The journalism and personal writings of the great American abolitionist and reformer Frederick Douglass
645 17 16MB
English Pages 816 [869] Year 2022
THE FREDERICK DOUGLASS PAPERS Series Four: Journalism and Other Writings
Volume 1
Y7870-Douglass.indb i
9/1/21 4:16 PM
Frederick Douglass, c. 1859. Courtesy of the National Parks Service, Frederick Douglass National Historic Site, Washington, D.C. FRDO-3909.
Y7870-Douglass.indb ii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE FREDERICK DOUGLASS PAPERS Series Four: Journalism and Other Writings Volume 1
John R. McKivigan, Editor Jeffery A. Duvall, L. Diane Barnes, Associate Editors Rebecca A. Pattillo, Lauren Zachary, Mark G. Furnish, Angela White, Assistant Editors Mark W. Emerson, James A. Hanna, Robert S. Levine, Alex Smith, John W. Stauffer, Textual Editors Eammon P. Brandon, Kate Burzlaff, Claire Christoff, Peter Harrah, Austen Hurt, Heather L. Kaufman, Kathryn Staublin, Lynette Taylor, Research Assistants
Yale University Press
Y7870-Douglass.indb iii
New Haven and London
9/1/21 4:16 PM
Published with assistance from The National Historical Publications and Records Commission.
Published with assistance from the Frank M. Turner Publication Fund. Copyright © 2021 by Yale University. All rights reserved. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, including illustrations, in any form (beyond that copying permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law and except by reviewers for the public press), without written permission from the publishers. Yale University Press books may be purchased in quantity for educational, business, or promotional use. For information, please e-mail [email protected] (U.S. office) or [email protected] (U.K. office). Set in 11.2/13 Times LT Std Roman type by Newgen North America. Printed in the United States of America. Library of Congress Control Number: 2020950315 ISBN 978-0-300-24681-0 (hardcover : alk. paper) A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper). 10 9
Y7870-Douglass.indb iv
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
9/1/21 4:16 PM
EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD
Mary F. Berry Richard J. M. Blackett David W. Blight Robert Hall Stanley Harrold Nancy A. Hewitt Howard R. Lamar Robert S. Levine John Stauffer
Y7870-Douglass.indb v
9/1/21 4:16 PM
This page intentionally left blank
Contents
Acknowledgments Abbreviations Introduction to Series Four Introduction to Volume One Editorial Method Timeline of Douglass’s Life Illustrations
xi xiii xv xlix liii lix lxxv
WRITINGS I was born a slave (c. 1842) Niagara (1843) God Be Thanked! (1845) The Folly of Our Opponents (1845) Bibles for the Slaves (1848) North Star Circular (1849) A note of thanks (1852) The Heroic Slave (1853) Address of the Colored National Convention to the People of the United States (1853) The Haytian Emigration Movement (1861) The Slave’s Appeal to Great Britain (1862) A Pertinent Question (1865) Reconstruction (1866) An Appeal to Congress for Impartial Suffrage (1867) Salmon P. Chase (1868) The Work before Us (1868) Santo Domingo Travel Diary (1871) U.S. Grant and the Colored People (1872) To the Editor of the New York Herald (1874) Gen. O. O. Howard Again Acquitted (1874) To the Depositors of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company (1874) The Emancipated Man Wants Knowledge (1875)
1 2 3 5 11 15 17 19 62 83 90 102 104 113 127 134 144 163 188 191 196 201
vii
Y7870-Douglass.indb vii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
viii
The Colored Exodus (1879) Negroes, Mongols and Hebrews (1880) The Color Line (1881) My Escape from Slavery (1881) Abolish the Vice President (c. 1882) To the Colored Men of the United States (1883) Civil Rights and Judge Harlan (1883) The Condition of the Freedmen (1883) The Future of the Negro Race (1884) The Democratic Return to Power—Its Effect? (1885) Has America Need of a Westminster Abbey? (1885) American Authors on International Copyright (1886) The Future of the Colored Race (1886) Thoughts and Recollections of a Tour in Ireland (1886) Reminiscences of Abraham Lincoln (1886) European/African Travel Diary (1886–87) Frederick Douglass in Paris (1887) Dear Joe (1887) Henry Ward Beecher (1887) The Great Agitation (1889) The Cause of the Republican Defeat (1890) To Joe Douglass from Grandpa (1891) Haiti and the United States: Inside History of the Negotiations for the Môle St. Nicolas. Part I (1891) Haiti and the United States: Inside History of the Negotiations for the Môle St. Nicolas. Part II (1891) The Afro-American Press, and Its Editors: Opinion of Hon. Frederick Douglass (1891) The Afro-American Press, and Its Editors: Review (1891) Slavery (1891) Unsolicited Opinions of Anti-Caste: Opinions of Coloured Americans (1892) President Harrison and Our Colored Citizens (1892) Lynch Law in the South (1892) Protection Demanded (1892) The Negro in the Present Campaign (1892) Douglass on the Late Election (1892) No Royal Road to Progress for the Negro (1892) Inauguration of the World’s Columbian Exposition (1893)
Y7870-Douglass.indb viii
CONTENTS
203 208 211 230 254 256 264 270 281 287 293 296 298 303 321 332 407 426 430 433 458 467 468 479 489 491 493 532 533 541 553 559 575 581 584
9/1/21 4:16 PM
CONTENTS
How to Secure Equal Rights (1893) The Reason Why the Colored American Is Not in the World’s Columbian Exposition: Introduction (1893) Douglass, Frederick (1895) Liberia (1895) What I Found at the Northampton Association (1895) The Story of the Hutchinsons: Introduction (1896) Toussaint L’Ouverture: An Estimate by a Fellow-African (1903) Undated Poems Textual Notes on The Heroic Slave Index
Y7870-Douglass.indb ix
ix
590 592 602 613 621 631 636 648 655 663
9/1/21 4:16 PM
This page intentionally left blank
Acknowledgments
Producing the first volume of the Journalism and Other Writings was a multiyear endeavor. Editorial work began at Yale University in the mid1970s under the direction of the project’s first editor, John W. Blassingame. In the decades that followed, many staff members as well as numerous individuals and institutions provided work that is incorporated into this volume. We apologize if we fail in these brief acknowledgments to thank any of them as fully as he or she deserves. Work on collecting the documents reproduced in this volume began at Yale and was continued at the Douglass Papers’ second institutional home, West Virginia University, and culminated at Indiana University– Purdue University at Indianapolis (IUPUI), where the Douglass Papers relocated in the summer of 1998. The libraries at all three institutions assisted us significantly. Staff members at other repositories and archives generously located many of the documents included here. At IUPUI, the School of Liberal Arts and the Departments of History and English deserve thanks for their institutional support. A special debt is owed the following people at IUPUI for their assistance: Robert Barrows, Didier Gondola, Eric Hamilton, Megan Lizarme, Edith Millikan, David Pfeifer, Rob Rebein, Martha Rujuwa, Thomas Upton, and Marianne Wokeck. Gratitude is also due Timothy Connelly, Lucy Barber, and Darrell Meadows from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission, along with the staff of the National Endowment for the Humanities, for supplying valuable advice to the Douglass Papers over the years. Professor Jonathan R. Eller, senior textual editor of the Institute for American Thought at IUPUI, helped significantly in finalizing our textualediting procedures. Special assistance was supplied by A. J. Aiseirithe in our document transcription and verification processes. Finally, we would like to thank Sarah Miller, our editor at Yale University Press, for her advice and encouragement.
xi
Y7870-Douglass.indb xi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
This page intentionally left blank
Abbreviations
Whenever possible, these abbreviations follow the standard Library of Congress symbols for libraries and other repositories. Additional abbreviations of other repositories and publications follow the forms established by earlier series of the Douglass Papers, provided they appear three or more times in this volume; all abbreviations for publications appear in earlier series. ACAB AHR ANB ASB BDUSC ChR DAB DANB DLC DM DNA DNB EAA EAAH
FD FDP JNH Lib. MdAA MdTCH MHiS MVHR NAR
Appleton’s Cyclopaedia of American Biography American Historical Review American National Biography (online) Anti-Slavery Bugle Biographical Directory of the United States Congress, 1774–Present (online) Philadelphia Christian Recorder Dictionary of American Biography Dictionary of American Negro Biography Library of Congress Douglass’ Monthly National Archives The Dictionary of National Biography Encyclopedia of Antislavery and Abolition Encyclopedia of African American History, 1619–1895: From the Colonial Period to the Age of Frederick Douglass Frederick Douglass Frederick Douglass’ Paper Journal of Negro History Liberator Hall of Records Commission, Annapolis, Md. Talbot County, Maryland, Courthouse Massachusetts Historical Society Mississippi Valley Historical Review / Journal of American History North American Review xiii
Y7870-Douglass.indb xiii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xiv
NASS NAW NCAB NEQ NHB NNE NRU NS OR
Y7870-Douglass.indb xiv
ABBREVIATIONS
National Anti-Slavery Standard Notable American Women, 1607–1950: A Biographical Dictionary National Cyclopaedia of American Biography New England Quarterly Negro History Bulletin New National Era University of Rochester North Star The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies
9/1/21 4:16 PM
Introduction to Series Four John R. McKivigan The Frederick Douglass Papers was founded in 1973, following consultation between officers of the National Historical Publications and Records Commission and Professor John W. Blassingame of Yale University. Blassingame agreed to become the project’s first director and assembled a small staff to undertake the editing of the voluminous papers of the most influential African American of the nineteenth century. Early in the Douglass Papers’ history, Blassingame made the fateful decision to divide the project’s swelling collection of documents into four series for publication, rather than organizing and publishing all documents chronologically. Consequently, the project’s staff has located, edited, and published with Yale University Press a five-volume series of Douglass’s Speeches, Debates, and Interviews; a three-volume series of his Autobiographical Writings; and the first two of a contemplated five volumes in the Correspondence series. The projected contents, size, and even title of the fourth and final series of the Frederick Douglass Papers have changed many times since 1973. The series was originally envisioned as a two-volume selection of the editorials Douglass wrote for his four periodicals, and it was planned as the second series in the overall edition. In the mid-1980s, a site-visit team from the National Endowment for the Humanities, a financial supporter of the project in its early decades, expressed a desire that the editors next produce editions of Douglass’s three autobiographies in accordance with modern textual-editing standards. Accepting this advice, the Douglass Papers staff rearranged its publication plans following production of the fifth and final volume of the Speeches series in 1992. In the following two decades, as the project completed the Autobiographical Writings series and launched work on the Correspondence series, the Douglass Papers staff continued to accumulate written texts by Douglass that did not belong in the other series. While Douglass wrote all these documents, some had not been, and had never intended to be, published. Others had been published not in Douglass’s newspapers, but in periodicals edited by others. A few, such as Douglass’s 1853 novella The Heroic Slave and entries written for three encyclopedias, were in categories all their own. Staff members developed the practice of referring to this miscellaneous xv
Y7870-Douglass.indb xv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xvi
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
collection of documents, along with the editorials in Douglass’s newspapers, as the “Other” series. Since the time has finally arrived for the publication of this diverse body of Douglass’s works, the project has chosen the label Journalism and Other Writings for the series. It will be divided into two volumes. The first contains Douglass’s journalism published in periodicals other than his own, his novella, two unpublished travel diaries, a few poems unquestionably attributable to him, an assortment of printed circulars, jointly authored convention addresses, book introductions, a book review, and his encyclopedia entries. The second volume in the series will contain a highly selective sampling of the editorials that Douglass wrote for his own publications: the North Star (1847–51); Frederick Douglass’ Paper (1851–60); the Douglass Monthly (1859–63); and the New National Era (1870–72).1 Publication of this series will help reshape the modern appreciation of Frederick Douglass, who is best remembered in history as an autobiographer of the slave experience and as one of the leading orators on behalf of abolition, civil rights, women’s rights, and other reform causes. Douglass’s pioneering contributions to African American literature in both fiction and nonfiction, as demonstrated by the documents in this new series, are not as well known but are arguably an equivalent achievement. Keenly aware of the importance of these branches of his writing, Douglass devoted considerable effort to sharpening his writing skills as a social commentator and critic. The iconic story of Douglass’s acquisition of reading skills has been recounted innumerable times, including in each of his autobiographies. Douglass’s attainment and perfection of writing skills, however, do not receive a similar level of attention in his personal works, nor have they been widely studied by scholars.2 The examples of Douglass’s writing over five decades, reproduced in this two-volume series, will provide scholars and the general public with the tools to study and appreciate yet another of Douglass’s many unprecedented intellectual achievements. Douglass’s introduction to public writing began shortly after his engagement as a lecturer by the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society in 1841. The following year, he sent a letter to William Lloyd Garrison, the leader of that organization, who published it in his weekly Boston Liberator. Douglass described his lecturing tours throughout the state in the company of fellow black abolitionist Charles Lenox Remond to rally public support for the arrested fugitive slave George Latimer. Douglass con-
Y7870-Douglass.indb xvi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xvii
cludes his report with this apology to Garrison’s readers: “I can’t write to much advantage, having never had a day’s schooling in my life, nor have I ever ventured to give publicity to any of my scribbling before; nor would I now, but for my peculiar circumstance.”3 For the next several years, Douglass regularly dispatched reports of his lecturing to the Liberator and to other newspapers affiliated with the Garrisonian abolitionists. Two years later, he still professed discomfort at public writing when reporting to James Miller McKim, editor of the Pennsylvania Freeman, on his recent lecturing in that state: “Though quite unaccustomed to write anything for the public eye, and in many instances quite unwilling to do so, in the present case, I cannot content myself to take leave of you . . . without dropping you a very hasty, and of course very imperfect, sketch of the Anti-Slavery meetings . . . it was my pleasure to attend.”4 Douglass’s hesitancy to write for the public dissipated quickly. The publication of his first autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, in late May 1845, had dramatic consequences for his emerging journalism. Feeling it unsafe to remain in Massachusetts with his identity as a fugitive slave exposed, Douglass made arrangements for a speaking tour of the British Isles and departed that August. During that trip, which lasted almost two years, Douglass corresponded regularly with Garrison in a series of public letters intended for the Liberator’s readers. These letters were sent by prior arrangement, but as Douglass revealed, he still felt ill prepared to act as a foreign correspondent: “I promised, on leaving America, to keep you informed of my proceedings whilst I remained abroad. I sometimes fear I shall be compelled to break my promise, if by keeping it is meant writing letters to you fit for publication.”5 In the first of these, Douglass makes it clear that his letters are intended to advance abolitionism through journalism: “There are a number of things about which I should like to write, aside from those immediately connected with our cause; but of this I must deny myself,—at least under the present circumstances. Sentimental letter-writing must give way, when its claims are urged against facts necessary to the advancement of our cause, and the destruction of slavery.”6 The pace of Douglass’s lecturing activities on behalf of the antislavery campaign became so great that he had to reduce the frequency of these dispatches to the Liberator, indicating that most abolitionists, including Douglass himself, found more value in his abilities as a speaker than as a journalist.7 Two acts of assistance from British admirers had enormous impact on Douglass’s subsequent development as a writer. In late 1846, British
Y7870-Douglass.indb xvii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xviii
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
abolitionist friends raised $700 and successfully negotiated Douglass’s purchase from his Maryland slave owner.8 Now safe from the prospect of capture and reenslavement, Douglass made plans to return to the United States. Before his departure, the British abolitionist community raised another $2,175 as a testimonial to him. The signers of the published testimonial indicated that the funds had been subscribed “for the purpose of presenting MR. FREDERICK DOUGLASS with a Steam printing Press,” and pronounced him “particularly fitted to engage in the editorship of a paper.”9 Eager to use these funds, Douglass later recalled his feelings about starting an antislavery newspaper of his own: “In imagination I already saw myself wielding my pen as well as my voice in the great work of renovating the public mind, and building up a public sentiment, which should send slavery to the grave.”10 In his second autobiography, My Bondage and My Freedom, Douglass recalled telling his British supporters that he would use his newspaper to help dispel American racism: “In my judgment, a tolerably well conducted press, in the hands of persons of the despised race, by calling out the mental energies of the race itself; by making them acquainted with their own latent powers; by enkindling among them the hope that for them there is a future; by combining and reflecting their talents—would prove a most powerful means of removing prejudice, and of awakening an interest in them.”11 Douglass’s desire to launch his own newspaper, however, was not seconded by his white abolitionist friends when he returned home. Douglass listed the many practical objections to his proposal that he received from Garrison, Wendell Phillips, and others upon returning to the United States: “First, the paper was not needed; secondly, it would interfere with my usefulness as a lecturer; thirdly, I was better fitted to speak than to write; fourthly, the paper could not succeed.” The Garrisonians warned Douglass that other, better-educated blacks had tried and failed to sustain a weekly newspaper. Douglass worried that he “should but add another to the list of failures, and thus contribute another proof of the mental and moral deficiencies of my race. Very much was said to me in respect to my imperfect literary requirements, I felt to be most painfully true.”12 Disappointed at the Garrisonians’ lack of faith in his abilities, Douglass reluctantly agreed to undertake a speaking tour of the western states in the company of Garrison and Stephen S. Foster in the summer of 1847. Perhaps to assuage his feelings, the Garrisonian leadership persuaded Douglass to accept a regular correspondent’s position with the National Anti-Slavery Standard, edited by Sydney H. Gay. Douglass requested pay-
Y7870-Douglass.indb xviii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xix
ment of $2.50 per column, which the Garrisonians agreed to pay rather than risk him jumping to another newspaper.13 Douglass also explored forming a partnership with the black abolitionists Thomas Van Rensselaer and Willis A. Hodges in editing the latter’s Ram’s Horn, published in New York City. Although Douglass contributed a few letters to the struggling Ram’s Horn, he did not make any financial arrangement with that newspaper before its demise in 1848.14 A loyal Garrisonian, Douglass expanded his journalistic portfolio by preparing articles for the gift book of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society, the Liberty Bell. Launched in 1839 and edited by Garrison’s close associate Maria Weston Chapman, the Liberty Bell belonged to a genre of publications issued by religious and reform organizations to raise money and awareness for their causes. Proceeds from the Liberty Bell helped support publication of the official Garrisonian newspaper, the New York National Anti-Slavery Standard, and the issuance of abolitionist pamphlets. Contributors to Chapman’s publication included leading Garrisonian abolitionists as well as such sympathetic literary figures as John Greenleaf Whittier, Margaret Fuller, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Harriet Martineau, and Ralph Waldo Emerson.15 Douglass produced an article for the 1845 Liberty Bell issue, rejoicing in the growing influence of the abolitionists. Chapman informs readers that she had received from Douglass a disclaimer of his ability to write anything worth publishing, which had, by then, become somewhat perfunctory: “It [the article] was intended for a place in the Liberty Bell, but my literary advantages have been so limited, that I am ill prepared to decide what is, and what is not, appropriate for such a collection. I looked exceedingly strange in my own eyes, as I sat writing. The thought of writing for a book!—and only six years since a fugitive from a Southern cornfield—caused a singular jingle in my mind.”16 In his second contribution to the Liberty Bell, three years later, there are no such expressions of self-doubt, since Douglass had already embarked on editing his own newspaper and was producing a steady stream of editorial materials weekly. While Douglass was traveling in Garrison’s company in the late summer of 1847, his desire to own and manage a newspaper gradually returned. In Pittsburgh, Douglass met Martin R. Delany, the son of a free black mother and slave father from western Virginia, who edited the Mystery, a sporadically issued periodical.17 Douglass also met Samuel Brooke, a major contributor to the financially struggling publication of western Garrisonians, the Anti-Slavery Bugle, based in Salem, Ohio. The three
Y7870-Douglass.indb xix
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xx
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
