Malcolm Rivera
The question of whether Southerners broke any constitutions for slavery is a complex one. The US Constitution, which was designed to secure the blessings of liberty, did not include the word slave, but it also did not restrict the slave trade. The framers of the Constitution believed that concessions on slavery were necessary to gain the support of Southern delegates for a strong central government. This compromise left the seeds for future conflict, as the issue of slavery became a point of contention between the North and the South. Southern slaveholders defended slavery on economic, historical, religious, and legal grounds, arguing that it was a positive good and a practical and moral necessity. They also pointed to the Bible as a justification for slavery, claiming that it was sanctioned by God. As Northern opposition to slavery grew, the South became increasingly isolated and defensive, and the controversy over slavery ultimately led to the Civil War.
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The US Constitution and slavery
The United States Constitution, drafted in 1787 and ratified in 1789, did not contain the words "slave" or "slavery" in its text. However, it dealt directly with American slavery in at least five of its provisions and indirectly protected the institution in other parts of the document. The framers of the Constitution consciously avoided using direct language about slavery, recognising that it would sully the document. Instead, they used euphemisms like "persons held to service or labour".
The issue of slavery may have played a role in the omission of a bill of rights in the original version of the Constitution. The framers' conflicted stance towards slavery led them to deliberately avoid addressing the institution directly. They prioritised political unity over abolition, resulting in key compromises like the Three-Fifths Clause and the Fugitive Slave Clause, which protected slaveholding interests. The Three-Fifths Clause counted three-fifths of a state's slave population when apportioning representation, giving the South extra representation in the House of Representatives and extra votes in the Electoral College. The Fugitive Slave Clause required the return of runaway slaves to their owners.
On August 21, 1787, a debate broke out over a South Carolina proposal to prohibit the federal government from regulating the Atlantic slave trade. Luther Martin of Maryland, a slaveholder, argued that the slave trade should be subject to federal regulation and was inconsistent with America's republican ideals. John Rutledge of South Carolina responded forcefully, insisting that religion and humanity had nothing to do with the question. He stated that unless regulation of the slave trade was left to the states, the southernmost states "shall not be parties to the union."
As the North increased its criticism of slavery, Southerners reacted by becoming more strident in their defence of the institution. They used arguments from economics, history, religion, legality, social good, and even humanitarianism to justify slavery. The Southern clergy, for example, defended the morality of slavery through an elaborate scriptural defence built on the infallibility of the Bible. They argued that slavery brought Christianity to the "heathen" and that it was a good thing for the enslaved.
In summary, while the US Constitution did not explicitly mention slavery, it included provisions that protected and strengthened the institution. The framers' compromises on slavery laid the foundation for future conflict, and the Constitution has been interpreted as both pro-slavery and anti-slavery.
War and Elections: A Dangerous Mix
You may want to see also
The Southern argument for slavery
Economics
The Southern economy was built on slavery, with cotton, tobacco, and rice production all relying on slave labour. Defenders of slavery argued that ending it would destroy the Southern economy, leading to unemployment, chaos, and social unrest. They pointed to the French Revolution as an example of the "rule of terror" that could follow.
History
Slavery had existed throughout history, with the Greeks, Romans, and English all having slaves. It was argued that slavery was a necessary part of society, and that even Abraham from the Bible had slaves.
Religion
Southern slaveholders often used biblical passages to justify slavery, arguing that it brought Christianity to the "heathen". They also claimed that slavery was divine and that it was good for the enslaved, who were cared for by their owners.
Legality
The Dred Scott Decision ruled that all Blacks had no legal standing as persons and were property, and the Constitution protected slaveholders' rights to that property.
Social Good and Humanitarianism
Defenders of slavery argued that slaves were better cared for than poor Whites, and that slaveholders would protect and assist them when they were sick, aged, or fired from their work.
States' Rights
As the nation expanded and abolitionist writings reached a wider audience, Southern leaders like John C. Calhoun argued that states could nullify federal laws, including those regarding slavery. They saw the South as an increasingly embattled minority and were intensely suspicious of democratic majorities.
