Simone Lawson
On July 4, 1854, William Lloyd Garrison, the founder of the New England Anti-Slavery Society, gathered with about two thousand others in Framingham, Massachusetts, to protest against slavery. In a dramatic climax, Garrison burned copies of the Fugitive Slave Law and the United States Constitution. He branded the U.S. Constitution as a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell, and the source and parent of all the other atrocities. This phrase, a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell, has been used by various people to refer to the U.S. Constitution, particularly in the context of slavery and the compromises made during the Constitutional Convention that led to the approval and protection of slavery.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Person who called the Constitution a covenant with death | William Lloyd Garrison |
| Date | July 4, 1854 |
| Place | Framingham, Massachusetts |
| Number of attendees | About two thousand |
| Reason | To demonstrate against slavery |
| Action | Burning the U.S. Constitution |
| Quote | "The Constitution of the United States of America is the source and parent of all other atrocities: 'a covenant with death, and an agreement with Hell.'" |
| Publication | The Liberator |
| Related people | Sojourner Truth, Henry David Thoreau, Wendell Phillips, Francis Jackson Garrison, Paul Finkleman |
| Related events | Fugitive Slave Law, Anthony Burns' forced return, the Compromise of 1850, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the Dred Scott decision |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
William Lloyd Garrison's condemnation of the US Constitution
William Lloyd Garrison was a renowned abolitionist and reformer, who founded the anti-slavery newspaper, The Liberator. He was a non-violent activist, but his condemnation of slavery and those who supported it was uncompromising. Garrison believed that the US Constitution was a "covenant with death and an agreement with hell", a pact with the devil that ought to be immediately discarded.
Garrison's newspaper exposed the corruption and lies of the political system and called upon people to reject all justifications for slavery. He urged his readers to become disciples of Jesus Christ and end the wicked practice. Garrison argued that the Constitution was a pro-slavery document, condemning millions of people to the brutality and dehumanization of slavery. He saw it as a document that justified the oppression of the public by a small group of politically connected elites.
Garrison's views on the Constitution were influenced by the discovery that the Founding Fathers had traded union and white liberty for black slavery. When James Madison's notes from the Constitutional Convention were published in the 1840s, abolitionists who had believed in an anti-slavery interpretation of the Constitution were shocked. Garrison believed that the Constitution was the result of a terrible bargain between freedom and slavery, an "infamous bargain" and an "unholy alliance".
Garrison refused to participate in American electoral politics because doing so meant supporting the pro-slavery Constitution. Instead, he argued for a dissolution of the Union under the slogan "No Union with Slaveholders". He urged the North to secede from the Union and, in 1854, publicly burned the Constitution of the United States.
Senators' Trips Abroad: Are They Constitutional?
You may want to see also
The Fugitive Slave Law and the US Constitution
The US Constitution included a Fugitive Slave Clause, which was agreed to without dissent at the Constitutional Convention. The Fugitive Slave Clause banned free states from freeing fugitives and required them to return fugitives to their owners. This was a significant issue as some slaves would escape to states where slavery was not legal.
The Fugitive Slave Clause was included in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, which abolished slavery in the Territory north and west of the Ohio River. However, the Ordinance also provided for the return of fugitive slaves who escaped there. The Clause was also included in the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793, which clarified the processes by which enslavers could claim their "property" and was designed to balance the competing interests of free and slave states. The enforcement provisions of this Act were strengthened as part of the Compromise of 1850.
The Supreme Court interpreted the Fugitive Slave Clause as granting the owner of an enslaved person the right to seize and repossess them in another state, as the local laws of their own state granted to them. State laws that penalized such a seizure were deemed unconstitutional.
The Fugitive Slave Clause and the Fugitive Slave Act were deeply unpopular with abolitionists. In 1854, noted abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison burned copies of the Fugitive Slave Law and the US Constitution, calling the latter "the source and parent of all the other atrocities—'a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell.'". Garrison was shocked by the publication of James Madison's notes from the Constitutional Convention in the early 1840s, which revealed that the Founding Fathers had prioritised union and white liberty over black slavery.
Our Forfathers' Constitution: A Legacy of Sacrifice
You may want to see also
The Founding Fathers and slavery
The United States Constitution, the nation's founding document, has been branded as "a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell" by noted abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison. In a dramatic act of defiance, Garrison burned copies of the Fugitive Slave Law and the United States Constitution, referring to it as "the source and parent of all the other atrocities".
Garrison's actions and words highlight the complex and contradictory legacy of the Founding Fathers regarding slavery. On the one hand, many of the Founding Fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin, acknowledged that slavery violated the core American Revolutionary ideal of liberty and expressed a desire to see it abolished. Jefferson, in his initial draft of the Declaration of Independence, even condemned the injustice of the slave trade and, by implication, slavery itself.
However, their simultaneous commitment to private property rights, principles of limited government, and intersectional harmony prevented them from taking bolder action against slavery. The considerable investment of Southern Founders in slave-based staple agriculture, combined with deep-seated racial prejudice, posed significant obstacles to emancipation. The Founding Fathers also prioritised maintaining the unity of the newly formed United States, which meant diffusing sectional tensions over slavery and making compromises.