discussed having Douglass launch an abolitionist newspaper in Cleveland, Ohio, that would absorb both the Mystery and the Anti-Slavery Bugle, but the Garrisonians apparently became suspicious of such a plan and reorganized the Anti-Slavery Bugle in order to assert firmer control.18 Soon after, Garrison fell seriously ill on the western states tour, forcing Douglass to leave him behind. While Garrison stayed with friends in Cleveland to recuperate, Douglass finished the September speaking engagements on his own in upstate New York.19 Douglass also attended the “National Convention of Colored People and Their Friends,” held in Troy on 6–9 October. This convention debated the formation of a national black press. Douglass opposed the idea, warning that it would provoke undesirable public infighting among black leaders hoping to dominate such a newspaper. When the convention ultimately voted to support such a plan, Douglass abstained.20 He would become a regular figure at similar national black conventions in later decades. For example, in 1853 at the “National convention of the free people” that met in Rochester, New York, he led the committee that wrote the official address to the American public.21 Douglass’s frequent lecturing in upstate New York had convinced him that the region would make a congenial home for his contemplated newspaper. In late October 1847 he wrote to Amy Post, a Quaker active in Garrisonian abolitionism, informing her that he had selected Rochester, where she lived, as the base for his new periodical and was purchasing the necessary type and other equipment. Douglass explained that he hoped to have the first issue out the following month, and since “any delay can only do the enterprise harm, I have therefore resolved to commence at once.”22 Douglass soon made his decision public and announced in the AntiSlavery Bugle that he would be publishing a weekly newspaper to “attack slavery in all of its forms and aspects—advocate Universal Emancipation—exalt the standard of public morality—promote the moral and intellectual improvement of Coloured people—and hasten the day of Freedom to the three millions of our enslaved countrymen.”23 As a clear allusion to the Underground Railroad, the new paper would carry the name the North Star, Douglass explained: “Of all the stars in this ‘brave, old, overhanging sky,’ The North Star is our choice. To thousands now free in the British dominions it has been the Star of Freedom. To millions, now in our boasted land of liberty, it is the Star of Hope.”24 Unable to dissuade Douglass from undertaking this venture, the Garrisonian press publicly applauded Douglass’s editorial venture. The Na-
Y7870-Douglass.indb xx
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxi
tional Anti-Slavery Standard and the Liberator both welcomed Douglass to the editorial field, the latter even graciously observing that the quality of the inaugural issue “is another proof of his genius and is worthy of especial praise.”25 Privately, however, Garrison viewed Douglass’s assertive act as a betrayal. While on their joint western tour, Douglass had not informed Garrison of his plans, causing the Boston editor to complain to his wife: “Such conduct grieves me to the heart. His conduct . . . has been impulsive, inconsiderate, and highly inconsistent . . . Strange want of forecast and judgment!”26 Many historians have traced the beginning of the estrangement between Douglass and his white Garrisonian allies to the ill will and suspicion caused by Douglass’s secretive manner in arranging the launch of the North Star. They also viewed it as an important expression of Douglass’s desire for greater independence from the oversight of his white mentors.27 Using the funds from his British supporters, Douglass purchased an expensive printing press for the North Star in late November 1847 and rented office space in the Talman Building at 25 Buffalo Street in Rochester. The first issue of the new paper was published on 3 December 1847. In that issue, Douglass stated the paper’s mission: “The object of the North Star will be to attack Slavery in all of its forms and aspects; advocate Universal Emancipation; exalt the standard of Public Morality; promote the moral and intellectual improvement of the Colored People; and hasten the day of FREEDOM to the Three Millions of our Enslaved Fellow Country.”28 On the North Star’s masthead, Douglass printed the motto: “Right is of no sex—Truth is of no color—God is the father of us all, and all we are brethren.”29 On a more practical note, John Dick, whom Douglass hired as his printer, soon concluded that the press was insufficient for printing newspapers in bulk; thus, Douglass arranged to have future issues printed by William Clough, whose office was just one floor above his own in the Talman Building.30 After that somewhat inauspicious beginning, Douglass settled into the routine of turning out a four-page weekly newspaper. This was not an easy task—besides writing regularly for the paper, Douglass was beset with significant financial problems. In 1848, the paper had only 700 subscribers to support production costs of fifty-five to sixty dollars a week.31 The money wasted on the original printing press had drained the nest egg provided by his British friends. Before long, Douglass found it essential that he travel and speak regularly to seek funds for the North Star. To keep
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xxii
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
the newspaper afloat, Douglass even mortgaged the home he had recently purchased in Rochester, where he had resettled his growing family from Lynn, Massachusetts.32 Douglass also had to respond to criticism that the existence of black newspapers tacitly promoted the separation of the races. In an early editorial, he argued: So far from the truth is the notion that colored newspapers are serving to keep up that cruel distinction, the want of them is the main cause of its continuance. . . . The white man is only superior to the black man, when he outstrips him in the race of improvement; and the black man is only inferior, when he proves himself incapable of doing just what is done by his white brother. In order to remove this odious distinction, we must do just what white men do. It must be no longer white lawyer, and black woodsawyer,—white editor, and black street cleaner: it must be no longer white, intelligent, and black, ignorant; but we must take our stand side by side with our white fellow countrymen, in all the trades, arts, profession and callings of the day.33 In the North Star’s early months, Douglass had the assistance of Delany as an itinerant associate editor who regularly contributed reports of his travels among Northern free black communities.34 Although the two men developed bitter ideological differences over the emigration issue in the mid-1850s, in the early years of the North Star, Delany and Douglass shared a commitment to combatting racial discrimination and promoting black elevation. The best scholar of the Douglass-Delany editorial collaboration, Robert Levine, concluded that it was not ideological disputes but the “relatively undramatic practical and personal reasons” of Delany’s desire for greater financial security through a return to his medical studies that led him to depart the North Star. If there was an underlying cause, Levine suspects that rivalry for leadership in the Northern free black community was the most likely factor.35 William C. Nell, a Boston-born free black, soon joined the newspaper’s small staff as “publisher” and helped with both the typesetting and the editorial writing. Nell departed the North Star in mid-1848 but remained in Rochester, and on several subsequent occasions, he helped manage the office during Douglass’s absences. Nell departed for good in 1851 when Douglass broke with the Garrisonians.36 The North Star’s printer, the Englishman John Dick, occasionally contributed editorial writings to the newspaper, too. Douglass praised Dick for his “admirable taste and discriminating judgement
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxiii
in selecting material for [the North Star’s] columns.”37 With such help at hand, Douglass felt it possible to make extended speaking tours to solicit the subscribers and contributions required for his young newspaper’s survival. No one provided Douglass more steadfast assistance in both the financial and the editorial operation of the North Star than Julia Griffiths, a British abolitionist who had helped raise the original testimonial to support Douglass as a journalist. In 1848, Douglass had revealed the precarious state of his paper’s finances in a letter to Griffiths, but argued that “ ‘the North Star’ must [be] sustained. It has alredy accomplished something. It has taken a respectable stand among (at least) American newspapers—and in a measure demonstrated the slave’s capacity for higher achievements. It has also impressed the colored people themselves, that they are destined [for] higher attainments—even in this country than now enjoy. This is very little to have accomplished but is some[thing].”38 Griffiths swiftly responded to this plea for help. In the company of her sister, she arrived in the United States in May 1849 and set to work to assist Douglass in improving the financial state of the money-losing North Star. With her assistance, Douglass was able to retain editorial control of the North Star when local Garrisonian abolitionists attempted to assume its management in exchange for financial backing.39 Griffiths undertook a number of fund-raising ventures to aid the newspaper, including organizing local antislavery sewing circles and conducting an annual fair. She also solicited money from New York abolitionists, most of whom were not affiliated with the Garrisonians but rather worked for antislavery advances through religious or political institutions.40 The most important of these was wealthy real estate developer Gerrit Smith, who struggled to keep the young Liberty party in the field. Thanks to Griffiths’s dedicated labor in seeking support from these groups, the financial condition of the North Star stabilized. Although he had the assistance of a few able associates, the bulk of the editorial writing in the North Star fell to Douglass. Each week, he diligently prepared an average of four editorials, ranging from a few dozen words to a thousand or more, on a vast array of subjects. Some editorials were in the form of reports about his recent travels to lecture against slavery and recruit readers for the North Star.41 Douglass also published “open letters” as part of his disputes with proslavery politicians or ministers or to assail his former slave master, Thomas Auld.42 Although Douglass had relocated far from the East Coast strongholds of the Garrisonians, his
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxiii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xxiv
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
editorials initially treated the competing political parties with his mentor’s vehement disdain.43 But in the summer of 1848, Douglass was impressed by the upsurge of Northern support for the newly formed Free Soil party, which opposed slavery’s westward expansion. Though the North Star announced that its editor would stand by Garrisonian nonvoting principles, Douglass advised those of his readers who chose to vote to support the Free Soil ticket.44 Douglass also used the columns of the North Star to support other reform causes. Even before he attended the pioneering women’s rights convention in Seneca Falls, New York, Douglass had editorialized in the North Star for the property rights of married women.45 Douglass also used his editorial columns to campaign on behalf of the fundamental civil rights of Northern free blacks. As early as 1849, he proposed formation of a “National League” for “the elevation and improvement of the free colored people of the United States.”46 As Waldo E. Martin observed about Douglass, the demands of producing weekly editorial commentary on a wide variety of contemporary topics were “an indispensable part of his intellectual development.”47 Douglass was forced to educate himself on a vast range of topics, to think out his own opinions, and to express them persuasively in writing. The power of his editorial platform brought Douglass to the forefront of antebellum free black leadership. James McCune Smith, a friend and black physician in New York City, observed this process in Douglass: “I have read his paper very carefully and find phase after phase develop itself as regularly as one newly born among us. The Church question, the school question, separate institutions, are questions that he enters upon and argues about as our weary but active young men thought about and argued about years ago, when we had Literary Societies.”48 Smith predicted that through Douglass’s labors of developing a distinct editorial voice, he was strengthening his identity as an African American and pulling away from his white Garrisonian mentors.49 Douglass used his position as editor of the largest-circulation African American newspaper to solidify his influence over that community.50 Douglass’s principal rival in the early 1850s was Delany, the former associate editor of the North Star and an early proponent of black nationalism and emigration to Africa. The focus of their disagreements in the early 1850s centered on advocacy for African American emigration to Africa or some other, less racist environment. The debate displayed very different attitudes regarding whether Northern whites would ever treat blacks as equals, with Douglass remaining more hopeful than Delany. Robert
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxiv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxv
Levine observed that Douglass shrewdly chose to combat the challenge from the emigrationist movement by minimizing publicity for its meetings and pamphlets in his newspaper.51 Despite the strenuous efforts of Douglass and his associates, the North Star was still not solvent in the early 1850s. It was this perplexing problem, perhaps, that forced Douglass to reexamine his antislavery alliances. Upstate New York was the center of strength for the small band of Liberty party supporters, led by Gerrit Smith, who had refused to merge with the Free Soil party in 1848. This faction distinguished itself from both the Free Soilers and the Garrisonians by asserting that the U.S. Constitution empowered the federal government to abolish slavery. Smith had courted Douglass since his arrival in Rochester52 and regularly sent him literature contending that the Constitution was inherently antislavery. North Star editorials document Douglass’s gradual movement toward Smith’s views and his abandonment of the Garrisonian position that the Constitution upheld slavery and that voting under its auspices therefore sanctioned slavery.53 In response to an inquiry from Smith about the financial health of the North Star, Douglass confessed that he had spent most of the money given him by British abolitionists “foolishly.” He also complained that the East Coast Garrisonians thought him “far more serviceable as a public speaker than I can be as an editor.” Because he “started the paper against their wishes—and against their advice, they feel therefore little or no interest in its support,” he wrote.54 Smith eventually made a proposal to assist Douglass with his editorial work. Smith had been subsidizing a failing political abolitionist newspaper, the Liberty Party Paper, and he proposed to finance its merger with Douglass’s journal. Because Smith wanted a high-quality periodical to revive support for the remnant of the Liberty party that he led, he offered to contribute one hundred dollars a month to the new paper for two years on the condition that Douglass take its editorial helm. Douglass quickly replied to Smith’s offer: “You want a good looking—as well as a good paper, established in western N.Y. & and have a plan to accomplish that object. I like the plan.”55 Douglass accepted Smith’s subsidy and quickly arranged the merger. He unsuccessfully attempted to persuade a fellow black abolitionist, Samuel Ringgold Ward, to bring his Syracuse-based Impartial Citizen into this union. To make his editorial control clear to all, Douglass gave the new newspaper, which debuted on 26 June 1851, his own name, Frederick Douglass’ Paper. Douglass had had few doubts about how the Garrisonians would regard his new newspaper. When the issue of a merger was first raised,
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xxvi
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
Douglass wrote Smith: “The leaders of the American Antislavery Society are strong men—noble champions in the cause of human freedom—and yet they are not after all the most charitable in construing the motives of those who see matters in a Different light from themselves.”56 As Douglass predicted, the Garrisonian press, led by the Liberator, launched what Douglass dubbed a “war of destruction” against his new newspaper. It assaulted Douglass’s new editorial positions on the Liberty party, the Constitution, and voting. Most of the attacks had a personal, rather than an ideological, character. Garrison accused Douglass of “roguery” and of selling himself to the political abolitionists. Worse, the Garrisonian press published unsubstantiated rumors that Douglass was having an affair with his editorial associate, Julia Griffiths, who, it claimed, had turned him against his former colleagues.57 Frederick Douglass’ Paper began life by giving energetic editorial support to the struggling Liberty party movement. Douglass unequivocally endorsed the group’s views on the unconstitutionality of slavery and publicized the activities of Smith and its other leaders. He would not, however, editorially support efforts to broaden the party’s platform to include land reform, free trade, and other causes that he regarded as extraneous to abolition. 58 Frederick Douglass’ Paper enjoyed moderate success in its early years. Departing Garrisonian subscribers were replaced by new Liberty party readers. In addition, Griffiths’s fund-raising skills were at their peak in the early 1850s.59 During this period of shifting abolitionist alliances, Douglass developed the idea of writing a novel about the career of Madison Washington, who had led a rebellion on board the bark Creole en route from Richmond, Virginia, to New Orleans in October 1841. After seizing control of the ship, Madison forced a captured crewman to sail the rebels to Nassau in the Bahamas, where British authorities had freed all slaves. Douglass, who had frequently spoken about Washington, initially considered writing a nonfiction account of the rebellion. Confronted with many gaps in the historical record regarding the Creole uprising and aware of the enormous impact that Harriet Beecher Stowe’s recently published Uncle Tom’s Cabin was having on Northern sentiment regarding slavery, Douglass opted instead to write a novella with Washington as its central character.60 During the same period, Julia Griffiths conceived of assembling a collection of antislavery articles, stories, and poems and publishing them as a gift book to raise funds for Frederick Douglass’ Paper. This vol-
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxvi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxvii
ume ultimately was entitled Autographs for Freedom at the suggestion of Stowe, who contributed a poem and a short story. Griffiths and Douglass envisioned Autographs as a means to forge a closer working relationship between political abolitionists like Smith and moderate Free Soilers and other Northern antislavery politicians, who were well represented among the authors. Significantly absent as writers in Autographs were Garrisonians, whose Liberty Bell was an obvious model for the new project.61 Douglass and, presumably, Griffiths had another goal in publishing Autographs for Freedom: persuading Northern opponents of slavery that employing violent tactics might be the only effective way to achieve emancipation. The strategy of converting readers to an acceptance of violent antislavery tactics seems apparent in Griffiths’s layout of the book’s contents. While early entries seem to uphold the traditional abolitionist disinclination to use violent means, the volume builds to a crescendo of four works, including Douglass’s The Heroic Slave, that advocate a more radical, violently aggressive strategy. Douglass’s novella has two distinct narrative voices: Madison Washington and a white Northerner named Mr. Listwell. In Part I, Listwell overhears Washington’s soliloquy regarding his life as a slave and his determination to escape. Listwell was so moved by the speech that it was as if it had “rung through the chambers of his soul, and vibrated through his entire frame”; he vows to himself, “I shall . . . atone for my past indifference to this ill-starred race, by making such exertions as I shall be able to do, for the speedy emancipation of every slave in the land.” 62 Douglass brilliantly uses rhetoric throughout the novella and maintains the emphasis on the relationship between Washington and Listwell as a way to incite white Northern abolitionists to take action. Listwell gives white readers— many of them newly sensitized to the horrors of slavery by Uncle Tom’s Cabin— someone to identify with, and Douglass hoped that they, by witnessing Listwell’s transformation into an abolitionist, would embark on the same journey of conversion.63 Advance copies of Autographs for Freedom were available for sale in Rochester in December 1852. Douglass soon serialized The Heroic Slave in four parts in Frederick Douglass’ Paper.64 Sadly, few details are available about Douglass’s labor in composing The Heroic Slave. Griffiths and other Rochester abolitionists encouraged Douglass’s writing and were shown preliminary drafts in the summer of 1852. Douglass shared with Henry Wadsworth Longfellow that his friends seemed “to think that my ‘fugitive Slave Ship’ will go a great ways towards obtaining the desired
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxvii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xxviii
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
treasure. I have no such vanity—and yet I am acting as though I had.”65 After its initial publication and its reprinting in a few pirated editions, the novella gradually slid out of public memory and was largely forgotten until 1975, when Philip S. Foner reproduced it in his five-volume The Life and Writings of Frederick Douglass.66 Significantly, Douglass did not prepare any new item, fictional or otherwise, for the second and final edition of Autographs for Freedom, but instead chose to reprint a portion of a speech he had delivered in May 1853 to a convention of non-Garrisonian abolitionists in New York City.67 Regrettably, aside from a few poems, The Heroic Slave was Douglass’s only known foray into creative writing. In the decade leading up to the Civil War, Douglass’s energies were consumed by extensive speaking tours and by the demands of his weekly newspaper. In 1855, when writing of his antebellum journalistic endeavors in his second autobiography, My Bondage and My Freedom, Douglass assessed the costs and rewards of running his own newspaper: It is not to be concealed, however, that the maintenance of such a journal, under the circumstances, has been a work of much difficulty; and could all the perplexity, anxiety, and trouble attending it, have been clearly foreseen, I might have shrunk from the undertaking. As it is, I rejoice in having engaged in the enterprise, and count it joy to have been able to suffer, in many ways, for its success, and for the success of the cause to which it has been faithfully devoted. I look upon the time, money, and labor bestowed upon it, as being amply rewarded, in the development of my own mental and moral energies, and in the corresponding development of my deeply injured and oppressed people.68 What Douglass could not have anticipated was that the struggle to produce a steady stream of editorial commentary on current events would become more difficult when his longtime collaborator Julia Griffiths returned home to Great Britain in the summer of 1855 and management of the newspaper fell largely into his hands.69 As agreed, Gerrit Smith had ceased his regular subsidies after two years, but occasionally made further contributions. Douglass again had to travel frequently on speaking tours to find new subscribers and financial contributors. His growing sons assisted in the office with the typesetting. William J. Watkins, a young free black from Boston who had joined the small staff, rose to become Douglass’s associate editor.
