Omar Bennett
In 1860, Frederick Douglass gave a speech titled The Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Anti-Slavery? in Glasgow, Scotland. In his speech, Douglass discussed his views on the American Constitution and its relationship to slavery. Douglass argued that the Constitution was not pro-slavery and that it could be used as a tool to abolish slavery in America. He believed that voting for anti-slavery politicians was the way forward to end slavery. He also highlighted the distinction between the American Government and the American Constitution, emphasizing that they are not identical. Douglass' position was one of reform, advocating for the abolition of slavery through the government rather than its overthrow.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Views on the American Constitution | The American Constitution is distinct from the American Government |
| Views on the American Constitution | The American Constitution is a written instrument that is complete in itself |
| Views on the American Constitution | The American Constitution is not like the British Constitution |
| Views on the American Constitution | The American Constitution does not guarantee the right to hold property in man |
| Views on the American Constitution | The American Constitution is anti-slavery |
| Views on the American Constitution | The American Constitution is not pro-slavery |
| Views on the American Constitution | The American Constitution is reformist, not revolutionary |
| Views on the American Constitution | The American Constitution can be made to bend to the cause of freedom and justice |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- Frederick Douglass believed the American Constitution is distinct from the American Government
- The Constitution does not guarantee the right to own slaves
- The Constitution is anti-slavery because it aimed to end the slave trade
- Douglass' position was reformist, not revolutionary
- Douglass believed that the intentions of the framers of the Constitution were good
Frederick Douglass believed the American Constitution is distinct from the American Government
In a speech delivered in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1860, abolitionist Frederick Douglass outlined his views on the American Constitution and its relationship to the American Government. He began by emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between the two, stating that they are "distinct in character as is a ship and a compass".
Douglass believed that the American Constitution is a written instrument that is complete in itself and cannot be altered by any court, Congress, or President. He argued that the Constitution does not guarantee the right to hold property over another person, and that it is not pro-slavery. Instead, he interpreted it as a tool that could be used to abolish slavery.
Douglass acknowledged that the South had influenced the Constitution to serve the purposes of slavery. However, he advocated for reform rather than revolution, suggesting that the North could now use the government to bend the Constitution towards the cause of freedom and justice. He encouraged voting for men who would use their powers to abolish slavery, thus ensuring that the intentions of the framers of the Constitution, which he believed to be good, could be realized.
Furthermore, Douglass pointed out that one of the requirements for slave states to join the American Union was to put an end to the slave trade within twenty years, indicating that the Constitution looked to the abolition of slavery rather than its perpetuity. He also emphasized that even if certain provisions were made to refer to the African slave trade, they had expired by their own limitation more than fifty years prior to his speech.
Happiness: A Constitutional Right or Misinterpretation?
You may want to see also
The Constitution does not guarantee the right to own slaves
In a speech delivered before the Scottish Anti-Slavery Society in Glasgow, Scotland, on March 26, 1860, Frederick Douglass, a former slave, outlined his views on the American Constitution. In his speech, titled "The Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Anti-Slavery?", Douglass addressed the question of whether the Constitution guarantees the right to own slaves.
Douglass argued that the Constitution does not explicitly guarantee the right to hold property in man. He believed that the way to abolish slavery in America was to vote for men who would use their powers to abolish slavery. Douglass acknowledged that slavery existed in the United States at the time of the Constitution's adoption and that slaveholders took part in its framing. However, he denied that the Constitution guaranteed the right to own slaves.
The Constitution included four clauses that indirectly addressed slavery without using those terms. The first was the Three-Fifths Clause in Article I, Section 2, which stated that slaves were considered less than fully human. Douglass believed that this clause encouraged freedom by giving more political power to free states over slave states. The second clause was the Importation Clause in Article I, Section 9, which prevented Congress from banning the slave trade for 20 years. Douglass argued that this clause looked to the abolition of slavery rather than its perpetuity.
The third clause was the Slave Insurrection Clause in Article I, Section 8, which gave the chief executive the power to suppress insurrections. Douglass argued that this clause was not a defence or guarantee of slavery and that an anti-slavery Congress could use it to put an end to slavery. The fourth clause was the Fugitive Slave Clause in Article IV, Section 2, which provided for the return of fugitive slaves from the North to the South. Douglass noted that this clause made sense in a country where some states were moving towards abolishing slavery.
In conclusion, while slavery was a part of American society at the time of the Constitution's adoption, and slaveholders influenced its creation, Douglass argued that the Constitution itself did not guarantee the right to own slaves. He believed that the Constitution could be interpreted and used to abolish slavery, and that the ultimate goal of the document was to put slavery in the course of ultimate extinction.
God and the US Constitution: A Mentioning Mystery
You may want to see also
The Constitution is anti-slavery because it aimed to end the slave trade
In a speech delivered in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1860, abolitionist Frederick Douglass outlined his views on the American Constitution, specifically addressing the question of whether it is pro-slavery or anti-slavery. While the Constitution has been interpreted in both ways, this response will focus on the argument that it is anti-slavery because it aimed to end the slave trade.
The Constitution of the United States, a written instrument distinct from the American government, does not explicitly mention the word "slave." However, it includes provisions that have been interpreted as protecting slavery, such as the notorious three-fifths clause and the fugitive slave clause. These clauses have been described as the "bricks and mortar of the pro-slavery Constitution."