As a result, the Constitution included several clauses that directly and indirectly protected slavery. For example, the three-fifths clause granted slave-holding states the right to count three-fifths of their slave population when apportioning the number of a state's representatives. Additionally, the domestic insurrections clause empowered Congress to call upon the militia to suppress insurrections, including slave rebellions. The prohibition on taxing exports prevented an indirect tax on slavery by taxing the staple products of slave labour.
While some Founding Fathers, like Gouverneur Morris, vocally opposed slavery, calling it "the curse of heaven on the States where it prevailed", others, like Thomas Jefferson, failed to translate their anti-slavery sentiments into concrete actions. Jefferson, despite recognising the evils of slavery, never personally freed his slaves and even profited from the institution. He chose to pass the burden of abolition to future generations, believing that the young men of the next generation would be better equipped to bring about an end to slavery.
Understanding AWS Regions and Their Availability Zones
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Compromise of 1850 and its pro-slavery forces
The Compromise of 1850 was a series of five bills passed in Congress that addressed boundary issues, the status of territories, and the issue of slavery. The compromise was proposed by Senator Henry Clay, a nationalist who sought to settle most of the pressing issues before Congress. The Compromise of 1850 played a major role in postponing the Civil War. However, it also included a more stringent Fugitive Slave Law, which caused deep offence among Northerners.
The Compromise of 1850 was a response to the tumult of the time, which included violent debates in Congress, fistfights between Northerners and Southerners, and Southern representatives brandishing loaded revolvers and talking of secession. The Compromise addressed issues arising from the Mexican-American War and the subsequent acquisition of new territories, including California, New Mexico, and Utah. These territories did not have slavery, and there were strongly conflicting opinions on whether they should. Southerners urged that all the lands acquired from Mexico should be open to slaveholders, while Northerners believed that if not allowed to spread, slavery would decline and die.
The Compromise of 1850 included a ban on the slave trade in Washington, D.C., but not on slave ownership. This caused outrage among Southerners in Congress, who saw it as a concession to abolitionists. However, they were outvoted, and the passage of the Compromise caused celebrations in Washington and elsewhere, with people shouting, "The Union is saved!" President Fillmore described the Compromise as a "final settlement" of sectional issues.
The Compromise of 1850 also addressed boundary issues, including Texas's claim to all former Mexican territory north and east of the Rio Grande. These issues had prevented the creation of organised territorial governments for the land acquired in the Mexican-American War. The Compromise allowed for the admission of California as a free state, which offended many Southerners who saw it as a victory for the Free Soil Party.
The Compromise of 1850 was opposed by pro-slavery forces, including President Zachary Taylor and John C. Calhoun, a Southern sectionalist who warned of imminent disaster if the balance between North and South was not maintained. Calhoun, who died shortly after delivering his final speech, was a key figure in the debates over the Compromise, and his death left a triumvirate broken, with Clay and Webster seeking compromise.
Constitutional Commissions: Their Roles and Relevance
You may want to see also
The US Constitution and Latter-day Saint circles
In the United States, the Constitution has been a subject of much debate and discussion, with varying interpretations and beliefs surrounding its creation and purpose. One notable perspective on the Constitution is that of William Lloyd Garrison, a prominent abolitionist. Garrison famously branded the Constitution as "a covenant with death and an agreement with hell," reflecting his view that it perpetuated and justified the atrocity of slavery.
In Latter-day Saint circles, there is a unique perspective on the US Constitution. Some Latter-day Saints believe that the Constitution is "divinely inspired." This belief is based on the idea that God inspired the Founding Fathers in their efforts to create a free country and establish a system of government rooted in the equality and unalienable rights of all people. They believe that the Constitution was established by God "for the rights and protection of all flesh" (Doctrine and Covenants 101:77). This interpretation suggests that the Constitution should be upheld and defended as a divinely ordained foundation of government.
However, it is important to note that this belief in the divine inspiration of the Constitution is not official Church doctrine. While it may reflect the opinions of many Latter-day Saints, it is not a universally held view within the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The belief in divine inspiration can lead to a sense of responsibility among Latter-day Saints to defend the Constitution and the principles of constitutionalism. This includes the belief in the importance of individual freedom and opposition to oppressive government laws, as they view God's law as supreme to man's laws.
The interpretation of the Constitution as "a covenant with death" by William Lloyd Garrison stems from his perspective on slavery. Garrison saw the Constitution as a source that enabled and perpetuated the atrocities of slavery, including brutality, torture, and dehumanization. By burning copies of the Constitution, Garrison and other abolitionists expressed their strong condemnation of slavery and their belief that the Constitution failed to protect the freedom and rights of all people.
In summary, the US Constitution has been interpreted in diverse ways by different groups in American society. Latter-day Saints may view the Constitution as divinely inspired, reflecting their belief in God's role in establishing a free nation. At the same time, critics like Garrison highlighted the Constitution's failure to prevent or abolish slavery, branding it as a "covenant with death." These contrasting perspectives showcase the complex and evolving nature of interpretations of the US Constitution throughout history.
Famous Quotes: US Constitution
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
William Lloyd Garrison called the U.S. Constitution "a covenant with death, and an agreement with hell".
William Lloyd Garrison was an abolitionist. He called the constitution a covenant with death because he believed it protected slavery.
William Lloyd Garrison burned a copy of the constitution in a dramatic demonstration against slavery.