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxviii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxix
During the early 1850s, Douglass editorialized frequently in support of greater cooperation among Northern African Americans. Using his position as editor of the nation’s largest-circulation and most influential African American periodical, he led an effort to create a national council to promote civil rights as well as economic and educational opportunities. Frederick Douglass’ Paper campaigned to create an “Industrial College” for the purpose of elevating Douglass’s race from the ranks of “menial” employments, such as “waiters, porters, and barbers,” since “no class or variety of people can furnish them exclusively without degradation.”70 The failure of Harriet Beecher Stowe to raise funds for the project from her vast readership, as Douglass had hoped she would, prevented it from launching. Nonetheless, Douglass used his extensive traveling and lecturing as opportunities to report to his readers on progress made by African Americans in communities across the North.71 New developments in the Northern political climate complicated the situation of Frederick Douglass’ Paper. Congressional passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854 had given renewed life to the antiextension movement. A coalition of Free Soilers and more recent defectors from the major parties launched the new Republican party that same year. Although the party lacked the abolitionists’ strong principles in regard to emancipation and equal rights for African Americans, it represented a realistic opportunity to win national power in the election of 1856. Smith and his small cadre of followers, however, stood aloof from the Republican movement and instead formed their own new vehicle, the Radical Abolitionist party, which replaced the remnant Liberty party. Douglass’s newspaper praised the prominent roles that African Americans played in the Radical Abolitionist party and its condemnation of the proslavery character of the U.S. Constitution, but he wavered in giving it his unqualified editorial support. In May 1856, Douglass confided in Smith that his newspaper was $1,500 in debt, for several reasons: “My paper is not Republican—and therefore Republicans look coldly on it. It is not Garrisonian and therefore Garrisonians hate and spare no pains to destroy it. Meanwhile the colored people do very little to support.”72 With the survival of his journalistic project in serious jeopardy, Douglass abandoned his initial endorsement of Smith’s presidential candidacy as a Radical Abolitionist and shifted to backing the Republican nominee, John C. Frémont, in August 1856. He answered both Garrisonian and Radical Abolitionist charges of “inconsistency” with the claim that “the difference between our paper this week and last week is a difference of Policy, not of Principle.”73
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxix
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xxx
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
Frémont’s defeat by the Democrat James Buchanan produced considerable despair in the antislavery community. Douglass found Republican support for African American civil rights disappointingly weak and soon returned his editorial support to Smith’s dwindling band of Radical Abolitionists. He also editorially sanctioned violence by free blacks and abolitionists in resisting any attempts to recapture runaways under terms of the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law.74 Frederick Douglass’ Paper applauded the guerrilla-style warfare waged by John Brown and other members of the free-state militia in Kansas to resist efforts to force that territory to become a slave state against the will of a large majority of its residents.75 None of these positions produced a significant increase in the readership of Frederick Douglass’ Paper, and its editor continued to resort to long lecture tours to raise funds to keep it afloat. The Rochester Ladies’ AntiSlavery Society, despite the loss of its leader, Julia Griffiths, continued to solicit funds for Douglass’s newspaper at home and abroad in the form of donations to its annual bazaar. Despite these efforts, the weekly was abandoned as financially unsustainable in July 1860.76 Closure of Frederick Douglass’ Paper did not deprive Douglass of an editorial outlet. In January 1859, he launched a second, simultaneous periodical, Douglass’ Monthly. The Monthly probably was founded at the urging of Griffiths as a means for Douglass to reach British readers and financial supporters more effectively. Many issues from the latter years of Frederick Douglass’ Paper and from the Monthly in the first half of 1860 have not survived, so it is not possible to determine how much overlap in editorial content occurred. Few editorials in the Monthly seem specifically aimed at a British audience, making it likely that a high percentage were taken directly from the weekly. Douglass seems to have appreciated the historical value of his Monthly, telling potential subscribers that “its size is that most convenient for binding” and “its matter shall be such as will be permanently useful and interesting to its readers.”77 The new periodical was less than a year old when Douglass had to flee the United States in October 1859 to avoid arrest for his role in assisting John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry.78 Production of both papers was sustained by Douglass’s sons and his older daughter, Rosetta, with the assistance of the veteran abolitionist editor Abram Pryne.79 After residing briefly in Canada, Douglass traveled to Great Britain, where he reunited with Griffiths and launched a new antislavery speaking tour, defending Brown and the need for his violent actions. The death of his youngest
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxx
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxxi
child, Annie, in March 1860, convinced Douglass to brave a return to Rochester in April.80 As the nation entered another presidential election year, Douglass watched developments with the eye of a skilled analyst. In a pragmatic editorial assessment in June, he decided that a Republican victory would “humble the slave power and defeat all plans for giving slavery any further guarantees of permanence.”81 Douglass endorsed the Republican candidate, Abraham Lincoln, while voicing the wish that the party had inscribed “Death to Slavery” instead of “No More Slave States” on its banners.82 In August, however, Douglass attended a hastily called convention of Radical Abolitionists, who nominated Gerrit Smith for president. In a surprising move, Douglass endorsed Smith and campaigned for him in speeches and editorials.83 Douglass seems to have worked hardest in that election for passage of a state referendum to grant black voters equal ballot access in New York. That referendum’s defeat, despite Lincoln’s triumph in the state, increased Douglass’s suspicions about the lack of commitment among many Republicans to the best interest of his race.84 The election of Lincoln to the presidency produced a panic in the slaveholding South that led to the secession of eleven states and sparked the bloody Civil War. Douglass used his editorial pen to persuade Northerners that though the conflict would be “long, revengeful, and isolating,” its outcome had to be nothing less than complete emancipation.85 His Douglass’ Monthly editorials during the first year and a half of the war excoriated the Lincoln administration for equivocating on emancipation as a war goal and for hesitating to employ blacks as Union Army soldiers. Adopting what the historian David W. Blight labels “apocalyptic language,” Douglass’s editorials warned of divine retribution on the nation if it failed to use the war as an opportunity to atone for tolerating the iniquity of slavery for so long.86 Douglass shared with his readers his pleased reaction to Lincoln’s preliminary Emancipation Proclamation: “We shout for joy that we live to record this righteous decree.”87 During the early war years, Douglass also began to broaden his journalistic reach by preparing pieces for publications other than his Monthly. He wrote two articles for the influential New York Independent at the request of its managing editor, Theodore Tilton, who became a close friend. In the first piece, Douglass clarified his shifting attitude toward a campaign by the Caribbean nation of Haiti to recruit free blacks from the United States to migrate there. While he had briefly wavered on the
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxxi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xxxii
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
emigration issue at the start of the Civil War, he now took an unequivocal position and discouraged African Americans from considering such a move: “While I hold up both hands for Hayti, grateful for her humanity, rejoice in her prosperity, point to her example with pride and hope, and would smite down any hand that would fling a shadow upon the pathway of her glory, I wish to remind those who claim to be the best representatives of her views and feelings that those who made Hayti what she is did not leave her, but remained there and worked out their own salvation.”88 Of greater significance was “The Slave’s Appeal to Great Britain,” which appeared in December 1862 and in which Douglass attempted to persuade the British public to support the Union cause, especially in light of Lincoln’s recent conversion to emancipation as a war goal.89 This widely reprinted essay proved highly influential in the British Isles. Douglass appealed to that nation’s pride by referring to its earlier example of moral leadership in abolishing slavery in its colonial possessions: “For the honor of the British name, which has hitherto carried only light and hope to the slave, and rebuke and dismay to the slaveholder, do not in this great emergency be persuaded to abandon and contradict that policy of justice and mercy to the negro which has made your character revered, and your name illustrious, throughout the civilized world.” These two Civil War– era Independent pieces demonstrated that Douglass could effectively use publications other than his own to solicit support for his race. Soon after the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation, on 1 January 1863, Douglass frequently traveled across the North in search of African American recruits for the Union war effort. After being promised an officer’s commission to serve as an adjutant assistant to General Lorenzo Thomas, who was engaged in recruiting slaves for the Union Army in Mississippi, Douglass immediately ceased publishing Douglass’ Monthly. In a valedictory added to the final issue, Douglass described his readers as his “true and tried friends” and promised them, “I shall think, write and speak as I have opportunity, while the slave needs a pen to plead his cause or a voice to expose his wrongs before the people.”90 Douglass also boasted that his antebellum newspapers had accomplished important work in winning acceptance for African American journalists: I have lived to see the leading presses of the country, willing and ready to publish any argument or appeal in behalf of my race, I am able to make. So that while speaking and writing are still needful, the necessity of a special organ for my views and opinions on slavery no
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxxii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxxiii
longer exists. To this extent at least, my paper has accomplished the object of its existence. It has done something towards battering down that dark and frowning wall of partition between the working minds of two races, hitherto thought impregnable.91 The military commission was never authorized, for reasons that are unclear, and Douglass never revived his periodical.92 In his third autobiography, Life and Times of Frederick Douglass (1881), Douglass looked back with pride on his achievements in journalism: “If I have at any time said or written that which is worth remembering or repeating, I must have said such things between the years 1848 and 1860, and my paper was a chronicle of most of what I said during that time.”93 For the first time in fifteen years, though Douglass lacked his own journalistic outlet, he remained engaged in the nation’s political debates by speaking at conventions and campaign events on behalf of groups and politicians committed to advancing African American rights. Shortly after the war’s end, Douglass launched a lucrative career on the lyceum circuit; and while he spoke on a wide range of subjects, he seldom strayed far from the central issue of African American rights.94 During the early years of Reconstruction, Douglass returned to writing occasional articles for newspapers. He produced two pieces for the Atlantic Monthly and individual pieces for the New York Independent and the National AntiSlavery Standard. The Atlantic articles offered Douglass’s counsel on the growing controversy between congressional Republicans and President Andrew Johnson over Reconstruction policies. He called on Congress to overcome opposition from the executive branch and “establish in the South one law, one government, one administration of justice, one condition to the exercise of the elective franchise, for men of all races and colors alike.”95 The National Anti-Slavery Standard gave Douglass the opportunity to denounce Salmon P. Chase, a former political abolitionist ally, as “a deserter from our ranks, in face of the enemy,” for pursuing the Democratic presidential nomination.96 Tilton, at the Independent, provided Douglass a forum in which to endorse the election of the Republican candidate, Ulysses S. Grant. Douglass’s old abolitionist colleague Lydia Maria Child persuaded him to contribute a very brief exhortation to the recently emancipated slaves in her 1865 primer The Freedmen’s Book. In February and March 1869, Douglass joined his son Lewis, George T. Downing, and several other black leaders in sending out a circular calling for contributions to fund a new weekly newspaper for African
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxxiii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xxxiv
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
Americans, to be published in Washington, D.C. Blacks in Washington soon supported this plan with pledges amounting to $2,500. They proposed Douglass as editor in chief, the Presbyterian minister and experienced journalist J. Sella Martin as associate editor, and Lewis Douglass as chief compositor and print shop manager. Douglass declined the offered position and warned that the enterprise would require much more capital. Investors pushed ahead anyway and offered the editorship to Martin, who accepted on the condition that Douglass serve as the newspaper’s contributing editor. The New Era issued its first copy on 13 January 1870, and Douglass’s first article appeared two weeks later.97 As Douglass had predicted, the new newspaper soon experienced serious financial problems. Many of its original shareholders withdrew, and Martin was forced to suspend its publication in the summer of 1870. To save the failing publication, Douglass relocated to the nation’s capital. With his sons Lewis and Frederick Jr., he purchased a half interest in the newspaper and became the editor of the renamed Washington New National Era. His editorial policy, he wrote, advocated, “Free men, free soil, free speech, a free press, everywhere in the land. The ballot for all, education for all, fair wages for all.”98 In his third autobiography, Douglass recalls: “My sixteen years’ experience as editor and publisher of my own paper, and the knowledge of the toil and anxiety which such a relation to a public journal must impose, caused me much reluctance and hesitation; nevertheless, I yielded to the wishes of my friends and counsellors, went to Washington, threw myself into the work, hoping to be able to lift up a standard at the national capital for my people which should cheer and strengthen them in the work of their own improvement and elevation.”99 Douglass assessed his journalist credentials in an early editorial: “While I come to the work willingly I do so with no high confidence in my ability to discharge its duties with credit. I am encouraged, however, by the consciousness that whatever may be my deficiencies as to ability, either as respects skill or judgment, I lack neither the will nor the purpose to serve the cause of our people. To those who know of my thirty years of active service, my steadfast zeal and perseverance will be granted.”100 On 12 December 1870, Douglass purchased the remaining half interest in the New National Era and its printing office for $8,000. Douglass placed much of the management of the newspaper into the hands of his sons, Lewis and Frederick Jr., both experienced printers.101 Douglass’s intimate friend Ottilie Assing became a correspondent on international
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxxiv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxxv
affairs, but she could not offer the assistance in the business department that Julia Griffiths had lent to the North Star and Frederick Douglass’ Paper.102 Douglass felt secure enough in the abilities of his small staff to depart the country for two months in early 1871 to serve as assistant secretary on a commission appointed by President Grant to interview Dominicans about a proposal to annex their nation to the United States. As was expected for a newspaper based in the nation’s capital, political issues before the federal government became the chief topic of Douglass’s editorials. He strongly endorsed Radical Republican positions in Reconstruction political battles, especially the protection of newly won African American rights. The New National Era unswervingly defended the policies of Ulysses S. Grant’s administration, including its controversial effort to annex the Dominican Republic. In the 1872 campaign, Douglass disparaged the effort by Liberal Republicans to displace Grant as the party’s presidential nominee and their subsequent merger with the inveterate opponents of black rights, the Democratic party.103 On the eve of the election, Douglass strongly endorsed Grant’s reelection: “In the canvass, from its inception, until now, this paper, to the extent of its ability, has performed its part in diffusing information, and conducting the public mind to wise and patriotic conclusions . . . At last, as at first, it is not ashamed of its position.”104 Douglass also editorially campaigned for such causes as woman suffrage, penal code reform, and greater educational opportunities for African Americans.105 While modest in regard to his own editorials, Douglass boasted that “some of the ablest colored men of the country made it the medium through which to convey their thoughts to the public.”106 Despite vigorous efforts by Douglass, the New National Era’s readership did not grow significantly beyond Washington’s small black elite. Shortly after the November 1872 election, Douglass left the newspaper’s editorial chair. J. Sella Martin briefly joined Lewis Douglass to guide the New National Era, with the senior Douglass contributing only a few subsequent columns.107 In the fall of 1873, Douglass’s sons unwisely merged their paper with a second struggling newspaper, the Colored Citizen, published by a number of clerks from the Freedman’s Bank. When the latter could not produce the resources they had promised, a lawsuit resulted, and an injunction against the Douglass brothers caused the New National Era to suspend publication in 1874. Although the brothers won the case and resumed publication, the New National Era went out of business permanently on 22 October 1874.108 The “misadventure” of the New National
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxxv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xxxvi
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
Era cost Douglass nearly ten thousand dollars, but he was not bitter about it: “The journal was valuable while it lasted, and the experiment was full of instruction to me, which has to some extent been heeded, for I have kept well out of newspaper undertakings since.”109 In the waning phase of his last newspaper, Douglass accepted an offer to become president of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, also based in Washington, D.C. That institution was floundering well before Douglass’s arrival—a reality hidden from him by its trustees, who recruited him in a last-ditch effort to bolster its credibility. In his capacity as the bank’s official spokesperson, Douglass wrote a number of circulars and public letters, trying in vain to retain confidence in the bank. Acknowledging some prior mismanagement, he emphasized the important purpose for which the bank had been created: “The mission of the Freedman’s Bank is to show our people the road to a share of the wealth and well being of the world. It has already done much to lift the race into respectability, and, with their continued confidence and patient cooperation, it will continue to reflect credit upon the race and promote their welfare.”110 Finally admitting defeat, Douglass oversaw the institution’s closing on 2 July 1874.111 Douglass deeply regretted his association with the bank, which, he reported, “has brought upon my head an amount of abuse and detraction greater than any encountered in any other part of my life.”112 The closing of the New National Era marked the beginning of the final phase of Douglass’s career as a writer. The best known of his later works, Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, was published in 1881 and then revised and expanded in an 1892 edition.113 He published an advance extract in the Century magazine, providing long-hidden details of his 1838 escape from slavery, to boost the sales prospects of his autobiography. Much less familiar to modern scholars than Life and Times, however, is the steady stream of journalism and other writings that Douglass produced in his final two decades. Through these published writings and his still-extensive schedule of public speaking, Douglass strove to remain an influential voice in shaping the nation’s racial relations. Since Douglass was probably the nation’s best-known African American and an influential Republican party advocate, his opinion was sought out frequently by the editors of some of the nation’s leading periodicals. As a result, he published commentary on current issues in prominent journals with largely white readership. Twice in the 1880s, Douglass agreed to prepare an article for a “symposium” in the North American Review
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxxvi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxxvii
that would include a variety of viewpoints on the prospects of the emancipated African American race. In each case, Douglass found himself partnered with authors who disparaged his race and advocated emigration to Africa as the best solution to blacks’ problems.114 In the second North American Review symposium, he reminded readers that “we should not measure the negro from the heights which the white race has attained, but from the depths from which he has come.”115 Douglass had more agreeable companions, such as Moncure Conway and Julia Ward Howe, for an 1889 symposium in Cosmopolitan magazine, entitled “The Great Agitation,” which offered assessments of the accomplishments of the abolitionist movement.116 About the antislavery movement, Douglass observed: “The history of this great struggle is instructive in many ways. It not only illustrates the wisdom and potency of moral agitation as a means of removing great evils and promoting reform, but also the tremendous price that must be paid for every inch in the march of human progress, and it would seem that the more obvious the truth asserted, the more bitter is the opposition to its demands.”117 In 1875, Douglass joined three other authors to write in the American Missionary Magazine about his reaction to reports on the poor state of educational opportunities for Southern blacks.118 Douglass produced additional commentary on important political events in the 1880s and 1890s. The disappointing U.S. Supreme Court decision in the 1883 Civil Rights cases caused Douglass to produce separate articles in Harper’s Weekly and the American Reformer, calling for justice for African Americans. In his American Reformer piece, Douglass declared, “Nothing has happened since the war for the Union, so calculated to encourage the war-exploded dogma of State rights, and humiliate the nation, as this decision of the Supreme Court.”119 Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Paper persuaded Douglass to join other commentators in assessing the reasons for the Republican party’s poor showing in the 1890 congressional election.120 Two years later, Douglass turned to the New York Independent to make the case that President Benjamin Harrison deserved renomination because of his support for African American rights. Douglass pragmatically endorsed Harrison as the candidate “in favor of law and force for the protection of the colored man from [the current reign of] lawless violence. There are other good men not less fit for the place than Benjamin Harrison, but none more likely, if any so likely, to be elected should any one them be nominated.”121 The same year, he responded to a request from the editor of the North American Review to publish a blistering critique of the intensifying problem of lynching in Southern states.
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxxvii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xxxviii
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
That article’s uncompromising denunciation of the nation for failing to protect all of its citizens equally from unjustified violence would be incorporated into the rhetoric of Douglass’s last great public lecture, “The Lessons of the Hour.”122 On other occasions, Douglass used his journalistic skills to produce articles intended to defend himself and his behavior in the public record. For example, he wrote a defense of his criticism of the Southern black “Exoduster” migration in 1879 for a Washington D.C. political newspaper. That article, as well as a later presentation to the American Social Science Association, did little to spare Douglass from accusations by African American opponents of “indifference to the welfare of the colored people of the South.”123 In 1891, Douglass produced a two-part article for the North American Review to answer critics of his role in the unsuccessful diplomatic negotiations with Haiti for the lease of the Môle-SaintNicolas as a naval station. He later reprinted those pieces with virtually no changes at the conclusion of the second edition of his Life and Times.124 Occasionally, Douglass declined an editor’s proposal to write on a suggested topic. For example, he declined an 1881 request from Scribner’s Monthly Magazine for an article on “the education of the colored race,” protesting that “my many engagements and duties make me shrink from trying my hand on such a paper.” Douglass did ingratiate himself with that magazine’s managing editor, Robert Underwood Johnson, by asserting that “a place on the Editorial Staff of such a periodical as Scribner’s Monthly is more desirable than a seat in Congress, and I think quite as honorable.”125 Perhaps flattered, Johnson successfully persuaded Douglass later that year to publish the earlier-described excerpt from his forthcoming Life and Times in the Century magazine, the successor to Scribner’s.126 In the immediate post-Reconstruction decades, Douglass frequently contributed to an assortment of African American publications.127 He published four articles in African Methodist Episcopal Church periodicals in the 1880s, all edited by the Reverend Benjamin Tucker Tanner, who granted Douglass great latitude in his subject matter. Two of these essays discussed current political issues of concern to African Americans and were decidedly pro–Republican party in character.128 A short piece in 1880 spoke out against the growing intolerance displayed toward Chinese immigrants. An article in the A.M.E. Church Review, published shortly before Douglass left the country on a long tour of Europe and Africa, recalled his earlier travels in Ireland and called on the British government to grant Home Rule to that island.129 In 1892, Douglass responded
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxxviii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xxxix
to a request from the Indianapolis Freeman for an assessment of African Americans’ prospects with a short essay that began with the autobiographical observation: “The whole field, as to the means to be adopted and the course to be pursued to better the condition of the Negro has been my thought during a long life, and I have nothing better to offer now than I had fifty years ago, and perhaps I may say without vanity, that there is, as I think, nothing better to be offered.”130 As a leading advocate for African American civil rights, Douglass coauthored a call for another National Convention of African Americans, which was ultimately held in Louisville, Kentucky, in 1883. A decade later, Douglass served as commissioner of the Haitian pavilion at the World’s Columbian Exposition, held in 1893 in Chicago. Twice in that capacity, Douglass wrote public protests against the greatly constricted role allotted to African Americans to display their achievements since emancipation on the international stage provided by the exposition. The first of these was in the World’s Columbian Exposition Illustrated, a semiofficial publication publicizing the event. The other served as the introduction to a historically significant pamphlet, The Reason Why the Colored American Is Not in the World’s Columbian Exposition, coauthored by Douglass, Ida B. Wells, Irvine Garland Penn, and others. In the latter work, Douglass rebutted suggestions that he and the other contributors were embarrassing their country, which was using the Columbian Exposition to pose “before the world as a highly liberal and civilized nation.” Instead, he used his essay not only to indict the discrimination shown at that event, but also to condemn the growing reign of terror across the Southern states, arguing, “Let the truth be told, let the light be turned on ignorance and prejudice, let lawless violence and murder be exposed.” Douglass declared his abiding optimism that such journalistic coverage of the wrongs against his race would have a positive effect: “The Americans are a great and magnanimous people and this great exposition adds greatly to their honor and renown, but in the pride of their success they have cause for repentance as well as complaisance, and for shame as well as for glory, and hence we send forth this volume to be read of all men.”131 In his last decades, Douglass used his pen to produce introductions, short articles, and promotional statements to be published in a number of books. Douglass joined a group of thirty-three prominent contributors to a collection of reminiscences of Lincoln.132 He was part of a similar assemblage of authors who prepared tributes of the well-known minister and reformer Henry Ward Beecher to commemorate his seventieth birthday.