Despite these clauses, some argue that the Constitution is anti-slavery in nature. One key argument is that the Constitution's compromise on the Atlantic slave trade was a temporary measure that ultimately aimed to end the practice. The compromise, which prohibited Congress from outlawing the slave trade for 20 years, was made to ensure the support of southern delegates for a strong central government. This compromise, it can be argued, was a strategic decision to ensure that a powerful central government could eventually abolish slavery.
Additionally, Douglass himself argued that the Constitution is anti-slavery because it looked to the abolition of slavery rather than its perpetuity. He believed that the intentions of the framers of the Constitution were good, and that the price of bringing slave states into the American Union was to put an end to the slave trade within a certain timeframe. Douglass also suggested that the Constitution could be used as a tool for reform, bending it towards the cause of freedom and justice to abolish slavery through the government rather than over its ruins.
In conclusion, while the Constitution has been interpreted as both pro-slavery and anti-slavery, the argument that it is anti-slavery because it aimed to end the slave trade holds weight. The framers of the Constitution made strategic compromises to ensure a strong central government that could eventually abolish slavery. Douglass's belief in using the Constitution as a tool for reform highlights his interpretation of the Constitution as a document that could be leveraged to end slavery in America.
John Adams' Vision: Amendments for the Constitution
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Douglass' position was reformist, not revolutionary
In a speech delivered in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1860, abolitionist Frederick Douglass outlined his views on the American Constitution and his belief that it was not a pro-slavery document. His position was one of reform, not revolution, as he sought to abolish slavery through the government rather than overthrowing it.
Douglass argued that the Constitution did not guarantee the right to hold property in man, and that the way to abolish slavery was to elect anti-slavery politicians into power. He believed that the Constitution was a written instrument, complete in itself, and that no court, Congress, or President could add or remove words from it. This view contrasted with the British Constitution, which is made up of enactments of Parliament, court decisions, and established government practices.
Furthermore, Douglass pointed out that the Constitution included provisions that could be interpreted as anti-slavery. For example, it required the slave states to end the African slave trade within 20 years of joining the American Union, indicating that the framers of the Constitution intended to abolish slavery rather than perpetuate it. He also argued that the Constitution was anti-slavery because it looked to abolition rather than perpetuity, and because it allowed for the possibility of change and reform.
Douglass's position was that the Constitution could be used to bend to the cause of freedom and justice, just as it had been bent to the purposes of slavery by the slaveholding states. He believed that the freemen of the North had the power to resolve to blot out the crime of slavery, which was a disgrace to the entire nation. By working within the system and electing anti-slavery representatives, Douglass believed that meaningful change towards abolition could be achieved.
In conclusion, Douglass's position was reformist rather than revolutionary because he sought to work within the existing government structure to abolish slavery. He believed that the American Constitution provided a framework for change and that electing anti-slavery politicians into power was the most effective way to bring about an end to slavery in the country.
Religious Freedom: Do Companies Have Constitutional Rights?
You may want to see also
Douglass believed that the intentions of the framers of the Constitution were good
In his 1860 speech, "The Constitution of the United States: Is It Pro-Slavery or Anti-Slavery?", Frederick Douglass outlines his views on the American Constitution and its relationship to slavery. While Douglass acknowledges the influence of slaveholders on the American government, he believes that the intentions of the framers of the Constitution were inherently good, even if their implementation fell short.
Douglass argues that the Constitution is a written instrument that is distinct from the American Government. He highlights the fact that no single entity, be it a court, Congress, or the President, can alter the Constitution's wording. This, in his view, demonstrates the framers' intention to create a stable and consistent framework for the nation.
Furthermore, Douglass suggests that the Constitution can be interpreted as anti-slavery. He points out that one of the conditions for slave states to join the American Union was the eventual abolition of the slave trade. This indicates that the framers recognised the immoral nature of slavery and sought to limit its continuation. Douglass also emphasises the potential for the Constitution to be used as a tool for abolition. By voting anti-slavery men into power, he believes the document can be leveraged to bend towards freedom and justice.
In his speech, Douglass expresses his belief in reform rather than revolution. He advocates for working through the government to abolish slavery, demonstrating his faith in the underlying principles of the Constitution. Douglass's position reflects his understanding that the framers intended to create a flexible and adaptable system that could be shaped by those in power. By encouraging the election of anti-slavery representatives, he aims to harness the Constitution's potential for positive change.
Overall, despite the complex history of slavery's influence on the American government, Douglass maintains his belief in the good intentions of the framers of the Constitution. He sees the document as a powerful tool that, when utilised effectively, can bring about the abolition of slavery and promote freedom and justice for all.
Does the Johnson Case Ad Count as an Offer?
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Douglass' position was one of reform, not revolution. He believed that the American Constitution was distinct from the American Government, and that the Constitution was a written instrument that was complete in itself.
No, Frederick Douglass did not think the American Constitution was pro-slavery. He believed that the way to abolish slavery in America was to vote men into power who would use their power for the abolition of slavery.
Frederick Douglass believed that the American Constitution was anti-slavery because it looked to the abolition of slavery rather than its perpetuity. He also pointed out that the intentions of the framers of the Constitution were good, as they wanted to put an end to the African slave trade.
Frederick Douglass proposed that if slaveholders had ruled the American Government, then anti-slavery men should rule the nation for the next fifty years. He also suggested that the North should use the Constitution to bend to the cause of freedom and justice, resolving to blot out slavery forever.