Constitutional Interpretations: Dynamic and Static Perspectives
You may want to see also
The role of the clergy
While the US Constitution did not explicitly mention "slavery", it included protections for the "institution of slavery and its consequences". The three-fifths clause, for instance, gave the South extra representation in the House of Representatives and extra votes in the Electoral College. The controversy over the Atlantic slave trade was settled with a compromise—a 20-year ban on any restrictions on the trade in exchange for removing a clause restricting the national government's power to enact laws requiring goods to be shipped on American vessels. The same day, the convention also adopted the fugitive slave clause, requiring the return of runaway slaves to their owners.
As Northern opposition to slavery grew, the three major Protestant churches—the Presbyterians, Methodists, and Baptists—split into northern and southern factions. This segregation of the clergy into Northern and Southern camps ended meaningful dialogue, leaving Southern preachers to address Southern audiences without contradiction. Southern slaveholders often used biblical passages to justify slavery, arguing that the sudden end to the slave economy would have a profoundly negative economic impact in the South. They also contended that slavery was divine and brought Christianity to the "heathen" from across the ocean.
Some prominent leaders in the Presbyterian Church were slaveholders, moderate anti-slavery advocates, and abolitionists. While some, like Samuel Davies, championed literacy for enslaved people and seemed deeply committed to their spiritual welfare, he never questioned the legitimacy of human bondage and owned slaves himself. The Presbyterian Church, in particular, attempted to occupy a middle ground, hoping for a gradual end to slavery while opposing the fanaticism of abolitionists.
Women's Suffrage: A Constitutional Conundrum?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
$24.73 $24.99
$18.95 $29.25
The impact of Lincoln's election
Abraham Lincoln's victory in the 1860 election had a profound impact on the course of American history, particularly regarding slavery and the Civil War. Lincoln, the Republican candidate, defeated three other candidates, including the Southern Democrat John C. Breckinridge, whose campaign was based on the protection of slavery.
Lincoln's election sent a clear message about the nation's stance on slavery. The election of 1860 was unique in that four parties ran candidates for president, two from the North and two from the South, with each candidate expressing differing views on slavery. Lincoln's victory, with less than 40% of the popular vote, signalled a shift away from the acceptance of slavery. While Lincoln's position on slavery was moderate, he was opposed to its expansion into new states. This stance was a direct threat to the Southern way of life, which was heavily dependent on an economic system based on slave-grown cotton.
The election of 1860, therefore, set the stage for the American Civil War. The Southern states' secession was an act of rebellion, and Lincoln, along with most Northerners, viewed it as treason. The conflict between the Union and the newly formed Confederate States of America could not be resolved through compromise, and war broke out in April 1861.
Lincoln's election also had a significant impact on the Republican Party's platform. The party, which had formed in the 1850s, was founded on the principle of ending slavery. Lincoln's victory empowered the radicals within the party, who made up the majority. This shift in power likely contributed to the passage of the 13th Amendment during Lincoln's second term, which abolished slavery in the United States.
Founding Fathers' Privacy Vision in the Constitution
You may want to see also
The Dred Scott Decision
In the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision of 1857, the Supreme Court ruled that enslaved people were not citizens of the United States and therefore could not expect any protection from the federal government or the courts. The Court also stated that Congress did not have the authority to ban slavery from a federal territory. This decision was considered by many legal scholars to be the worst ever made by the Supreme Court. It was later overturned by the 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution, which abolished slavery and declared all persons born in the United States as citizens.
Electoral Power: Elections Conducted via Constitutional Authority
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Southerners did not break any constitutions for slavery. However, the 3/5ths clause in the US Constitution gave the South extra representation in the House of Representatives and extra votes in the Electoral College. The word "slave" does not appear in the Constitution, but slavery received important protections in it. The controversy over the Atlantic slave trade was settled by a compromise that banned restrictions on the trade for 20 years in exchange for removing a clause restricting the national government's power.
Southern slaveholders often used biblical passages to justify slavery. They also argued that the sudden end of the slave economy would have a devastating economic impact in the South. They believed that slaves could not take care of themselves and needed masters to look after them. They also pointed to the violence of Nat Turner's 1831 slave revolt as a reason to continue slavery.
As Northern opposition to slavery grew, Southerners felt increasingly isolated and beleaguered. They saw themselves as "prisoners in their own country" due to the rising hysteria of the abolition movement. The Southern clergy played a significant role in defending the morality of slavery through scriptural defense, influencing both slaveholders and non-slaveholders.