Y7870-Douglass.indb xxxix
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xl
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
Douglass prepared an introduction to his longtime friend John Wallace Hutchinson’s history of his family of well-regarded antislavery singers, recalling, “I never saw one of its members falter or flinch before any duty, whether social or patriotic; and it is a source of more satisfaction than I can express, to have lived, as I have now done, to bear this high testimony to the character of the Hutchinsons.”133 Douglass wrote an introduction for an American edition of the biography of Toussaint L’Ouverture by the French reformer Victor Schoelcher, whom he had befriended during his 1886–87 European tour.134 When asked to prepare a contribution to a forthcoming history of the Massachusetts utopian community of Florence, Douglass used the opportunity to recall his meetings there with David Ruggles, Sojourner Truth, and other reformers.135 Douglass’s short contribution to Irvine Garland Penn’s 1891 book, The Afro-American Press and Its Editors, offered a bleak assessment: “Colored papers, from their antecedents and surroundings, cost more, and give their readers less, than papers and publications by white men.”136 Douglass offered a more positive appraisal of African American journalistic achievements in a review he prepared for Penn’s book: “Though the history of the colored press conforms to the rule that many are called and few are chosen; that in the field of journalism few succeed and many fail; there is quite enough of success to vindicate the laudable ambition and ability of the colored race in the use of this powerful instrumentality.”137 The British reform journal Anti-Caste published a brief endorsement of the periodical by Douglass, solicited by the editor to boost its reputation. That Douglass was sought out again and again to prepare these kinds of short pieces was a testament to the high regard in which he was held in many American and European circles in his last decades. One of the most unusual of Douglass’s later writings was the entry “Slavery” for a pirated American version of the ninth edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica.138 Unlike his autobiographical recollections of experiences as a Maryland slave, this was a scholarly piece that traced the history of human bondage in North America from its colonial beginnings to emancipation. Douglass devoted a great deal of attention to colonial-era laws governing the treatment of slaves. Not surprisingly, half the entry was devoted to the growth and final triumph of the abolition campaign, detailing the contributions of the movement’s many factions. It is possible that Douglass received significant assistance in researching the article, even if not in writing it, from his second wife, Helen Pitts Douglass, who, after her husband’s death, spoke and wrote on a number of historical topics.139
Y7870-Douglass.indb xl
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xli
Before their marriage, Helen Pitts had been a clerk for Douglass in the Recorder of Deeds Office in the District of Columbia. Likely because of the meticulous record keeping of Helen Pitts Douglass, numerous newspaper reports and the manuscript drafts of dozens of documents by Douglass from the post–Civil War years have survived. As noted in an earlier volume in this project, such manuscripts played an important role in determining the authoritative text for Douglass’s Life and Times.140 Scholars can perform a similar exercise by consulting the source notes supplied by the Douglass Papers editors for many of the documents in this series, which indicate the location of manuscript drafts as well as the published sources. For several documents, such as Douglass’s two travel diaries, some short poems, inscriptions in guest books, and his review of Penn’s Afro-American Press, the manuscripts are the only surviving sources for such samples of Douglass’s writing. The travel diaries might be the most historically significant. The first he kept while serving as assistant secretary of a commission appointed by President Grant to travel to the Dominican Republic and explore sentiment there regarding a proposed annexation to the United States. The second was a record of Douglass’s observations during his tour of Europe and Egypt with his second wife in 1886–87. While neither was intended for publication, he used both manuscripts as sources for later addresses and writings, and they reveal his unfiltered opinions on a range of subjects. * * * * * * Despite this large and impressive body of work, Douglass’s achievements as a writer have failed to receive anywhere near the same level of recognition as his public speaking or autobiographical writing. The greatest praise that Douglass’s labors as a journalist attracted from contemporaries was limited to sustaining his series of newspapers in Rochester when all other black-edited antebellum periodicals proved short-lived. A fellow black abolitionist William Wells Brown articulated this sentiment most positively: “Of all of his labors . . . we regard Mr. Douglass’s efforts as a publisher and editor as most useful to his race. For sixteen years, against much opposition, single-handed and alone, he demonstrated the fact that the American colored man was equal to the white in conducting a useful and popular journal.”141 Irvine Garland Penn continued this theme of complimenting Douglass chiefly for conducting his newspapers in a virulently racist climate. Quoting Brown’s assessment at length in his Afro-American Press, Penn observed that “previous to this publication
Y7870-Douglass.indb xli
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xlii
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
[of the North Star], Mr. Douglass was not known as a writer; but he was afterward recognized as a great man in more than one sphere.”142 These early positive assessments of Douglass as a newspaper editor had little impact on twentieth-century studies of American journalism. Most ignored Douglass’s accomplishments altogether or provided the briefest of notices, such as Frank Luther Mott’s 1962 squib that “the ablest of all [‘Negro publications’] was Frederick Douglass’ North Star, founded in Rochester, New York, in 1847.”143 Only the small body of scholarship focused exclusively on the black press in the United States afforded Douglass real recognition as a journalist. Penelope L. Bullock’s comprehensive survey of the African American periodical press was the first to examine Douglass’ Monthly as a part of the striving by antebellum African Americans to develop a journalistic and literary voice.144 Frankie Hutton’s The Early Black Press in America (1993) placed Douglass’s journalism in line with that of other antebellum black editors, who were campaigning “in unison on the uplift of their people through the vehicles of education, temperance, prudence, continued morality, and a purposeful, genteel social life.”145 There are a small number of other noteworthy exceptions to the general dismissal by scholars of Douglass’s nonautobiographical writings. Philip Foner’s pioneering compilation of Douglass’s works includes a significant number of his editorials. A few modern scholars such as David W. Blight, Waldo Martin, and Peter Myers146 have extensively used Foner’s edition, treating those editorials as important evidence of Douglass’s evolving political thought. While Douglass’s achievements as editor of four African American periodicals have gradually achieved overdue recognition in recent specialized scholarship, his other nonautobiographical writings remain largely ignored. Partial fault for this omission might lie with Douglass himself—his last autobiography, Life and Times, reproduces numerous speeches but none of his writings. The same preference can be seen in the two biographies of Douglass written with their subject’s cooperation, by James Gregory and Frederic May Holland. Two other early biographers, Booker T. Washington and Charles W. Chesnutt, also focus almost exclusively on Douglass’s speeches and autobiographies as sources for his thinking.147 For a variety of reasons, therefore, most modern scholarship continues to focus on Douglass as a speaker and an autobiographer—a trend reinforced by this scholarly edition’s own plan of work, which has placed
Y7870-Douglass.indb xlii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xliii
his journalistic writings last in order of production. Even those few scholars who have used Douglass’s enormous body of editorials have largely ignored his journalistic writing in other periodicals and books. It is our hope that the publication of this final series of the Frederick Douglass Papers will provide ready access to the full range of Douglass’s journalism and other writing and will allow this large body of work to be judged alongside his speeches, correspondence, and autobiographies as evidence of the talents of this remarkable man. 1. Douglass’s role in the ownership and editorial direction of the New National Era is complicated. He was originally a contributing editor before taking over ownership in the summer of 1870; he turned the newspaper over to his sons in November 1872 but wrote occasional articles for it until the summer of 1874. Philip S. Foner, ed., The Life and Writings of Frederick Douglass, 5 vols. (New York, 1950–75), 4:55–61, 89. 2. One important exception worth noting is Shelley Fisher Fishkin and Carla L. Peterson, “‘We Hold These Truths to Be Self-Evident’: The Rhetoric of Frederick Douglass’s Journalism,” in Frederick Douglass: New Literary and Historical Essays, ed. Eric J. Sundquist (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), 189–204. 3. FD to William Lloyd Garrison, 8 November 1842, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:1–5. 4. FD to James Miller McKim, 5 September 1845, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:27–32. See also Fishkin and Peterson, “We Hold These Truths,” 189. 5. FD to William Lloyd Garrison, 29 September 1845, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:56–59. These, along with some other letters that Douglass arranged to send to the editors of antislavery newspapers, have been collected and published as part of the Douglass Papers’ Correspondence series. Also see Fishkin and Peterson, “We Hold These Truths,” 196–97. 6. FD to William Lloyd Garrison, 1 September 1845, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:47–52. 7. FD to William Lloyd Garrison, 2 January 1847, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:190–94. 8. Benjamin Quarles, Frederick Douglass (Washington, D.C., 1948), 51. 9. As quoted in Robert S. Levine, The Lives of Frederick Douglass (Cambridge, Mass., 2016), 113. 10. John W. Blassingame, John R. McKivigan, and Peter P. Hinks, eds., The Frederick Douglass Papers, ser. 2: Autobiographical Writings, 3 vols. (New Haven, Conn., 1999–2011), 2:226, 3:202. 11. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 2:224. 12. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 2:226–27. 13. Edmund Quincy, on the Garrisonians’ behalf, insisted on a $100 cap on annual compensation to Douglass for these contributions, which he resented. FD to Sydney Howard Gay, 8 August 1847, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:223–27; William S. McFeely, Frederick Douglass (1991; New York, 1995), 147; Patsy Brewington Perry, “Before the North Star: Frederick Douglass’ Early Journalistic Career,” Phylon, 35:96–107 (1974). 14. FD to Thomas Van Rensselaer, 18 May 1847, FD to Sydney H. Gay, 13 August, 1847, Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 1:210–13, 227–33; Pennsylvania Freeman, 2 September 1847; Frankie Hutton, The Early Black Press in America, 1827–1860 (Westport, Conn., 1993), 11, 141. 15. Meaghan M. Fritz and Frank E. Fee, Jr., “To Give the Gift of Freedom: Gift Books and the War on Slavery,” American Periodicals: A Journal of History, Criticism, and Bibliography, 23:60– 82 (2013); Perry, “Before the North Star,” 96–107. 16. The Liberty Bell (Boston, 1845), 166. See also FD to Maria Weston Chapman, 27 October 1844, Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 1:43. 17. Hutton, Early Black Press in America, 15–17.
Y7870-Douglass.indb xliii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xliv
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
18. ASB, 17 September, 22 October, 26 November 1847, 14 April 1848; Douglas A. Gamble, “Moral Suasion in the West: Garrisonian Abolitionism, 1831–1861” (Ph.D. diss., Ohio State University, 1973), 340, 350–54; Mary G. McMillan, “Mr. Editor If You Please: Frederick Douglass in Rochester, 1847–1852” (honors thesis, Mount Holyoke College, 1985), 12. 19. Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:244–553. 20. Howard Holman Bell, A Survey of the Negro Convention Movement, 1830–1861 (New York, 1969), 86–91, 94–98; Hutton, Early Black Press in America, 13–14. 21. FDP, 15 July 1853; Proceedings of the Colored National Convention, Held in Rochester, July 6th, 7th, and 8th, 1853 (Rochester, N.Y., 1853), 7–18; Howard Holman Bell, ed., Minutes of the Proceedings of the National Negro Conventions, 1830–1864 (New York, 1969), n.p.; Foner, Life and Writings, 2:254–68. 22. FD to Amy Post, 28 October 1847, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:266. 23. Reprinted in Quarles, Frederick Douglass, 80–81. 24. NS, 3 December 1847. 25. NASS, 27 January 1848; Lib., 28 January 1848. 26. As quoted in Levine, Lives, 114. 27. Benjamin Quarles, “The Breach between Douglass and Garrison,” JNH, 23:144–54 (April 1938); William H. Pease and Jane H. Pease, “Boston Garrisonians and the Problem of Frederick Douglass,” Canadian Journal of History, 2:29–48 (September 1967); John L. Thomas, The Liberator: William Lloyd Garrison, A Biography (Boston, 1963). 28. NS, 3 December 1847. 29. NS, 7 January 1848. 30. FD to Jonathan D. Carr, 1 November 1847, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:266–68. Also see Frank E. Fee, Jr., “ ‘Intelligent Union of Black with White’: Frederick Douglass and the Rochester Press 1847–1848,” Journalism History, 31:32–45 (2005). 31. FD to Martin R. Delany, 12 January 1848. General Correspondence File, reel 1, frame 647, FD Papers, DLC. 32. Julia Griffiths and her sister Eliza later purchased this mortgage and allowed Douglass to repay it on more manageable terms. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:305; Paul Finkelman et al., eds., Encyclopedia of African American History, 1619–1895: From the Colonial Period to the Age of Frederick Douglass, 3 vols. (New York, 2006), 1:353–55. 33. NS, 7 January 1848. 34. Robert Levine notes that all early biographers of Douglass incorrectly dated Delany’s departure date as June 1848, citing the shortness of that tenure as evidence of Delany’s minimal contribution to the North Star. Levine, Martin Delany, Frederick Douglass, and the Politics of Representative Identity (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1997), 20–21. 35. Ibid., 22, 30, 48–49, 57. 36. McMillan, “Mr. Editor If You Please,” 20. 37. NS, 10 November 1848, 23, 30 November, 7 December 1849. 38. FD to Julia Griffiths, 28 April 1848, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:302–03. 39. FD to Amy Post, 11 September 1849, FD to Isaac Post, 16 September 1849, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:397–99; Erwin Palmer, “A Partnership in the Abolition Movement,” University of Rochester Library Bulletin, 26:1–19 (Autumn–Winter 1971–72). 40. Julia Griffith’s sister Eliza married the North Star’s printer, John Dick, and the couple left Rochester in 1850 to pursue antislavery work in Canada. Life and Times, 205; EAAH, 1:353–55; Nancy A. Hewitt, Women’s Activism and Social Change: Rochester, New York, 1822–1872 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1984), 116–18, 140. 41. For examples, see NS, 30 June 1848, 27 April, 6 July, 30 November 1849, 18 July 1850. 42. NS, 3 December 1847, 8 September 1848, 7 September 1849; Fishkin and Peterson, “We Hold These Truths,” 196–97.
Y7870-Douglass.indb xliv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xlv
43. NS, 17 March, 7 July 1848; David W. Blight, Frederick Douglass’ Civil War: Keeping Faith in Jubilee (Baton Rouge, La., 1989), 28–29. 44. NS, 17 November 1848. Also see John R. McKivigan, “The Frederick Douglass–Gerrit Smith Friendship and Political Abolitionism in the 1850s,” in Sundquist, Frederick Douglass, 212–13. 45. NS, 21 April, 28 July, 11 August 1848. See also Hutton, Early Black Press in America, 69–70. 46. NS, 10 August 1849. 47. Waldo E. Martin, Jr., The Mind of Frederick Douglass (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1984), 59. 48. James McCune Smith to Gerrit Smith, 28 July 1848, quoted in Martin, Mind of Frederick Douglass, 58. See also Philip S. Foner, Frederick Douglass: A Biography (New York, 1964), 94; Benjamin Quarles, “Frederick Douglass: Abolition’s Different Drummer,” in The Antislavery Vanguard: New Essays on the Abolitionists, ed. Martin Duberman (Princeton, N.J., 1965), 130. 49. Martin, Mind of Frederick Douglass, 58–59. 50. Henry Bibb and Mary Ann Shadd edited the Canadian newspapers A Voice of the Fugitive and the Provincial Freeman, respectively. William Howard Day’s Cleveland Aliened American and Samuel Ringgold Ward’s Syracuse Impartial Citizen were also briefly competitors of Douglass’s newspaper. Hutton, Early Black Press in America, 50–51, 62–64, 81–82. 51. FDP, 26 August 1853, 13 January 1854; Levine, Representative Identity, 70, 82–84, 97–98. 52. As a welcoming gift to Douglass for settling in New York, Smith deeded him a farm lot in Essex County of sufficient value to allow the African American editor to meet the state’s $250 property requirement for voting. Gerrit Smith to Douglass, 8 December 1847, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:276–77. 53. FD to Gerrit Smith, 30 March 1849, 21 January 1851; NS, 16 March, 25 May 1849, 5 April 1850; Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:375–78, 438–54; L. Diane Barnes, Frederick Douglass: Reformer and Statesman (New York, 2013), 74–75; John Stauffer, The Black Hearts of Men: Radical Abolitionists and the Transformation of Race (Cambridge, Mass., 2002) 166–67. 54. FD to Gerrit Smith, 30 March 1849, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:375–77. 55. FD to Gerrit Smith, 1 May 1851, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:441–45; McKivigan, “Frederick Douglass–Gerrit Smith Friendship,” 214–15. 56. FD to Gerrit Smith, 21 May 1851, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:447–48. 57. As quoted in Quarles, Frederick Douglass, 106; also see Martin, Mind of Frederick Douglass, 38–39; Quarles, “Breach between Douglass and Garrison,” 150–54; Pease and Pease, “Boston Garrisonians and Frederick Douglass,” 39–46. 58. FDP, 24 July, 2 October 1851, 8 April 1852. 59. FD to Gerrit Smith, 14 January 1853, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 2:1–2. Robert Fanuzzi provides a perspective on the Douglass-Garrison feud as “a publicity war between two rivals in the newspaper trade.” Robert Fanuzzi, Abolition’s Public Sphere (Minneapolis, Minn., 2003), 209–14. 60. Frederick Douglass, The Heroic Slave: A Cultural and Critical Edition, eds. Robert S. Levine, John Stauffer, and John R. McKivigan, (New Haven, Conn, 2015), xi–xxxvi. 61. John R. McKivigan and Rebecca A. Pattillo, “Autographs for Freedom and Reaching a New Abolitionist Audience,” Journal of African American History, 102:35–51 (Winter 2017). 62. Douglass, Heroic Slave, 8–9. 63. Richard Yarborough, “Race, Violence, and Manhood: The Masculine Ideal in Frederick Douglass’s ‘The Heroic Slave,’ ” in Sundquist, Frederick Douglass, 176–88. 64. McKivigan and Pattillo, “Autographs for Freedom,” 35–51; Douglass, Heroic Slave, xxxiii. 65. FD to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, 16 June 1852, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:542–43. 66. Foner, Life and Writings, 5:473–505; Douglass, Heroic Slave, xxxiii–xxxv. 67. Julia Griffiths, ed., Autographs for Freedom, 2d ed. (New York, 1854), 251–55; Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 2:423–40. 68. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 2:227–28.
Y7870-Douglass.indb xlv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xlvi
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
69. Frank E. Fee, Jr., “To No One More Indebted: Frederick Douglass and Julia Griffiths, 1849– 63,” Journalism History, 37:12–26 (Spring 2011). 70. FDP, 1 April 1853, 24 March 1854. Also see Peter C. Myers, Frederick Douglass: Race and the Rebirth of American Liberalism (Lawrence, Kans., 2008), 179–80; Hutton, Early Black Press in America, 140–41. 71. FDP, 20 November 1851, 29 October 1852, 12 August, 11 November 1853, 28 April 1854. 72. Douglass to Gerrit Smith, 23 May 1856, also 12 April 1856, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 2:185– 86, 179–80. 73. FDP, 15 August, 12 September 1856; Blight, Frederick Douglass’ Civil War, 50. 74. FDP, 25 September 1851, 9 September 1853, 9 June 1854; Leslie Friedman Goldstein, “Violence as an Instrument for Social Change: The Views of Frederick Douglass (1817–1895),” JNH, 61:62–66 (January 1976). 75. FDP, 27 April 1855, 27 June 1856; Stauffer, Black Hearts of Men, 171–73, 197–200. 76. McKivigan, “Frederick Douglass–Gerrit Smith Friendship,” 222–23; Leigh Fought, Women in the World of Frederick Douglass (New York, 2017), 178. 77. DM, 3:305 (August 1860); Penelope L. Bullock, The Afro-American Periodical Press, 1838– 1909 (Baton Rouge, La., 1981), 220–21. 78. Barnes, Douglass, 83–84. 79. FD to Maria G. Porter, 11 January 1860, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 2:291–94. 80. McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 201–07; Blight, Frederick Douglass’ Civil War, 96–97. 81. DM, 3:278 (June 1860). Also see DM, 3:306 (August 1860); Blight, Frederick Douglass’ Civil War, 53. 82. DM, 3:278 (June 1860). 83. DM, 3:339–40 (October 1860), 3:353 (November 1860). 84. John R. McKivigan, “Frederick Douglass and the Abolitionist Response to the Election of 1860,” in The Election of 1860 Reconsidered, ed. A. James Fuller (Kent, Ohio, 2013), 154–60; McKivigan, “Frederick Douglass–Gerrit Smith Friendship,” 223–24. 85. DM, 3:451 (May 1861), 4:166 (October 1861); Blight, Frederick Douglass’ Civil War, 82–84, 86. 86. DM, 4:529–30 (October 1861); 4:547–48 (November 1861); 5:705–06 (September 1862), 5:817 (April 1863); Blight, Frederick Douglass’ Civil War, 118. 87. John Stauffer, Giants: The Parallel Lives of Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln (New York, 2008), 243–45; DM, 5:721 (October 1862). 88. New York Independent, 27 June 1861. Another text is in DM, 4:484 (July 1861). 89. Robert S. Levine, Dislocating Race and Nation: Episodes in Nineteenth-Century American Literary Nationalism (Chapel Hill, N.C., 2008), 192–200; Hannah-Rose Murray, “A ‘Negro Hercules’: Frederick Douglass’ Celebrity in Britain,” Celebrity Studies, 7:264–79 (2015). 90. DM, 5:n.p. (August 1863). 91. Ibid. 92. C. W. Foster to FD, 13, 21 August 1863, General Correspondence File, reel 1, frames 834–35, 842–43L, FD Papers, DLC; Benjamin Quarles, The Negro in the Civil War (New York, 1953), 208. 93. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:207. 94. John R. McKivigan, “ ‘A New Vocation before Me’: Frederick Douglass’s Post–Civil War Lyceum Career,” Howard Journal of Communications, 29:268–91 (July–September 2018). 95. Atlantic Monthly, 18:761–65 (December 1866). 96. NASS, 18 July 1868. 97. Patrick S. Washburn, The African American Newspaper: Voice of Freedom (Evanston, Ill., 2006), 35; Foner, Frederick Douglass, 277–79; James H. Whyte, Uncivil War: Washington during the Reconstruction, 1865–1878 (New York, 1958), 252–53; Roland E. Wolseley, The Black Press, USA (Iowa City, Iowa, 1971), 34–35.
