every abuse and when you have found the last, lay your facts by the side of the everyday practices of this nation, and you will say with me, that, for revolting barbarity and shameless hypocrisy, America reigns without rival.

Proslavery settler fears Kansas will end up a free state, 1857

The following excerpts from a pro-slavery settler of Kansas directly relate to the previous document from Douglas regarding the ability of Americans to peacefully vote slavery up or down in the west.

I fear, Sister, that coming here will do no good at last, as I begin to think that this will be made a Free State at last. ‘Tis true we have elected Proslavery men to draft a state constitution, but I feel pretty certain, if it is put to the vote of the people, it will be rejected, as they have the majority here at this time. The South has ceased all efforts, while the North is redoubling her exertions…One of our most staunch Proslavery men was killed in Leavensworth a few days ago…[According to some] the man who was killed (Jas Lyle) went up to the polls and asked for a ticket [to vote]. An abolitionist handed him one which he, Lyle, tore in two. The other asked him he had better not do so again, when Lyle…[asked for another]. It was given him, and he tore it also, at which the Abolitionist drew a bowie knife and stabbed Lyle to the heart, then ran a few paces, drew a revolver, and commenced firing a the dying man. The fellow was taken prisoner…and Governor Walker put out for Leavensworth on Friday to have the prisoner carried to the fort, in order to keep the Abolitionists from rescuing him….

The Supreme Court defends slavery in the territories in the Dred Scott case, 1857

The decision in Dred Scott was written by Taney after a 7-2 vote in favor of it. At least five of the justices of the Supreme Court, like Taney, were or at one time had been slaveholders

It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in relation to that unfortunate race, which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened portions of the world at the time of the Declaration of Independence, and when the Constitution of the United States was framed and adopted. But the public history of every European nation displays it in a manner too plain to be mistaken. They [African-Americans] had for more than a century been regarded as being of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit…There are two clauses of the Constitution which point directly to the negro race as a separate class of persons, and show clearly that they were not regarded as a portion of the people or citizens of the Government then formed.

John Brown defends violent efforts to end slavery, 1859

The fact that John Brown had received support from Northern abolitionists made his attempted raid at Harper’s Ferry, Virginia all the more alarming to Southerners, and increased their paranoia regarding Northern efforts to ruin their way of life.

I intended certainly to have made a clean thing of that matter, as I did last winter, when I went into Missouri and there took slaves without the snapping of a gun on either side, movig them through the country, and finally leaving them in Canada. I designed to have done the same thing again on a larger scale. That was all I intended. I never did intend murder, or treason, or the destruction of property, or to exercise or incite slaves to rebellion….

This Court acknowledges…I suppose, the validity of the law of God. I see a book kissed, which I suppose to be the Bible, or at least the New Testament, which teached me that all things whatsoever I would that men should do to me, I should do even so to them. I endeavored to at up to that instruction. I say I am yet too young to understand that God is any respecter of persons. I believe that to have interfered as I have done, as I have always freely admitted I have done, in behalf of His despised poor, I did no wrong, but right. Now, if it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, unjust exactments, I say, let it be done…..I feel no consciousness of guilt. I have stated from the first what was my intention, and what was not. I never had any design against the liberty of any person, nor any disposition to commit treason or incite slaves to rebel or make any general insurrection. I never encouraged any man to do so, but always discouraged any idea of that kind.

South Carolina newspaper defends Southern interests, Charleston Mercury, February 1860

It is important to compare the statements made below regarding the sanctity of Southern property held in slaves with the views of Brown and other Northerners described above.

The right to have slave property protected in the territory [of Kansas] is not a mere abstraction without application or practical value…When the gold mines of California were discovered, slaveholders at the South saw that, with their command of labor, it would be easy at a moderate outlay of capital to make fortunes digging gold. The inducements to go there were great, and there was no lack of inclination on their part. But, to make the emigration profitable, it was necessary that the [slave] property of Southern settlers should be safe, otherwise it was plainly a hazardous enterprise…Few were reckless enough to stake property, the accumulation of years, in a struggle with active prejudices amongst a mixed population…

What has been the policy pursued in Kansas? Has the territory had a fair chance of becoming a Slave State? Has the principle of equal protection to slave property been carried out by the Government there in any of its departments? On the contrary, has not every appliance been used to thwart the South and expel or prohibit her sons from colonizing there?....

New Mexico, it is asserted, is too barren and arid for Southern occupation and settlement….Now, New Mexico teems with mineral resources….There is no vocation in the world in which slavery can be more useful and profitable than in mining….We frequently here talk of the future glories of our republican destiny on the continent, and of the spread of our civilization and free institutions over Mexico and the Tropics. Already we have absorbed two of her States, Texas, and California. Is it expected that our onward march is to stop here? Is it not more probable and more philosophic to suppose that, as in the past, so in the future, the Anglo-Saxon race will, in the course of years occupy and absorb the whole of that splendid but ill-peopled country, and to remove by gradual process before them, the worthless mongrel races that now inhabit and curse the land?...Our people will never sit still and see themselves excluded from all expansion, to please the North….