Y7870-Douglass.indb xlvi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
xlvii
98. Foner, Frederick Douglass, 279; Whyte, Uncivil War, 253; Wolseley, Black Press, 34–35; Washburn, African American Newspaper, 35. 99. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:312–13. 100. NNE, 8 September 1870. 101. Foner, Frederick Douglass, 281. 102. Fought, Women, 212–13, 216. 103. For example, see NNE, 6 June, 24 October, 7 November 1872. 104. NNE, 31 October 1872. 105. For example, see NNE, 20 October, 3 November 1870, 12 January, 25 July, 5 October 1871. 106. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:313. 107. NNE, 28 November 1872, 6 February, 1 May 1873, 19 March 1874. 108. Whyte, Uncivil War, 253–54; Wolseley, Black Press, 35; Washburn, African American Newspaper, 35. 109. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:313. 110. Circular reprinted in U.S. Congress, Senate, Select Committee to Investigate the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, Report, 2 April 1880, U.S. Congress, 46th Congress, 2d Session, Senate Report 440 (Serial 1895), Appendix, 44–45. 111. Walter Lynwood Fleming, The Freedmen’s Savings Bank: A Chapter in the Economic History of the Negro Race (1927; New York, 1970), 85–86; Carl R. Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud: A History of the Freedman’s Savings Bank (Urbana, Ill., 1976), 183. 112. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:317. 113. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3. 114. NAR, 139:78–100 (July 1884), 142:437–41 (May 1886). In 1881, Douglass had written an article on racial prejudice for that magazine and would produce two more in 1891, as well as a final one in 1892, making the North American Review the periodical that published the largest amount of his postbellum journalism. NAR, 132:566–77 (June 1881), 153:337–45 (September 1891), 153:451–59 (November 1891); 155:17–24 (July 1892). 115. NAR, 142:437–40 (May 1886). 116. Cosmopolitan (August 1889). 117. Cosmopolitan, 7:365–82 (August 1889). 118. American Missionary Magazine, 19:171 (August 1875). 119. New York American Reformer, 2:388 (November 1883). 120. Ibid.; Harper’s Weekly, 27:782–83 (8 December 1883); New York Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Paper, 29 November 1890. 121. New York Independent, 21 April 1892. 122. NAR, 155:17–24 (July 1892); Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 5:575–607. Douglass similarly called for greater protection of African American rights in the Southern states in an 1892 article in the New York Herald. New York Herald, 21 August 1892. 123. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:336. 124. Washington National View, 24 May 1879; NAR, 153:337–45 (September 1891), 153:451–59 (November 1891). 125. FD to Robert Underwood Johnson, 5 January 1881, FD Manuscripts, Yale University. A duplicate copy is located in the Robert U. Johnson Manuscripts, Duke University Library. 126. See “My Escape from Slavery,” published herein. Robert Underwood Johnson to FD, 16 May 1881, General Correspondence File, reel 3, frames 459–60, FD Papers, DLC. 127. The only significant scholarly acknowledgment of this phase of Douglass’s journalism is found in Bullock, Afro-American Periodical Press, 66. 128. A.M.E. Church Review, 1:213–15 (October 1884), 9:114–26 (October 1892). 129. Philadelphia Christian Recorder, 23 December 1880; A.M.E Church Review, 3:136–43 (October 1886); Bullock, Afro-American Periodical Press, 96, 98.
Y7870-Douglass.indb xlvii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
xlviii
INTRODUCTION TO SERIES FOUR
130. Indianapolis Freeman, 24 November 1892. Douglass’s piece “Toussaint L’Ouverture” was posthumously published in the New York Colored American Magazine, but it had been written more than a decade earlier as a foreword for the never-published English-language edition of Victor Schoelcher’s biography of Toussaint. New York Colored American, 8:487–92 (6 July 1903). 131. FD’s introduction is reprinted herein. See Leonardo Buonomo, “Showing the World: Chicago’s Columbian Exposition in American Writing,” in Moving Bodies, Displaying Nations: National Cultures, Race and Gender in World Expositions, Nineteenth to Twenty-First Century, ed. Guido Abbattista (Trieste, Italy, 2014), 36–37; Elliott M. Rudwick and August Meier, “Black Man in the ‘White City’: Negroes and the Columbian Exposition, 1893,” Phylon, 26:354–61 (1965). 132. A fellow ally of the slain abolitionist John Brown, James Redpath, recruited Douglass to contribute to this collection, which was edited by Alan Thorndike Rice, editor of the North American Review. John R. McKivigan, Forgotten Firebrand: James Redpath and the Making of NineteenthCentury America (Ithaca, N.Y., 2008), 180–81. 133. John Wallace Hutchinson, Story of the Hutchinsons (Tribe of Jesse), ed. Charles E. Mann, 2 vols. (Boston, 1896), 1:xv–xviii. 134. New York Independent, 23 April 1903. 135. Charles A. Sheffield, ed., The History of Florence, Massachusetts, Including a Complete Account of the Northampton Association of Education and Industry (Florence, Mass., 1895), 129–32. 136. I. Garland Penn, The Afro-American Press, and Its Editors (1891; Salem, N.H., 1988), 448. 137. Miscellany File, reel 16, frames 445–47, FD Papers, DLC. 138. Ironically, Douglass had contributed a paragraph to a collection of endorsements compiled by James Russell Lowell and published by the Century magazine in support of an international copyright law. Douglass began his statement by admitting that he had “given very little thought to the subject.” James Russell Lowell, “Open Letters: International Copyright,” Century, 31:629 (February 1886). 139. Helen Pitts Douglass’s writings are mixed haphazardly with her husband’s in the Library of Congress collection, but the largest portion of them can be found in the Speech, Article, and Book File, reels 20–21, FD Papers, DLC. 140. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:485–90. 141. As quoted in John Ernest, Douglass: In His Own Time (Iowa City, Iowa, 2014), 131–32. 142. Penn, Afro-American Press, 68. 143. As quoted in David T. Z. Mindich, “Understanding Frederick Douglass: Toward a New Synthesis Approach to the Birth of Modern American Journalism,” Journalism History, 26:15 (Spring 2000). 144. Bullock, Afro-American Periodical Press, 49–55. More recently, Rachelle C. Prioleau has offered an insightful analysis of principal rhetorical themes found in Douglass’ Monthly. See Rachelle C. Prioleau, “Frederick Douglass: Abolitionist and Humanist,” Howard Journal of Communications, 14:177–90 (July 2003). 145. Hutton, Early Black Press in America, 32–33. For an even earlier survey, see Vishnu V. Oak, The Negro Newspaper (Westport, Conn., 1948). 146. Blight, Frederick Douglass’ Civil War; Martin, Mind of Frederick Douglass; Myers, Frederick Douglass. 147. See Ernest, Douglass, 161–62.
Y7870-Douglass.indb xlviii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
Introduction to Volume One
Douglass’s writing, beyond his autobiographies and his editorials for his four periodicals, has survived in many ways. The National Park Service, which became the curator of Douglass’s final home, Cedar Hill, in the Anacostia neighborhood of Washington, D.C., donated a substantial collection of Douglass materials to the Library of Congress in 1972. The thousands of items in this collection constitute the source used most often for the first three series of the Frederick Douglass Papers. In this volume, which launches the fourth series, the Library of Congress’s Frederick Douglass Collection has supplied us with manuscript or printed copies of sixteen of our sixty-seven items. Six other documents came from other historical archives. The remaining writings were originally published in periodicals and books from 1845 to 1903, eight years after his death. The periodicals that published Douglass most frequently were the North American Review and the New York Independent, with six and four articles respectively. Seven of Douglass’s essays, all written after the Civil War, were printed in black-edited periodicals or newspapers, four of them appearing in magazines published by the African Methodist Episcopal Church. Most of the documents reproduced in this volume were written by Douglass for publication. Eleven appear not to have been written for publication: seven poems, two guest book transcriptions, and two travel diaries. One additional item, a book review, seems to have been written for publication, but no printed copy of it has been located by the Douglass Papers staff. These written documents appeared unevenly across Douglass’s long public life. Six were composed in the 1840s, three in the 1850s, seven in the 1860s, seven in the 1870s, eighteen in the 1880s, and twenty-one in the 1890s. Two documents, an undated newspaper clipping on the subject of the vice presidency and an essay on Toussaint L’Ouverture, cannot be dated precisely but were certainly composed in the 1880s or 1890s. As demonstrated by the documents reproduced in this volume, the subject matter of Douglass’s writing evolved in discernible patterns over his five decades of public life. His antebellum writing almost exclusively xlix
Y7870-Douglass.indb xlix
9/1/21 4:16 PM
l
INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME ONE
advanced arguments for the abolition of slavery—even his 1853 novella, The Heroic Slave, seems primarily a piece of antislavery advocacy. His coauthored public address at the July 1853 Colored National Convention promoted the cause of African American civil rights as well as that of abolition. Only Douglass’s surviving short poetry and his inscriptions in two guest books, all manuscripts not intended for publication, depart from those related topics to deal with religious or personal issues. The Civil War and the Reconstruction era, which immediately followed, marked a significant turning point in Douglass’s writing. With emancipation achieved by passage of the Thirteenth Amendment, Douglass’s pen now focused on rallying public support for winning greater rights and opportunities for the freed people. Closely related to that goal were articles boosting the Republican party, which Douglass viewed as the best political friend of African Americans. In his role as president of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, Douglass wrote public letters and circulars to maintain depositors’ confidence in that institution. The only manuscript document that Douglass wrote during this era—his diary while traveling through the Dominican Republic as assistant secretary to an American diplomatic commission—shows him conscientiously at work in gathering information about that nation. In the final two decades of his life, after the disappointing conclusion of Reconstruction and as the nation’s racial climate worsened, Douglass continued to generate a steady stream of writing on politics and civil rights. He seems to have responded readily to requests from editors of both leading national journals and smaller African American periodicals for his opinions on such matters. As he aged, more of Douglass’s journalistic pieces had an autobiographical character; some were designed to defend his reputation from criticism, and others to describe his past accomplishments. Douglass also produced articles on slavery, abolitionism, and historical topics with which he was familiar, as well as biographical sketches of earlier associates. The large body of journalism produced by Douglass in those decades is supplemented here by the travel diary of his tour of western Europe and Egypt with his second wife, Helen Pitts Douglass. In editing these writings of such varied character and content, the project encountered a number of problems. Published articles or book chapters proved the easiest to handle. Even when a manuscript pre-text was located, the project selected the printed version as our final text. In a few cases, such as Douglass’s entry on American slavery for the Encyclo-
Y7870-Douglass.indb l
9/1/21 4:16 PM
INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME ONE
li
paedia Britannica, considerable searching was required to determine the correct date of publication. When our efforts failed to locate information on a publication date, we supplied an estimated one based on our analysis of the document’s contents. The novella The Heroic Slave, published by Douglass on more than one occasion, presented some unique textual problems that required the inclusion of a special appendix with an apparatus to explain our choice of copy-text and the means by which we determined a definitive critical text. Our decision to include a number of unpublished writings by Douglass generated additional problems. Transcription procedures used by the project in our Correspondence series were adapted for these works. Dates of composition were frequently missing, and so estimates had to be supplied. We worked carefully with archivists at a number of repositories to verify, and in one case refute, the provenance of short inscriptions and poems attributed to Douglass. One of Douglass’s two travel diaries had serious preservation problems; thus, a site visit was necessary in order to inspect that document and verify its text. As in all of our project’s volumes, the documents reproduced here demanded comprehensive annotation of Douglass’s many references—some familiar, some obscure, and many requiring considerable explanation for modern readers. The historical notes, supported by primary sources as well as a host of secondary sources, afford unprecedented access to the context of the nineteenth-century America in which and about which Douglass wrote. It is our hope that the first volume of the Douglass Papers edition of its Journalism and Other Writings series might enable and motivate new generations of scholars to further study of this singular epoch, to which Frederick Douglass made such an unparalleled contribution.
Y7870-Douglass.indb li
9/1/21 4:16 PM
This page intentionally left blank
Editorial Method Jeffery A. Duvall This is the first volume in the Douglass Papers’ fourth and final series, Journalism and Other Writings, which is designed to introduce the reader to the broadest range of Douglass’s efforts as an author. Consisting of works that appeared in publications other than his own newspapers, as well as a number of unpublished items, Volume 1 brings together all such known material in a single volume for the first time. Volume 2 will provide an overview of the thousands of editorials, through a small sampling of the best of them, that Douglass published in his own newspapers (the North Star, Frederick Douglass’ Paper, Douglass’ Monthly, and the New National Era) between 1847 and 1872. The present volume begins with one of the earliest extant examples of Douglass’s literary efforts, the poem “I Was Born a Slave,” which was written c. 1842, and concludes with several pieces that were published after Douglass’s death in February 1895. The remaining sixty-plus items cover a range of topics written for a variety of audiences, including two unpublished travel diaries, his only substantive work of fiction (the novella The Heroic Slave), a scholarly essay on slavery in the United States, and a short think piece calling for the abolition of the office of vice president of the United States. Selection of Copy-Text Three types of documents served as copy-text for the items appearing in this series: printed material appearing in contemporary publications, including Douglass’s own newspapers; autographs, that is, documents written wholly in the handwriting of the person writing it; and documents that were written, either wholly or partially, through the use of typing machines. Of the copy-texts of the sixty-seven items published in this volume, seven (three poems, two guest book inscriptions, and the two travel diaries) were never intended for publication and exist solely in autograph form. The Douglass Papers’ staff was unable to locate a print copy of an eighth item, an apparently unpublished book review of I. Garland Penn’s The Afro-American Press, and Its Editors, for which a typescript, with handwritten corrections, served as copy-text. Printed material provided liii
Y7870-Douglass.indb liii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
liv
EDITORIAL METHOD
the copy-texts of the remaining items in this volume, as well as all the editorials that will appear in the second volume of this series. Autographs served as copy-text when available for unpublished documents. Where no holograph was available, a document appearing in the publication that first printed it served as copy-text. In some instances, however, a publication reprinted an item that first appeared in a different source, but no exemplars of the original printed item have survived. In such situations, the earliest surviving printing served as copy-text, and all known information about the initial publication appears in a note. Transcription of the Documents The essential principle guiding transcription was to record everything in word processing as it appears in the copy-text. The one significant exception is the copy-text for Douglass’s 1853 novella The Heroic Slave, for which the editors followed modern principles of critical editing in determining the copy-text. Our rationale for the emendations to this novella is found in “Textual Notes to The Heroic Slave” at the end of this volume. For copy-texts taken from newspapers, transcription included reproducing aspects of format such as font style (roman or italic) and font effect, such as superscript, small caps, and all caps. Any misspellings or other typographical errors were transcribed without correction, and any symbols were duplicated. Certain document copy-texts are excerpts from unlocated originals. For such cases, the transcript duplicates the symbols used in the copy-text to indicate the omitted portion. For example, if the omitted portion is marked by a series of asterisks in the original publication, then the present edition contains a series of asterisks at the same point in the document. Likewise, if the omitted portion is marked by an extended series of ellipsis points, a similar line of ellipsis points marks the omitted portion of the document in the transcript. Missing text in the body of a document resulting from damage to the original (or to a sole surviving copy of a first printing) is indicated in square brackets by the words [missing text]. For autographs and typewritten documents, the central principle was to record everything the author wrote in composing, correcting, or revising the text. Any authorial alterations, such as insertions and cancellations, were recorded. The symbols used to indicate authorial revisions were angle brackets () to indicate insertions, and struck-through type (canceled) to indicate cancellations. Spelling was preserved, and capitalization, punctuation, and abbreviation retained, exactly as found in the
Y7870-Douglass.indb liv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
EDITORIAL METHOD
lv
autographs. Superscription was duplicated for both letter characters and numerals. Following standard typographical conventions, words underlined once in the autographs have been italicized in the transcript, those underlined twice have been represented in small caps, and words underlined three times appear as all caps. Illegible words or passages were recorded with the bracketed term [illegible]. Emendation and Standardization of Autographs and Typewritten Documents A. Silent emendations. No emendations to the transcript, as reproduced from the copy-text, have been made without indicating such by square brackets [ ], with the following exceptions. 1. Superscripts. Superscripts, suffixes in abbreviated words (Fredk), and ordinal numbers (18th), have been brought down to the line. 2. Interlineations. Inserted or marginal text has been properly placed in the running text, the angle brackets have been removed, and the interlineated text has been brought down to the line. 3. Cancellations. Superseded words and phrases struck out by the writer are recorded in the transcription, but are generally omitted from the present edition without editorial comment. In some instances, however, the canceled word or phrase has been deemed important, and the deleted material has been restored to the text, indicated by struck-through type and explained in an annotation if necessary. B. Overt Emendations. The following methods were used in overtly emending the transcript as reproduced from the copy-text. All emendations to the letter texts are recorded, but purely physical characteristics, such as line spacing and paragraph indentation, have been silently regularized. 1. Spelling. Spelling has been preserved as it appears in the copy-text. Misspelled words have not been marked by an editorial [sic]. If the sense of a word has been obscured by misspelling, the word has been spelled correctly, with any changes indicated by square brackets. 2. Abbreviations. Abbreviations have been retained as they appear in the copy-text, but those that are confusing or not easily recognizable are expanded in square brackets. For example, the word “Dolls” has been expanded to “Doll[ar]s” to avoid any confusion.
Y7870-Douglass.indb lv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lvi
EDITORIAL METHOD
3. Punctuation. Punctuation in the copy-text is preserved, with the following exceptions. In cases where independent clauses in a paragraph are not separated by punctuation or joined by a coordinating conjunction, terminal punctuation is inserted in brackets after the first independent clause, and the first word of the following sentence is capitalized, if not already so, and marked by square brackets. Missing quotation marks, such as a single or double closing quote, have been supplied in the appropriate matching style and are indicated by square brackets. 4. Slips of the pen. Slips of the pen, such as recording the same word twice, are uncorrected and not marked by [sic]. 5. Capitalization. The transcript preserves the capitalization found in the correspondence, except that the first word of a sentence, when not capitalized, has been capitalized and indicated by square brackets. 6. Typesetting errors. Three general classes of errors committed by typesetters in printing a document have been corrected. First, words that are misspelled have been corrected, as indicated by square brackets, giving the author the presumption of having spelled the word correctly. Second, when a typographical error renders a passage confusing or misleading, the error has been corrected, as indicated by square brackets. For example, when a document states that a mob “intimated” a speaker, the word has been corrected to “intim[id]ated,” with the changes indicated by square brackets. Third, words not separated by a space have been separated, with the change being indicated by an empty square bracket pair between the words. For instance the phrase “wasalso” has been changed to “was[ ]also” in order to avoid confusion. Textual Verification After initial transcription and before editing, members of the Frederick Douglass Papers Project ensured that the transcribed documents and editorials matched as closely as possible the copy-text as reproduced by photocopy from microfilm or the original holograph. First, the transcribers proofread against the photocopy of the documents or editorials they transcribed, correcting their own typing errors. In the second step, a member of the editorial staff read the photocopy of the copy-text aloud to another member of the staff, who verified the accuracy of the transcription. Next
Y7870-Douglass.indb lvi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
EDITORIAL METHOD
lvii
a member of the staff made any necessary corrections to the transcription to ensure its accuracy, and another member of the staff verified the accuracy of those corrections. Arrangement of Documents and Editorials Documents and editorials are arranged chronologically in both volumes, based on their dates: date of publication if published, approximate date of composition if unpublished. Undated items have been given approximate dates based on context and internal references. When an item includes or has been assigned a month only, it appears at the end of the entries for that month within the given year. Editorial Headings, Head Notes, and Provenance Notes The provenance of each document is indicated in the editorial source note for each item, which precedes each introductory head note. The first sentence of each source note indicates the symbols used to describe the copytext of each item, followed by a colon and the location of copy-text for the document. The second sentence of the source note indicates reprints, if any, of the document in the same form as the copy-text. Each successive sentence in a source note indicates a different form of the document and where that document is located. Further publication information recorded in the source notes has been limited to documents appearing in scholarly compilations, latter-day copies located in collections of archival material, and documents republished (in part or in whole) in Douglass’s own writings. Following the source note, a head note, providing both historical context and a publication history of the item, introduces the documents in this volume. Annotations Numbered footnotes follow the body of each document and editorial. They clarify aspects of the item without attempting to be exhaustive. Generally limited to 250 words, notes most often contain biographical information, including full names as well as birth and death dates parenthetically following the name, whenever possible. Such notes generally include the person’s education and vocation, geographic attachment, and relationship
Y7870-Douglass.indb lvii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lviii
EDITORIAL METHOD
to Douglass. Place-names, including those of towns, geographic features, buildings, and monuments, appear frequently in the annotations. The notes contain explanations of events mentioned in the documents and editorials, as well as elucidations of quotations, literary or historical allusions, and other miscellaneous information such as concepts, publications, and foreign words or phrases. Annotations are not cross-referenced.
Y7870-Douglass.indb lviii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
Timeline of Douglass’s Life
1818 February
Frederick Augustus Washington Bailey was born sometime in February at Holme Hill Farm plantation at Tuckahoe, near the town of Easton, Talbot County, on the eastern shore of Maryland. He was rumored to be the son of Captain Aaron Anthony, the master of his mother, Harriet Bailey. 1824
August
Sent to live in the home of his master, Aaron Anthony, overseer of the Wye Plantation, seat of the powerful Lloyd family. 1826
March
Sent to the Fells Point district of Baltimore to work for Hugh Auld, a ship’s carpenter and the brother-in-law of Aaron Anthony’s daughter, Lucretia Auld. 1827
November
Became the property of Thomas Auld, son-in-law of Aaron Anthony, after Anthony’s death. Remains in the household of Hugh and Sophia Auld, where he was taught rudimentary reading skills by Sophia, who ceased the lessons at her husband’s insistence. 1829–30 Worked for Auld & Harrison, a shipbuilding partnership established by Hugh Auld; practices reading and writing in secret.
lix
Y7870-Douglass.indb lix
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lx
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
1831
December
Bought a used copy of Caleb Bingham’s compilation of speeches The Columbian Orator, which he memorized to hone his reading and speaking skills. Learned of the abolitionist movement after reading newspaper articles about John Quincy Adam’s antislavery petitions in the House of Representatives. 1833
March 6 December
Sent to St. Michaels to work for Thomas Auld. William Lloyd Garrison founded the American AntiSlavery Society in Philadelphia. 1834
January August
Began year as a rented field hand on a farm under the watch of Edward Covey, known as the “slave-breaker.” Repelled a physical attack by Covey and was never whipped or beaten again. 1836
2 April Mid-April
Led a failed escape attempt from the farm of William Freeland. Returned to work for Hugh Auld in Baltimore, who had him trained in the trade of ship caulking. 1837 Joined the East Baltimore Mental Improvement Society, a free black debating club, and there met Anna Murray, who encouraged him to save money and plan an escape. 1838
Spring 3–4 September
Y7870-Douglass.indb lx
Became engaged to Anna Murray. Escaped from Maryland into Massachusetts by borrowing papers from a free black sailor and taking a train from Baltimore to New York City.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
15 September 18 September
lxi
Married Anna Murray in New York City. Moved to New Bedford, Massachusetts, where he changed his name to Douglass. 1839
April
December
Subscribed to the Liberator, an abolitionist weekly edited by William Lloyd Garrison. Heard Garrison, Wendell Phillips, and other abolitionist leaders speak in New Bedford. Obtained a license from the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church to preach. Maria Weston Chapman and the Boston Female AntiSlavery Society published the first volume of The Liberty Bell, an annual gift book sold to raise funds for the abolitionist movement. 1841
10–12 August
Fall
Spoke on his experience as a slave at a Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society convention in Nantucket, Massachusetts, after which he was invited to become a paid itinerant lecturer. Moved his family to Lynn, Massachusetts, where he bought a house. 1842
January
Hired as a permanent lecturer by the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society. 1843
30 May–1 June 15–19 August
Fall
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxi
Met the Hutchinson family singers at the New England Anti-Slavery Convention held in Boston. Successfully opposed a resolution by Henry Highland Garnet at the National Convention of Colored Citizens, in Buffalo, New York, urging slaves to rebel. Joined a group of Garrisonian abolitionists on a speaking tour of the Midwest dubbed the “One Hundred Conventions.”
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lxii
16 September
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
Beaten by a mob during an outdoor antislavery meeting in Pendleton, Indiana. 1844
April
May
Winter
Visited the Northampton Association of Education and Industry, in Florence, Massachusetts, for the first time, and met Sojourner Truth. Visited a second time the following April. Joined the majority at the annual meeting of the American Anti-Slavery Society in endorsing Garrison’s condemnation of the Constitution as proslavery. Began work on his autobiography. 1845
28 May
16 August
28 August
25 October
Published his first autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Written by Himself, which had sold 4,500 copies by September. Sailed from Boston to avoid recapture, leaving his family behind, and began a twenty-one-month tour of Great Britain and Ireland. Arrived in Liverpool, England, and traveled from there to Ireland, where he began a three-month lecture tour. Sold by Thomas Auld to his brother Hugh for $100. 1846
12 December
25 December
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxii
Toured England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland with Garrison. British abolitionist admirers negotiated the purchase and manumission of Douglass from Hugh Auld for the sum of just over $700. Visited Newcastle-upon-Tyne with Anna and Ellen Richardson, who introduced him to Julia Griffiths, a British woman active in the antislavery cause.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
lxiii
1847 4 April 20 April Late September
November
3 December
Left Liverpool to return to the United States. Arrived in Boston and reunited with his family in Lynn. Used just over $2,000 raised by British and Irish friends to purchase a printing press. Began his friendship with Gerrit Smith, a wealthy land speculator living near Peterboro, New York, who had helped found the Liberty party in 1840. Arrived in Rochester, New York, with the intent of establishing a newspaper. Visited John Brown for the first time, at Brown’s home in Springfield, Massachusetts. Published the first issue of his weekly newspaper, the North Star, in partnership with Martin R. Delany. 1848
March Early April
14–15 June
19–20 July 29 August
The American Missionary Association launched a campaign to raise funds to purchase Bibles for slaves. Purchased 4 Alexander Street, his first home in Rochester, which he later mortgaged to keep the North Star financially viable. Attended his first official political gathering, the National Liberty party convention in Buffalo, New York, convened by Gerrit Smith. Attended the Seneca Falls Women’s Rights Convention, where he signed the Declaration of Sentiments. Attended the convention in Buffalo, New York, that resulted in the formation of the Free Soil party. 1849
May
29 June
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxiii
The British reformer Julia Griffiths joined the staff of Douglass’s newspaper as its unofficial business manager. Became the sole editor of the North Star when Delany ended his involvement with the paper.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lxiv
Fall
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
Local Garrisonians questioned the North Star’s solvency under Douglass’s management. 1850
8 September 23–24 October
As part of the Compromise of 1850, Congress passed a new Fugitive Slave Act. Attended the first national Women’s Rights Convention, held in Worcester, Massachusetts. 1851
April
9 May 26 June
Agreed to merge the North Star with Gerrit Smith’s struggling Liberty Party Paper, accepting Smith’s financial support and his antislavery interpretation of the Constitution. Broke with Garrison openly over the issue of political action to end slavery, which Garrison opposed. Published the first edition of Frederick Douglass’ Paper, a pro–Liberty party newspaper, with the motto “All Rights for All!” 1852
Summer
5 July
11 August
October
14 October
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxiv
Moved his family to a hilltop farm overlooking downtown Rochester, located two miles from the city’s center, on the St. Paul Road. Delivered the speech “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?” at a meeting of the Rochester Ladies AntiSlavery Society. Elected secretary of the second Free Soil party convention, held at the Masonic Hall in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Campaigned in central New York in support of Gerrit Smith’s successful independent candidacy for the U.S. House of Representatives. Addressed the Free Democratic party convention, the successor to the Free Soil party, in Pittsburgh and endorsed John P. Hale, its presidential nominee, in Frederick Douglass’ Paper.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
lxv
1853 January
6–8 July
Winter
Published his novella, The Heroic Slave, in the gift book Autographs for Freedom, a collection of antislavery writings edited by Julia Griffiths and sold to raise funds for Frederick Douglass’ Paper. Organized and hosted the Colored National Convention in Rochester, New York, where he was criticized by several black leaders for his industrial school proposal on the grounds that it would promote segregation. Garrison’s Liberator alluded to Julia Griffiths having caused “much unhappiness” in the Douglass household; Douglass responded heatedly. 1854
7 August
Political mentor and benefactor Gerrit Smith resigned his seat in the House of Representatives out of frustration with the legislative process. 1855
Mid-June 26–28 June August
Julia Griffiths departed Rochester to return to Great Britain. Helped found the Radical Abolitionist party at a Syracuse, New York, convention. Second autobiography, My Bondage and My Freedom, published. 1856
28–29 May
July 15 August
7 December
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxv
At the urging of Gerrit Smith, attended the Radical Abolitionist party’s nominating convention in Syracuse, New York. Met the German immigrant journalist Ottilie Assing for the first time. Endorsed the Republican party’s presidential ticket as the most electable antislavery ticket, in an editorial in Frederick Douglass’ Paper. Visited by John Brown in Rochester.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lxvi
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
1857 14 May
Addressed anniversary meeting of the American Abolition Society in New York City, condemning the recent Dred Scott Supreme Court ruling. 1858
Late January June 7 October
John Brown resided at Douglass’s Rochester home for three weeks, planning his raid on Harpers Ferry. Launched new periodical, Douglass’ Monthly, aimed largely at British readers. Presided over an anti-capital-punishment rally in Rochester to protest the execution of Ira Stout, a convicted murderer. 1859
February
19–21 August
16–18 October 19–21 October
12 November
Delivered the lecture “Self-Made Man” for the first of over fifty times during his career while on a speaking tour of Illinois and Wisconsin. Met with John Brown at Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, but chose not to join the plot to attack the Harpers Ferry Arsenal because he believed the plan would ultimately fail. John Brown attempted to start an armed slave revolt by seizing the U.S. arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia. Warned that he might be placed under arrest, following the failure of the Harpers Ferry raid, Douglass fled from Philadelphia to Rochester and finally to Canada. Sailed from Quebec to Great Britain for greater safety because of his prior close connections with John Brown. 1860
13 March Mid-April
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxvi
Douglass’s youngest daughter, Annie, died at the age of eleven. Returned to the United States, arriving in Portland, Maine.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
August 19 September
c. 2 October
lxvii
Due to financial difficulties, forced to cease publication of his weekly, Frederick Douglass’ Paper. Having endorsed the Radical Abolitionist Gerrit Smith for president the preceding month, attended a convention in Worcester, Massachusetts, organized by Stephen S. Foster, in an unsuccessful bid to win their backing for Smith. Campaigned extensively in western New York in support of a state equal-suffrage referendum. 1861
February–March April
12–14 April
May–June
The Confederacy sent its first diplomatic mission to Europe. Denounced secession but called on the Lincoln administration to make the goal of war emancipation as well as reunion. Contemplated visiting Haiti to investigate conditions for prospective African American emigrants. The Civil War officially began with the attack on Fort Sumter in the harbor of Charleston, South Carolina, by Confederate forces. Lectured on the progress of the war on Sunday afternoons in Rochester’s Spring Street A.M.E. Church; critical of Lincoln for not taking stronger antislavery action. 1862
5 February
Summer
31 December
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxvii
Lectured in a series sponsored by the Emancipation League of Boston, calling on the federal government to enlist black soldiers as a means of facilitating a Union victory. U.S. Ambassador Charles Francis Adams warned Washington, D.C., that the British government was seriously considering formally recognizing the Confederate States of America. Attended a celebration in Boston for the issuance of the Emancipation Proclamation.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lxviii
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
1863 February–July 1 August
10 August Mid-August
Traveled extensively in the North to recruit blacks for Union army regiments being raised by Massachusetts. Resigned as army recruiter after protesting the lack of equal pay and promotion opportunities given black Union soldiers. Had interviews with Secretary of War Edwin Stanton and President Abraham Lincoln in Washington, D.C. Returned to Rochester and issued the valedictory issue of Douglass’ Monthly in anticipation of receiving a military commission, which never arrived. 1864
22 May 19 August
4–6 October
Signed a public call for a convention to replace Lincoln as the Republican presidential candidate in 1864. Met with President Lincoln in the Executive Mansion (White House), Washington, D.C., to discuss means of recruiting more slaves to run away from masters and enlist in the Union army. Presided over the National Convention of Colored Men at Syracuse, New York, and gave a lukewarm endorsement to Lincoln’s reelection. 1865
4 March 9 April
14 April Fall
6 December
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxviii
Attended Lincoln’s second inauguration in Washington, D.C. General Robert E. Lee surrendered the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia, effectively ending the Civil War. President Lincoln shot by John Wilkes Booth. Intended to showcase the accomplishments of African American men and women, Lydia Maria Child’s The Freedman’s Book was published as a primer for freed slaves, of all ages, attending government-sponsored schools in the South. Thirteenth Amendment ratified.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
29 December
lxix
William Lloyd Garrison published the final issue of the Liberator. 1866
7 February
Part of a black delegation that had a contentious interview with President Andrew Johnson at the Executive Mansion, Washington, D.C. 20–21 November Spoke at a meeting of the American Equal Rights Association in Albany, New York. 1867 7 March
Congress authorized creation of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company (the Freedman’s Savings Bank) to meet the financial needs of the emancipated slaves. 1868
9 July 18 July 27 August
Fourteenth Amendment ratified. U.S. Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase died. Publicly endorsed the Republican ticket of Ulysses S. Grant and Schuyler Colfax. 1869
3 August
Delivered speech critical of race relations in the United States, “We Are Not Yet Quite Free,” at a West Indian Emancipation Day celebration in Medina, New York. 1870
3 February 31 May 1 July
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxix
Fifteenth Amendment ratified. The First Force Act enacted to enforce the Fifteenth Amendment. Moved to the District of Columbia and began editing the New National Era to advance black civil rights as well as other reforms.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lxx
September December
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
Purchased a half interest in the New National Era. Became sole owner and publisher of the New National Era. 1871
17 January
26 March 20 April
Appointed assistant secretary to the Santo Domingo Commission; left New York City for the Dominican Republic. Members of the Santo Domingo Commission, including Douglass, arrived back in Washington, D.C. The Third Force Act, known as the Ku Klux Klan Act, passed in Congress. It authorized President Grant to declare martial law and use military force to suppress the Klan. 1872
13 April
2 June 6 June
28 November
Addressed the National Convention of the Colored People of the United States, held in New Orleans, Louisiana, on the topic “The Republican Party Must Be Maintained in Power”; endorsed Grant’s reelection in the New National Era. Douglass’s home on South Avenue in Rochester, New York, burned down, most likely from arson. Nominated by Victoria Woodhull, the first woman to run for president, to run as vice president on the Equal Rights party presidential ticket. Nomination was neither acknowledged nor accepted. Turned over editorship of the New National Era to his sons. 1873
13 April
Massacre of African Americans in Colfax, Louisiana. 1874
Mid-March
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxx
Major General Oliver Otis Howard faced courtmartial, having been charged with misappropriation
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
Late March 29 June
22 October
lxxi
of funds intended for black soldiers under his command during the Civil War. Appointed president of the Freedman’s Bank; campaigned to keep public trust in the institution. Voted, along with the bank’s board of trustees, to close the Freedman’s Savings Bank, believing it no longer solvent. Final edition of the New National Era published. 1877
Spring
17 June
Appointed U.S. marshal of the District of Columbia by President Rutherford B. Hayes, becoming the first African American to receive a federal appointment requiring Senate approval. Visited his former master, Thomas Auld, on his deathbed in St. Michaels, Maryland. 1878 Moved to a fifteen-acre estate, which he and Anna named Cedar Hill, in the Anacostia neighborhood of the District of Columbia. 1879
January–March
The “Exoduster” movement began as thousands of African Americans from the former Confederate states moved into Kansas and other midwestern states in an effort to get away from the violence and lack of opportunity they faced in the South. 1881
May
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxi
Appointed recorder of deeds for the District of Columbia by President James A. Garfield. Published his third autobiography, Life and Times of Frederick Douglass.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lxxii
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
1882 Spring
4 August
Hired Helen M. Pitts, a graduate of Mount Holyoke College and former teacher of freed blacks in Virginia and Indiana, as a clerk. Anna Murray Douglass died. 1883
5 May
15 October
Joined other African American leaders in Washington, D.C., in calling for a National Convention of Colored Men to meet there in September. The location of the meeting would be changed to Louisville, Kentucky. Supreme Court struck down the Civil Rights Act of 1875. John Marshall Harlan was the only justice to dissent. 1884
24 January
4 November
Married Helen M. Pitts, a younger white woman. Their interracial relationship generated public controversy as well as disapproval from many members of both families. Grover Cleveland, a Democrat, elected president of the United States. 1886
15 September
Sailed from New York City with second wife, Helen M. Pitts, aboard the City of Rome to England, France, Italy, Egypt, and Greece on an extended tour. 1887
8 March 11 August
Henry Ward Beecher died. Returned to the United States. 1888
19 June
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxii
Attended the National Republican Party Convention, meeting in Chicago, Illinois.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
6 November
lxxiii
Benjamin Harrison, a Republican, defeated Grover Cleveland in the presidential election. 1889
July 14 November
Victor Schoelcher’s biography of Toussaint L’Ouverture published in France. Accepted appointment from President Harrison as U.S. minister resident and consul general to Haiti. Presented his diplomatic credentials to the government of Haiti. 1890
4 November
Democrats swept the midterm election and regained control of the U.S. House of Representatives for the first time since the Civil War. The Republicans also lost seats in the Senate. 1891
22 April
3 July
Interviewed by Irvine Garland Penn for his book The Afro-American Press and Its Editors. Haitian government denies the United States permission to lease the port of Môle-Saint-Nicolas as a refueling station. Returned to the United States, by way of New York City, on leave from Haitian post. Resigned in August. 1892
April June
October
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxiii
Endorsed renomination of Benjamin Harrison for president. Attended the Republican Convention, in Minneapolis, Minnesota, as a nondelegate and called for the inclusion of an antilynching plank in the Republican party platform. Campaigned for the Republican ticket. Accepted appointment from the government of Haiti to serve as commissioner of the Haitian pavilion at the World’s Columbian Exposition, in Chicago.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
lxxiv
TIMELINE OF DOUGLASS’S LIFE
1893 29 April
Joined Ida B. Wells and other activists in protesting the lack of African American representation at the World’s Columbian Exposition. 1 May–30 October World’s Columbian Exposition. 1895 20 February
Died at his Cedar Hill home in Washington, D.C., after attending a women’s rights convention. 1903
1 December
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxiv
Helen Pitts Douglass died in Washington, D.C.
9/1/21 4:16 PM
The Hutchinson Family, c. 1847. Courtesy of the Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division. [LC-DIG-pga-04503]. Jane “Jennie” Marsh Parker, c. 1885. Photo courtesy of Ellen L. Parker, greatgranddaughter of Jane Marsh Parker.
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxv
9/1/21 4:16 PM
Douglass on the deck of the U.S.S. Tennessee, 1871. Courtesy of the Monroe County Public Library, Key West, Fla. President Ulysses S. Grant, c. 1870–1880. The Brady-Handy Collection. Courtesy of the Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division. [LC-BH826–28899].
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxvi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
Major General Oliver O. Howard, c. 1860–1865. Courtesy of the Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division. [LC-B813–3719A]. John Marshall Harlan. Courtesy of the Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division. [LC-USZ62–40292].
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxvii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
Frederick and Helen Pitts Douglass at Niagara Falls, 1884. Courtesy of the National Park Service, Frederick Douglass National Historic Site, Washington, D.C. FRDO-11001.
World’s Columbian Exposition, Chicago, 1893. Photograph by Frances Benjamin Johnston. Courtesy of the Library of Congress, Prints and Photographs Division. [LC-USZ62–120452].
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxviii
9/1/21 4:16 PM
Ida B. Wells, c. 1893. Photograph by Sallie E. Garrity. Courtesy of the National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution, NPG.2009.36.
Frederick Douglass, c. 1895. Photograph by C. M. Battey. Courtesy of the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture. 2009.37.1.
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxix
9/1/21 4:16 PM
This page intentionally left blank
THE FREDERICK DOUGLASS PAPERS Series Four: Journalism and Other Writings
Volume 1
Y7870-Douglass.indb lxxxi
9/1/21 4:16 PM
This page intentionally left blank
I WAS BORN A SLAVE (c. 1842) Post Family Collection, Charles L. Blockson Afro American Collection, Temple University, Philadelphia, Pa.
In the fall of 1842, Frederick Douglass made his first visit to western New York State, where he would reside from 1847 to 1870. He returned there the following summer as part of the famous “One Hundred Conventions” lecturing campaign of the Garrisonian American Anti-Slavery Society. At some point on one of these early speaking tours, Douglass was befriended by the Post family of Rochester. A short signed poem in Douglass’s handwriting was located among other Post family items by the Africana artifact collector Charles L. Blockson. Although not dated, the poem is presumed by the project to have been written for some form of autographed guestbook during one of Douglass’s first encounters with this Quaker abolitionist family, with whose members he would remain friendly for the rest of his life. Hewitt, Women’s Activism and Social Change, 116–17, 119–20, 140, 143, 184, 230–32. I was born a slave,1 And had to obey a masters command, And finding no arm to save, In all this christian land, So I resolved to run away, And thus get rid of slavery, FREDERICK DOUGLASS 1. Douglass was born a slave of the plantation overseer Aaron Anthony in early 1818 at Holme Hill Farm, Talbot County, Maryland. After Anthony’s death in 1826, Douglass became the property of Thomas Auld, Anthony’s son-in-law, and was later transferred to Auld’s brother Hugh, a Baltimore shipwright. Douglass successfully fled slavery on 3 September 1838 while under his charge. Dickson Preston, Young Frederick Douglass: The Maryland Years (Baltimore, 1985), 22–34, 84–85, 143, 173–75.
1
Y7870-Douglass.indb 1
9/1/21 4:16 PM
2
NIAGARA
NIAGARA (1843) “Anti-Slavery Album of Contributions from Friends of Freedom,” Benjamin Jones Papers, DLC.
In the fall of 1843, Douglass joined a group of Garrisonian abolitionists on a speaking tour, dubbed the “One Hundred Conventions,” throughout New York and the Midwest. This was the same tour during which Douglass was assaulted and nearly killed by an antiabolition mob in Pendleton, Indiana, on 16 September 1843. Douglass spent several days recovering at a nearby Quaker home before continuing eastward into Ohio. It is likely that sometime late in the fall of 1843, he came into contact with Benjamin S. Jones, the recording secretary of the Ohio American AntiSlavery Society—the state affiliate of William Lloyd Garrison’s national abolition organization. Jones maintained a bound volume of signed poems and inscriptions from abolitionists traveling through Ohio, including items from such notables as Garrison, Wendell Phillips, Charles L. Remond, Angelina Grimké Weld, and John Greenleaf Whittier. It was probably while speaking in Jones’s hometown of New Lisbon that Douglass wrote the following short inscription. In it, he describes his impressions of Niagara Falls, which he had seen for the first time earlier on the One Hundred Conventions tour. Jones’s book, bearing the title “An Anti-Slavery Album of Contributions From Friends of Freedom,” was presented to the Library of Congress by his daughter in 1935. Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 3:179–80; Sylvia Lyons Render, “Freedom,” Quarterly Journal of the Library of Congress, 31:161–65 (July 1974). Niagara.1 I went to this wonderful place with the most lofty expec[ta]tions. I had heard—read—thought and felt much in regard to it. I had frequaintly gazed with extreme delight upon its miniture I longed to go behold the original, In my imagination, I had often—seen its broad—blue waters rushing on amidst the dim,—dark gloom of its own creation.—toward the awful cataract.—threatening total to any power interposing a barrier to its onward progress. Its—inspirations of buiaty—grandure—
Y7870-Douglass.indb 2
9/1/21 4:16 PM
GOD BE THANKED
3
wonder—and terror, (long before I saw it) danced sportively in my soul, I saw its majestic spray flying wildly into the air,—its buiatiful rainbow and heard its awful thunders. As I approached—it I felt somewhat as I did at the approaching hour, when for the first time I was to stand on free soil. and breath free air. When I came into its awful presence the power of discription failed me, an irrisistible power closed my lips Completely. Charmed I stood with eyes fixed, all, all absorbed.—scarcly concious of my own existence, I felt as I never felt before. The heavy trees all around me quivered the ground trembled,—the—mighty rocks shook!—as its awful roar gave them its terrible mandate. My Courage quailed. In unison with tree—rock, hill and dale, I trembled totally subdued I stood in solemn reverance. The awful God,—was there! FREDK DOUGLASS FEB 2D 1843 1. The falls lie along the Niagara River, which serves as a boundary between the United States and Canada, and are formed as water from Lake Erie drops approximately 165 feet into Lake Ontario. “Niagara Falls” is the name collectively given to three adjacent cataracts. Douglass referred to the power and beauty of Niagara Falls frequently in his speeches over the years. In August 1884, Douglass and his second wife, Helen Pitts Douglass, visited the falls on their honeymoon. McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 322; Leon E. Seltzer, ed., The Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer of the World (1952; New York, 1970), 1319.
GOD BE THANKED! (1845) “Susan Wright Clark Notebook, 1845–1847,” Jonas Gilman Clark Papers, Box A-10–9, Clark University Archives.
Jonas Gilman Clark and his wife, Susan Wright Clark, were active Massachusetts abolitionists in the 1840s. Jonas was financially successful in a number of enterprises, including carriage making, tinware manufacturing, and hardware retailing. He married Susan Wright in 1836, and both became active supporters of Garrisonian abolitionism in the Worcester area. Susan kept a ledger from 1845 to 1847 in which she collected poems or short inscriptions by abolitionists and other reformers she encountered. Among them were Adin Ballou, founder of the Hopedale utopian community, and the black abolitionists William Wells Brown and Frederick Douglass. Douglass visited the Clarks’ hometown of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 3
9/1/21 4:16 PM
GOD BE THANKED
3
wonder—and terror, (long before I saw it) danced sportively in my soul, I saw its majestic spray flying wildly into the air,—its buiatiful rainbow and heard its awful thunders. As I approached—it I felt somewhat as I did at the approaching hour, when for the first time I was to stand on free soil. and breath free air. When I came into its awful presence the power of discription failed me, an irrisistible power closed my lips Completely. Charmed I stood with eyes fixed, all, all absorbed.—scarcly concious of my own existence, I felt as I never felt before. The heavy trees all around me quivered the ground trembled,—the—mighty rocks shook!—as its awful roar gave them its terrible mandate. My Courage quailed. In unison with tree—rock, hill and dale, I trembled totally subdued I stood in solemn reverance. The awful God,—was there! FREDK DOUGLASS FEB 2D 1843 1. The falls lie along the Niagara River, which serves as a boundary between the United States and Canada, and are formed as water from Lake Erie drops approximately 165 feet into Lake Ontario. “Niagara Falls” is the name collectively given to three adjacent cataracts. Douglass referred to the power and beauty of Niagara Falls frequently in his speeches over the years. In August 1884, Douglass and his second wife, Helen Pitts Douglass, visited the falls on their honeymoon. McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 322; Leon E. Seltzer, ed., The Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer of the World (1952; New York, 1970), 1319.
GOD BE THANKED! (1845) “Susan Wright Clark Notebook, 1845–1847,” Jonas Gilman Clark Papers, Box A-10–9, Clark University Archives.
Jonas Gilman Clark and his wife, Susan Wright Clark, were active Massachusetts abolitionists in the 1840s. Jonas was financially successful in a number of enterprises, including carriage making, tinware manufacturing, and hardware retailing. He married Susan Wright in 1836, and both became active supporters of Garrisonian abolitionism in the Worcester area. Susan kept a ledger from 1845 to 1847 in which she collected poems or short inscriptions by abolitionists and other reformers she encountered. Among them were Adin Ballou, founder of the Hopedale utopian community, and the black abolitionists William Wells Brown and Frederick Douglass. Douglass visited the Clarks’ hometown of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 3
9/1/21 4:16 PM
4
GOD BE THANKED
Hubbardston, Massachusetts, on 6 July 1845, shortly after the publication of his Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. Douglass’s signed, page-long inscription in Susan Wright Clark’s book recited many familiar points from the Garrisonians’ critique of the proslavery attitudes of most the nation’s religious institutions. Shortly after their encounter, Douglass left the United States for a tour of the British Isles. The Clarks departed Massachusetts a few years later to pursue economic opportunities in California. They returned to Worcester after the Civil War and funded the establishment of Clark University in that city with a generous donation. Susan Wright Clark’s notebook with Douglass’s inscription eventually was donated to that university’s archives. [Susan Wright Clark, comp.], In Memoriam: Jonas Gilman Clark (New York, [1900]), n.p.; William A. Koelsch, “Grass-Roots Garrisonians in Central Massachusetts: The Case of Hubbardston’s Jonas and Susan Clark,” Historical Journal of Massachusetts, 31:73–89 (Winter 2003).
God be thanked! The sublime, and world saving principles of the ever blessed Jesus do not depend upon an organized self constituted church:— for ether there existance or propagation, [illegible] is independant self existant and eternal. It has the power and the right to summon its ministers from the haunts of wickedness, and the darkness of ignorance, and through them confound the wisdom of the crafty, and bring to naught the counsels of the ungodly. It is not confined to time nor place, It is with us only so far as we are with it, The church cannot hold it, It breaks over and through its massive walls as a horse though a spiders web, It rushes from the alter at the first call of suffering humanity, and flies to its relief, Thus we see it on its high mission of mercy, raising the drunkard from the ditch—washing the mud from his swollen eyes and bloated face, clothing him in his right mind—sending him home, a blessing to his distressed family and friends. And thus we see it snatching the prostitute as from the terrible jaws of death, The condemned prisoner from the malicious gallows, The perishing & and whip-scarred slave from his galling fetters, supplanting pollolution with purity—Falsehood with truth, & devastating war,—with the heavenly peace with omnipotent love. FREDERICK DOUGLASS JULY 1845
Y7870-Douglass.indb 4
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE FOLLY OF OUR OPPONENTS (1845) The Liberty Bell (Boston, 1845), 166–72.
From 1839 to 1857, Maria Weston Chapman and the Boston Female Anti-Slavery Society published a gift book titled The Liberty Bell, which they sold at their annual fair. The book contained letters, essays, poems, and stories by such prominent figures as John Quincy Adams, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Harriet Martineau, and Elizabeth Barrett Browning, along with contributions by antislavery activists. The main purpose of The Liberty Bell and similar gift books was to raise funds for the abolitionist movement, but its publishers hoped that the literary appeal of the volume would attract converts to their cause. Douglass was invited by Chapman to contribute to the 1845 volume, and his inclusion did not go unnoticed by the literary critic and journalist Margaret Fuller, who wrote that one of the most interesting features of the 1845 edition was the inclusion of writings by African Americans: “These not only compare favorably with those penned by white hands, but—when we see such rapid progress as in the case of Douglass, who was ‘only six years since a fugitive from a Southern cornfield’—are the most unanswerable arguments in favor of the capacities of the African race. Their claims need no argument.” New York Daily Tribune, 7 January 1845; Lee Chambers-Schiller, “ ‘A Good Work among the People’: The Political Culture of the Boston Antislavery Fair,” in The Abolitionist Sisterhood: Women’s Political Culture in Antebellum America, ed. Jean Fagan Yellin and John C. Van Horne (Ithaca, N.Y., 1994), 258–59, 265–66; Ralph Thompson, “The Liberty Bell and Other Anti-Slavery Gift-Books,” New England Quarterly, 7:154–67 (March 1934); Benjamin Quarles, “Sources of Abolitionist Income,” Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 32:72–74 (June 1945).
In a note enclosing this article, Mr. Douglass says:—“It was intended for a place in the Liberty Bell, but my literary advantages have been so limited, that I am ill prepared to decide what is, and what is not, appropriate for such a collection. I looked exceedingly strange in my own eyes,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 5
9/1/21 4:16 PM
6
THE FOLLY OF OUR OPPONENTS
as I sat writing. The thought of writing for a book!—and only six years since a fugitive from a Southern cornfield1—caused a singular jingle in my mind.” DR. DEWEY,2 in his somewhat notorious defence of American Morals, published soon after his return to this country from Europe, where he had witnessed those morals subjected to a most rigid examination, treats of the conduct of the American people with regard to prejudice and Slavery; and, in extenuation of their conduct, speaks of the existence of an “impassable barrier” between the white and colored people of this country, and proceeds to draw a most odious picture of the character of his colored fellow-countrymen.3 Mean and wicked as is this position, the Doctor assumes it; and in so doing, becomes the favorite representative of a large class of his divine order, as well as of his white fellow-citizens, who, like himself, being stung to very shame by the exposures abroad of their naked inhumanity at home, strive, with fig-leaf sophistry, to cover their guilt from the penetrating eye and scorching rebukes of the Christian world. Fortunately for the cause of truth and human brotherhood, it has reached a period, when such mean-spirited efforts tend more to advance than retard its progress. Ingenious as are the arguments of its foes, they but defeat the object they are intended to promote. Their authors, in seeking thus to cover their sins, succeed only in lighting the lamp of investigation by which their guilt is more completely exposed. It is the decree of the Supreme Ruler of the universe, that he will confound the wisdom of the crafty, and bring to naught the counsels of the ungodly; and how faithfully is his decree executed upon those who bring their worldly wisdom to cover up the guilt of the American people! Their iniquity has grown too large for its robe. When one part is covered, another, equally odious and revolting, is made to appear. The efforts of priests and politicians to stretch the garment, to suit the dimensions of this giant sin, has resulted in tearing it asunder, and leaving the monster revealed as perhaps it never was before. When they tell the world that the negro is ignorant, and naturally and intellectually incapacitated to appreciate and enjoy freedom, they also publish their own condemnation, by bringing to light those infamous Laws by which the Slave is compelled to live in the grossest ignorance.4 When they tell the world that the Slave is immoral, vicious and degraded, they but invite attention to their own depravity: for the world sees the Slave stripped, by his accusers, of every safeguard to virtue, even of that purest and most sacred institution of marriage. When they represent the Slave
Y7870-Douglass.indb 6
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE FOLLY OF OUR OPPONENTS
7
as being destitute of religious principle—as in the preceding cases—they profit nothing BY the plea. In addition to their moral condemnation they brand themselves with bold and daring impiety, in making it an offence punishable with fine and imprisonment, and even death, to teach a Slave to read the will of God. When they pretend that they hold the Slave out of actual regard to the Slave’s welfare, and not because of any profit which accrues to themselves, as owners, they are covered with confusion by the single fact that Virginia alone has realized, in one short year, eighteen millions of dollars from the sale of human flesh.5 When they attempt to shield themselves by the grossly absurd and wicked pretence that the Slave is contented and happy, and, therefore, “better off” in Slavery than he could be possessed of freedom, their shield is broken by that long and bloody list of advertisements for runaway Slaves who have left their happy homes, and sought for freedom, even at the hazard of losing their lives in the attempt to gain it.6 When it is most foolishly asserted by Henry Clay,7 and those he represents, that the freedom of the colored is incompatible with the liberty of the white people of this country, the wicked intent of its author, and the barefaced absurdity of the proposition, are equally manifest. And when John C. Calhoun8 and Senator Walker9 attempt to prove that freedom is fraught with deafness, insanity and blindness to the people of color, their whole refuge of lies is swept away by the palpable inaccuracy of the last United States Census. And when, to cap the climax, Dr. Dewey tells the people of England that the white and colored people in this country are separated by an ‘impassible barrier,’ the hundreds of thousands of mulattoes, quadroons, &c. in this country, silently but unequivocally brand him with the guilt of having uttered a most egregious falsehood. Bad, however, as are the apologies which the American people make in defence of themselves and their ‘peculiar institution,’10 I am always glad to see them. I prize them very highly, as indications of a living sense of shame, which renders them susceptible of outward influences, and which shall one day bring them to repentance. Men seldom sink so deep in sin as to rid themselves of all disposition to apologise for their iniquity;— when they do, it is quite idle to labor for their reformation. Fortunately for our brethren under the accursed yoke, the American people have not yet reached that depth; and whilst there is a sense of shame left, there is strong ground for hope. The year eighteen hundred and forty-four has produced an abundant harvest of Anti-Slavery discussion. Slavery and prejudice cannot endure discussion, even though such discussion be had
Y7870-Douglass.indb 7
9/1/21 4:16 PM
8
THE FOLLY OF OUR OPPONENTS
in its favor. The light necessary to reason by, is at once too painful to the eyes of these twin-monsters of darkness to be endured. Their motto is, “Put out the light!” Thanks to Heaven, “the morning light is breaking;”11 our cause is onward; the efforts of our enemies, not less that the efforts of our friends, are contributing to increase the strength of that sentiment at home, as well as abroad, which is very soon to dash down the bloody altar of Slavery, and “proclaim liberty through all the land, unto all the inhabitants thereof.”12 LYNN, MASSACHUSETTS, U.S. 1. On Monday, 3 September 1838, Douglass boarded a train in Baltimore carrying the identification papers of a black sailor. After passing through Delaware and Philadelphia, he arrived in New York City on Tuesday, 4 September 1838. The publication dates of the Liberty Bell were dated with the year for which they were intended rather than the year of publication. Thus, Douglass correctly claims that he escaped slavery six years earlier, since he wrote this to Chapman on 27 October 1844. Frederick Douglass, “My Escape from Slavery,” Century Magazine, 21:125–31 (November 1881); McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 69–71; Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 1:43; Thompson, “The Liberty Bell,” 154–67. 2. Orville Dewey (1794–1882) was a Unitarian minister born in Sheffield, Massachusetts. After graduating from Williams College and then Andover Theological Seminary, Dewey accepted an appointment to preach at various churches for the American Education Society. Greatly influenced by William Ellery Channing, he served as Channing’s assistant from 1821 to 1823 and then moved to New Bedford, Massachusetts, where he remained a minister until 1833. After suffering from a nervous disorder, he moved his family to New York, where he continued to preach. Poor health forced Dewey to retire from the ministry in 1849. Although he was firmly opposed to slavery, he was too cautious to support the antislavery cause actively, viewing abolitionism as a threat to the preservation of the Union. He supported the Compromise of 1850, believing that the Fugitive Slave Law was a necessary step to satisfy Southerners, which prompted criticism from other Unitarian abolitionists. Douglas C. Stange, British Unitarians against American Slavery, 1833–65 (London, 1984), 171–72; James D. Bratt, ed., Antirevivalism in Antebellum America: A Collection of Religious Voices (New Brunswick, N.J., 2006), 81–82; American National Biography (online). 3. In 1844, Orville Dewey wrote an article entitled “On American Morals and Manners.” It was published in the Christian Examiner and then as a pamphlet. In the essay, Dewey claimed that many Northerners were against the abolition movement because they believed it to be “dangerous to the peace of the country, to the union of the States.” He further claimed that blacks in America would forever be a “small and depressed minority” because they were separated from whites by “impassable physical, if not mental barriers.” Dewey believed that only through their entire removal from the country could blacks achieve “any fair chance as men.” Orville Dewey, On American Morals and Manners (Boston, 1844), 18–21; Stange, British Unitarians, 171–72. 4. As early as the 1740s, some Southern states enacted variations of laws that prohibited the teaching of slaves or free blacks to read and write. While not every state enacted such antiliteracy laws, this type of legislation escalated during the 1830s. In the wake of the Nat Turner slave rebellion and the Jamaican slave revolt, which resulted in the emancipation of the British West Indies, slaveholders in the United States grew increasingly paranoid about the possibility of slave insurrections. To help protect the basic foundation of slavery, Southern states adopted these antiliteracy laws, believing that the education of blacks directly led to rebellion. Most of these laws provided fines or imprisonment for anyone caught teaching slaves or free blacks to read or write. Some states,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 8
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE FOLLY OF OUR OPPONENTS
9
like Maryland, prohibited public assemblies of blacks for religious or educational purposes, but did not punish people for teaching individual blacks to read. Only Virginia, North and South Carolina, and Georgia maintained these strict antiliteracy laws for the entire period, from the 1830s to 1865. George M. Stroud, A Sketch of the Laws Relating to Slavery in the Several States of the United States of America (1827; Philadelphia, 1856), 58–63; Janet Duitsman Cornelius, “When I Can Read My Title Clear”: Literacy, Slavery, and Religion in the Antebellum South (Columbia, S.C., 1991), 32–34; William H. Jeynes, American Educational History: School, Society, and the Common Good (London, 2007), 94–95. 5. The American Anti-Slavery Society produced two publications that discussed the evils of slavery as well as what the institution meant economically to the South. Theodore Weld’s American Slavery As It Is: Testimony of a Thousand Witnesses (1839) and Thomas Ward’s Slavery and the Internal Slave Trade in the United States of North America (1841) were circulated in the United States and in England. Both sources include figures from the slave trade in Virginia and contain a quotation from the editor of the Virginia (Wheeling) Times, who claimed that many men estimated that the number of slaves exported from Virginia between 1835 and 1836 was 120,000. About one-third of these slaves were sold at an average of $600 each, meaning that Virginia made a profit of $24 million that year from the sale of slaves. In his book, Ward claimed that the actual values from the internal slave trade could only be estimated, since the evidence for each state could not be found on any statistical records. The fact that the numbers are merely approximations might account for the difference between the figures published in these antislavery books and Douglass’s figure of $18 million. Theodore Weld, American Slavery As It Is: Testimony of a Thousand Witnesses (New York, 1839), 182–84; Thomas Ward, Slavery and the Internal Slave Trade in the United States of North America; Being Replies to Questions Transmitted by the Committee of the British and Foreign Anti-slavery Society, For the Abolition of Slavery and the Slave Trade Throughout the World, Presented to the General Anti-Slavery Convention, Held in London, June, 1840, By the Executive Committee of the American Anti-Slavery Society (London, 1841), 12, 18; Winfield H. Collins, The Domestic Slave Trade of the Southern States (1904; Port Washington, N.Y., 1969), 52–53. 6. In 1839 the American Anti-Slavery Society published American Slavery As It Is: Testimony of a Thousand Witnesses, compiled by the abolitionist Theodore Weld, as a way to educate Northerners about the evils of slavery. Several abolitionists contributed to the book by giving testimony about their direct encounters with slavery in the South. More importantly, the publication included facts about slavery given by slaveholders as printed in Southern newspapers, letters, periodicals, and books. Throughout the book are multiple examples of the advertisements written by slaveholders for runaway slaves. Douglass most likely used this publication to demonstrate that although slaveholders claimed blacks were better off in slavery, the long list of advertisements for runaways proved otherwise. Weld, American Slavery As It Is, 85–91, 152–54, 159–66; Owen W. Muelder, Theodore Dwight Weld and the American Anti-Slavery Society (Jefferson, N.C., 2011), 100. 7. Henry Clay (1777–1852), a native Virginian, entered politics during the 1790s in his adopted state of Kentucky and quickly rose to national prominence. As a congressman, senator, secretary of state, founder of the Whig party, and perennial presidential candidate (1824, 1832, 1844), Clay espoused broadly nationalistic programs designed to avoid sectional antagonism caused by the issue of slavery. He figured prominently in the debates that led to the passage of the Missouri Compromise, and he was a leading architect of the Compromise of 1850. His support of the American Colonization Society aroused the lasting hostility of Garrisonian abolitionists. In Congress, Clay vigorously opposed abolitionist petitions against slavery in the District of Columbia. On 7 February 1839 in a speech in the Senate on the subject of these petitions, he claimed that while he was no friend of slavery, he preferred the liberty of his own race to any other. He continued by saying, “The liberty of the descendants of Africa in the United States is incompatible with the safety and liberty of the European descendants. Their slavery forms an exception—an exception resulting from a stern and inexorable necessity—to the general liberty in the United States.” Douglass and other abolitionists found him
Y7870-Douglass.indb 9
9/1/21 4:16 PM
10
THE FOLLY OF OUR OPPONENTS
a particularly odious presidential candidate because Northern Whigs attempted to cast the slaveryowning Clay as “anti-slavery in his feelings,” which potentially undermined the Liberty party’s political base. Lib., 15 February 1839; Henry Clay, Speech of Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, on the Subject of Abolition Petitions, Delivered in the Senate of the United States, February 7, 1839 (Washington, D.C., 1839), 16; Merrill D. Peterson, The Great Triumvirate: Webster, Clay, and Calhoun (New York, 1987); Robert V. Remini, Henry Clay: Statesman for the Union (New York, 1991); Richard H. Sewell, Ballots for Freedom: Antislavery Politics in the United States, 1837–1860 (New York, 1976), 109; Allen Johnson and Dumas Malone, eds., Dictionary of American Biography, 11 vols. (New York, 1931), 4:73–79. 8. John Caldwell Calhoun (1782–1850), a prominent politician from South Carolina, is best known for his advocacy of states’ rights. In 1812 he appeared on the national political scene as one of the “war hawks.” Calhoun quickly rose to prominence and was appointed secretary of war by James Monroe. In 1824 and 1828, he was elected vice president under Andrew Jackson, but he resigned and returned to South Carolina to defend the rights of his home state during the Nullification Controversy of 1831–32. Election to the U.S. Senate from South Carolina ensured that Calhoun would remain on the national political scene, and he returned to a cabinet post as secretary of state under John Tyler. In January 1845 the U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution directing the secretary of state to address and correct any mistakes that were made in the 1840 U.S. Census. On 8 February, Calhoun wrote a letter to Congress regarding this issue, alleging that no major mistakes had been made. He also commented on the criticism made by some concerning the statistics that compared diseases among free blacks and slaves. He wrote that the controversy resulted from the claim that there was a far greater prevalence of insanity, blindness, deafness, and dumbness among free blacks than slaves. Calhoun supported these figures and determined that they had been correctly gathered. He went on to conclude that based on these statistics, freedom for blacks was “a curse instead of a blessing.” Those who supported slavery, like Calhoun, used the census figures to claim that blacks would suffer if emancipated. John C. Calhoun, The Works of John C. Calhoun, ed., Richard K. Crallé, 6 vols. (New York, 1855) 5:458–61; Irving H. Bartlett, John C. Calhoun: A Biography (New York, 1993); Nikolas Rose, Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought (Cambridge, 1999), 220; DAB, 2:411–19. 9. Robert John Walker (1801–69), U.S. senator, cabinet officer, and governor of the Kansas Territory, was born in Northumberland, Pennsylvania. Sometimes known as Robert James Walker, he graduated at the top of his class from the University of Pennsylvania in 1819, and was admitted to the bar in 1821. He joined the Democratic party and supported Andrew Jackson for president in 1824. Walker moved to Natchez, Mississippi, in 1826, and became a speculator in cotton, land, and slaves. He was elected to the U.S. Senate (1835–45) and then served as secretary of the treasury under James K. Polk. James Buchanan appointed Walker governor of the Kansas Territory in 1857. He learned that most Kansans wanted the territory to be admitted to the Union as a free state and sought to support their aspirations in a manner that also made the new state pro-Democrat. After Buchanan endorsed the proslavery Lecompton Constitution adopted in Kansas, Walker resigned as governor. During the Civil War, he supported the Union and traveled to Europe as a financial agent. While serving as senator in 1844, he wrote a letter endorsing the annexation of Texas and in it discussed the controversial 1840 Census. He supported the census figures that “proved” free blacks were more likely than slaves to suffer from serious maladies and end up in poorhouses, jails, hospitals, and asylums. Walker also argued that based on the census, tax increases would be necessary to support the millions of blacks who would ultimately be committed to asylums and hospitals following emancipation. Robert J. Walker, Letter of Mr. Walker, of Mississippi, Relative to the Annexation of Texas: In Reply to the Call of the People of Carroll County, Kentucky, to Communicate His Views on That Subject (Washington, D.C., 1844), 11–15; William Edward Dodd, Robert J. Walker: Imperialist (Chicago, 1914); Stephen Hartnett, “Senator Robert Walker’s 1844 Letter on Texas Annexation: The Rhetorical ‘Logic’ of Imperialism,” American Studies, 38:41 (Spring 1997); ANB (online).
Y7870-Douglass.indb 10
9/1/21 4:16 PM
BIBLES FOR THE SLAVES
11
10. Southern states’-rights advocate John C. Calhoun is most likely responsible for the antebellum familiarity with the term “peculiar institution” in reference to slavery. In a public letter dated 11 September 1830 to his friend and fellow politician Virgil Maxcy, Calhoun discussed the Tariff of 1828 and the harm it would cause the South, and mentioned slavery as a basis for the unfair treatment by the government: “The truth can no longer be disguised, that the peculiar domestick ‘institution’ of the Southern States, and the consequent direction, which that and her soil and climate have given to her industry, has placed them in regard to taxation and appropriates in opposition relation to the majority of the Union.” Calhoun also used the phrase frequently in congressional debates in the 1830s. From about this period forward, the term “peculiar institution” served as a euphemism for slavery. John C. Calhoun, The Papers of John C. Calhoun, ed. Clyde N. Wilson, 28 vols. (Columbia, S.C., 1978), 11:229. 11. This phrase is the title and first line of a missionary hymn written by Samuel Francis Smith (1808–95) in 1832. The tune of the hymn is “Millennial Dawn,” composed by George James Webb (1803–87) around 1830. Smith, a Baptist clergyman and author, is most famous for writing the hymn “My Country ’Tis of Thee,” more commonly known as “America.” W. Howard Doane and E. H. Johnson, eds., The Baptist Hymnal, For Use in the Church and Home (Philadelphia, 1883), 307; James H. Ross, “Old and New Missionary Hymns,” Homiletic Review, 39:413 (January–June 1900); ANB (online). 12. This phrase, popular among abolitionists, comes from the book of Leviticus in the Bible, and is inscribed on the Liberty Bell. William Lloyd Garrison used the verse on the masthead of his abolitionist newspaper the Liberator from 13 December 1861 to 6 October 1865. While Douglass quotes it as “through all the land,” it is in fact “throughout all the land.” Lib., 13 December 1861, 6 October 1865; Lev. 25:10; Edwin S. Gaustad, Proclaim Liberty Throughout All the Land: A History of Church and State in America (1999; New York, 2003), ix.
BIBLES FOR THE SLAVES (1848) The Liberty Bell (Boston, 1848), 121–27.
Douglass’s second contribution to The Liberty Bell was in direct response to a revived campaign to supply slaves with Bibles. In the 1830s, American abolitionists unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the American Bible Society to distribute the scriptures to slaves. Non-Garrisonian abolitionists, led by Joshua Leavitt and Henry Bibb, revived this campaign in the mid-1840s and won endorsements from several New England church groups. These abolitionists called for $40,000 in contributions designated exclusively for a “Slaves’ Bible Fund.” Less than $2,000 was collected for this project, however, and the American Bible Society continued to defer to its Southern auxiliaries’ disinclination to undertake such a project. The American Missionary Association organized a similar campaign, led by the abolitionist John G. Fee, in the spring of 1848, which focused its efforts in Kentucky for well over
Y7870-Douglass.indb 11
9/1/21 4:16 PM
BIBLES FOR THE SLAVES
11
10. Southern states’-rights advocate John C. Calhoun is most likely responsible for the antebellum familiarity with the term “peculiar institution” in reference to slavery. In a public letter dated 11 September 1830 to his friend and fellow politician Virgil Maxcy, Calhoun discussed the Tariff of 1828 and the harm it would cause the South, and mentioned slavery as a basis for the unfair treatment by the government: “The truth can no longer be disguised, that the peculiar domestick ‘institution’ of the Southern States, and the consequent direction, which that and her soil and climate have given to her industry, has placed them in regard to taxation and appropriates in opposition relation to the majority of the Union.” Calhoun also used the phrase frequently in congressional debates in the 1830s. From about this period forward, the term “peculiar institution” served as a euphemism for slavery. John C. Calhoun, The Papers of John C. Calhoun, ed. Clyde N. Wilson, 28 vols. (Columbia, S.C., 1978), 11:229. 11. This phrase is the title and first line of a missionary hymn written by Samuel Francis Smith (1808–95) in 1832. The tune of the hymn is “Millennial Dawn,” composed by George James Webb (1803–87) around 1830. Smith, a Baptist clergyman and author, is most famous for writing the hymn “My Country ’Tis of Thee,” more commonly known as “America.” W. Howard Doane and E. H. Johnson, eds., The Baptist Hymnal, For Use in the Church and Home (Philadelphia, 1883), 307; James H. Ross, “Old and New Missionary Hymns,” Homiletic Review, 39:413 (January–June 1900); ANB (online). 12. This phrase, popular among abolitionists, comes from the book of Leviticus in the Bible, and is inscribed on the Liberty Bell. William Lloyd Garrison used the verse on the masthead of his abolitionist newspaper the Liberator from 13 December 1861 to 6 October 1865. While Douglass quotes it as “through all the land,” it is in fact “throughout all the land.” Lib., 13 December 1861, 6 October 1865; Lev. 25:10; Edwin S. Gaustad, Proclaim Liberty Throughout All the Land: A History of Church and State in America (1999; New York, 2003), ix.
BIBLES FOR THE SLAVES (1848) The Liberty Bell (Boston, 1848), 121–27.
Douglass’s second contribution to The Liberty Bell was in direct response to a revived campaign to supply slaves with Bibles. In the 1830s, American abolitionists unsuccessfully attempted to persuade the American Bible Society to distribute the scriptures to slaves. Non-Garrisonian abolitionists, led by Joshua Leavitt and Henry Bibb, revived this campaign in the mid-1840s and won endorsements from several New England church groups. These abolitionists called for $40,000 in contributions designated exclusively for a “Slaves’ Bible Fund.” Less than $2,000 was collected for this project, however, and the American Bible Society continued to defer to its Southern auxiliaries’ disinclination to undertake such a project. The American Missionary Association organized a similar campaign, led by the abolitionist John G. Fee, in the spring of 1848, which focused its efforts in Kentucky for well over
Y7870-Douglass.indb 11
9/1/21 4:16 PM
12
BIBLES FOR THE SLAVES
a decade. Douglass and Garrisonians denounced this campaign, believing it to be a form of gradualism that would delay emancipation, since slaves were expected to learn how to read before being set free. Douglass’s opposition extended beyond the pages of The Liberty Bell. Following its publication, he engaged in several debates within the pages of the North Star and the Impartial Citizen, notably with the African American minister Henry H. Garnet. Boston Emancipator, 2 June 1846; Lib., 25 January, 21 May 1847; American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Reporter, 2:25–26, 72 (January, October 1845); NS, 15 June, 17 August 1849; Impartial Citizen, 27 June 1849; Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society, Sixteenth Annual Report (Boston, 1848), 66–67; American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, Shall We Give Bibles to Three Millions of American Slaves? ([New York], [1847]); Stanley Harrold, The Rise of Aggressive Abolitionism: Addresses to the Slave (Lexington, Ky., 2004), 100–102; John R. McKivigan, The War against Proslavery Religion: Abolitionism and the Northern Churches, 1830–1865 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1984), 123–24.
THE above is the watch-word of a recent but quite numerous class of persons, whose ostensible object seems to be to give Bibles to the American Slaves. They propose to induce the public to give, of their abundance, a large sum of money, to be placed in the hands of the American Bible Society,1 to be employed in purchasing Bibles and distributing them among the Slaves. In this apparently benevolent and Christian movement, they desire to unite all persons friendly to the long imbruted and long neglected Slave. The religious press has already spoken out in its favor. So full of promise and popularity is this movement that many of the leaders in Church and State are pressing into it. Churches, which have all along slumbered unmoved over the cruel wrongs and bitter woes of the Slave,—which have been as deaf as Death to every appeal of the fettered bondman for liberty,—are at last startled from their heartless stupor by this new cry of Bibles for the Slaves. Ministers of Religion, and learned Doctors of Divinity, who would not lift a finger to give the Slave to himself, are now engaged in the professed work of giving to the Slave the Bible. Into this enterprize have been drawn some who have been known as advocates for emancipation. One Anti-Slavery Editor has abandoned his position at the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 12
9/1/21 4:16 PM
BIBLES FOR THE SLAVES
13
head of a widely circulating journal, and has gone forth to lecture and solicit donations in its behalf.2 Even the American Bible Society, which a few years ago peremptorily refused to entertain the offensive subject, and refused the offer of ten thousand dollars, has at last relented, if not repented, and now condescends to receive money for this object. To be sure we have had no public assurance of this from that society. It is, however, generously inferred by the friends of the movement, that they will consent to receive money for this purpose. Now what does all this mean? Are the men engaged in this movement sane? and if so, can they be honest? Do they seriously believe that the American Slave can receive the Bible? Do they believe that the American Bible Society cares one straw about giving Bibles to the Slaves? Do they suppose that Slaveholders, in open violation of their wicked laws, will allow their Slaves to have the Bible? How do they mean to get the Bible among the Slaves? It cannot go itself,—it must be carried. And who among them all has either the faith or the folly to undertake the distribution of Bibles among the Slaves? Then, again, of what value is the Bible to one who may not read its contents? Do they intend to send teachers into the Slave States, with the Bibles, to teach the Slaves to read them? Do they believe that on giving the Bible, the unlettered Slave will all at once—by some miraculous transformation—become a man of letters, and be able to read the sacred Scriptures? Will they first obtain the Slaveholder’s consent, or will they proceed without it? And if the former, by what means will they seek it? And if the latter, what success do they expect? Upon these points, and many others, the public ought to be enlightened before they are called upon to give money and influence to such an enterprize. As a mere indication of the growing influence of Anti-Slavery sentiment this movement may be regarded by Abolitionists with some complacency; but as a means of abolishing the Slave system of America, it seems to me a sham, a delusion, and a snare, and cannot be too soon exposed before all the people. It is but another illustration of the folly of putting new cloth into an old garment, and new wine into old bottles.3 The Bible is peculiarly the companion of liberty. It belongs to a new order of things—Slavery is of the old—and will only be made worse by any attempt to mend it with the Bible. The Bible is only useful to those who can read and practise its contents. It was given to Freemen, and any attempt to give it to the Slave must result only in hollow mockery. Give Bibles to the poor Slaves! It sounds well. It looks well. It wears a religious aspect. It is a Protestant rebuke to the Pope, and seems in
Y7870-Douglass.indb 13
9/1/21 4:16 PM
14
BIBLES FOR THE SLAVES
harmony with the purely evangelical character of the great American people. It may also forestall some movement in England to give Bibles to our Slaves,4 —and this is very desirable! Now admitting (however difficult it may be to do so) the entire honesty of all engaged in this movement,—the immediate and only effect of their efforts must be to turn off attention from the main and only momentous question connected with the Slave, and absorb energies and money in giving to him the Bible that ought to be used in giving him to himself. The Slave is property. He cannot hold property. He cannot own a Bible. To give him a Bible is but to give his master a Bible. The Slave is a thing,—and it is the all commanding duty of the American people to make him a man. To demand this in the name of humanity, and of God, is the solemn duty of every living soul. To demand less than this, or anything else than this, is to deceive the fettered bondman, and to soothe the conscience of the Slaveholder on the very point where he should be most stung with remorse and shame. Away with all tampering with such a question! Away with all trifling with the man in fetters! Give a hungry man a stone, and tell what beautiful houses are made of it,—give ice to a freezing man, and tell him of its good properties in hot weather,—throw a drowning man a dollar, as a mark of your good will,—but do not mock the bondman in his misery, by giving him a Bible when he cannot read it. ROCHESTER, NEW YORK. 1. Founded in 1816, the American Bible Society (ABS) had as its mission to supply every family in the United States with a copy of the Bible. Many abolitionists, including members of the American Anti-Slavery Society (AASS), complained that the ABS was not supplying enough Southern planters with Bibles, and in 1834, the AASS offered the ABS $20,000 to send Bibles to Southerners. The ABS declined the offer, and outraged abolitionists such as Joshua Leavitt and Henry Bibb started their own “Bible for Slaves” campaign to supply donations to the ABS for distribution to Southern blacks. The ABS accepted the donations and put them in a fund labeled “for the slaves,” though little of the donations were spent for that purpose. McKivigan, War against Proslavery Religion, 124. 2. Joshua Leavitt was the editor of the antislavery newspaper the Emancipator from 1840 until 1847, when he left to join Henry Bibb in focusing abolitionist efforts on the Bible for Slaves campaign. Leslie M. Alexander and Walter C. Rucker, eds., Encyclopedia of African American History, 3 vols. (Santa Barbara, Calif., 2010), 3:398. 3. Matt. 9:16–17, Mark 2:21–22. 4. Douglass is most likely referring to the involvement of the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society with the American Missionary Association to raise funds for the Bible for Slaves campaign in the spring of 1848. Harrold, Rise of Aggressive Abolitionism, 100.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 14
9/1/21 4:16 PM
NORTH STAR CIRCULAR (1849) Frederick Douglass Collection, Lavery Library, St. John Fisher College, Rochester, N.Y.
Founded by Douglass in Rochester, New York, in December 1847, the weekly North Star was Douglass’s first foray into newspaper publishing. Funds to launch the newspaper had come largely from a testimonial gathered by abolitionist admirers in Britain before Douglass returned to the United States from a nearly two-year speaking tour in Ireland, England, and Scotland. The North Star received only lukewarm support from Douglass’s original abolitionist mentors, particularly William Lloyd Garrison, who believed the black abolitionist could better serve their cause on the lecture circuit. The paper struggled to win enough subscribers and fell into debt. In the summer of 1849, local Garrisonians began an investigation into the newspaper’s solvency under Douglass’s management. The timely arrival from Great Britain of two of Douglass’s abolitionist admirers, Julia Griffiths and her sister Eliza, alleviated the crisis. Julia reorganized the North Star’s office operations and launched local fund-raising efforts to support the newspaper. The following circular, issued to mark the commencement of the North Star’s third year of operation, sought the assistance of the antislavery community in expanding the newspaper’s subscription rolls to ensure its survival. The North Star continued for another year and a half, during which Douglass’s relations with the Garrisonians became increasingly strained. In June 1851, the North Star was converted into a political abolitionist journal and renamed Frederick Douglass’ Paper. McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 146–49, 164–65, 182; Tyrone Tillery, “The Inevitability of the Douglass-Garrison Conflict,” Phylon, 37:137– 45, 149 (January 1976).
NORTH STAR OFFICE,} Rochester,}
My Dear Friend: Your deep interest in the cause of the perishing Slave, and in the Improvement and Elevation of the Nominally Free Colored People of our land, is
Y7870-Douglass.indb 15
9/1/21 4:16 PM
16
NORTH STAR CIRCULAR
my apology for invoking your aid and assistance in the work of extending the circulation of the North Star. The permanent existence of this paper is of vital importance to the cause with which it is identified; and its claims to support are peculiarly strong. Belonging, as I do, to the race almost universally despised at the North, and having endured the horrors of Slavery at the South, I feel especially bound to devote my energies to the Freedom and Elevation of my people. For the accomplishment of this object, I know of no instrumentality more effective than the Press. This always commands respect, and can never be despised. It is the friend of Truth, Liberty and Intelligence; and the enemy of Error, Slavery and Ignorance. The presence of a tolerably conducted Journal in this country, edited by one of the oppressed, is essential to the proper vindication of the colored race from the charge of inferiority, and to the assertion of their equal claims to fellowship in the common bond of Human Brotherhood. The North Star has reached its third volume,1 which is sufficient evidence that I am in earnest, and do not mean to be discouraged by difficulties or hardships. I commenced with a determination to persevere; and the strength of my resolution has experienced no abatement. I am convinced that the downfall of the paper would be hailed with a thrill of delight by all those who make merchandize of God’s image, and who “gain their fortunes by the blood of souls.” There is nothing more galling to the pride of the oppressor, than to be confronted by the object of his injustice and cruelty. Such an one is, is a living and palpable contradiction to all his sophistical theories against equal justice and equal manhood. While The North Star lives, it will cheer with hope the hearts of the enslaved, and alarm the fears of the guilty slaveholder. The fact that such a paper exists, has already been of immense value in the discussions which have been going on in high places during the last two years. Its columns have often been cited as evidence of negro capacity and ability. I say this gratefully—not egotistically. Having briefly stated my views with respect to the importance of sustaining The North Star, I am ready to answer the question as to how this can be done. Here is my plan: I propose to send this circular to such active and earnest friends as I think will take an interest in the object which it sets forth; and I suggest that each exert him or herself to obtain at least one additional subscriber
Y7870-Douglass.indb 16
9/1/21 4:16 PM
A NOTE OF THANKS
17
to our list. Should such friends respond to this call, and comply with this plan, I have no question but that the paper will be permanently and usefully established. That you may be moved to co-operate with me in this labor of good will, is the sincere desire of Your friend and co-worker in the cause of Human Freedom, FREDERICK DOUGLASS. 1. Douglass labeled the North Star of 28 December 1849 as the first issue of the publication’s third volume.
A NOTE OF THANKS (1852) William W. Layton Collection, Millwood, Va. Other text in William W. Layton Collection, DNA.
Known by her family as Jenny, Permelia Jane Marsh Parker (1836–1913) was the third and youngest child of the Reverend Joseph Marsh and his wife, Sarah Adams. Between 1839 and 1843, Joseph Marsh served both as pastor of a Christian Connection church in Union Mills, New York, and as the editor of the denomination’s bimonthly paper, the Christian Palladium. In 1843, however, both he and his wife became followers of the apocalyptic preacher William Miller. After delivering a series of sermons supporting Miller’s views on the Second Coming and the imminent end of the world, Marsh was summarily dismissed by his congregation and fired from the newspaper. The family relocated to Rochester, New York, where Marsh rented space in the Talman Building, known locally as the Talman Block, and began publishing a Millerite newspaper, the Voice of Truth and Glad Tidings of the Kingdom at Hand. Subsequently, Marsh purchased a home on Alexander Street. It was during this period, according to Jane Marsh Parker, that her parents joined the abolitionist movement and became involved with the Underground Railroad. By the time Douglass arrived in Rochester (where he too set up a newspaper office in the Talman Building) in 1847, William Miller’s followers had experienced the failure of the apocalypse to occur in 1844 as he had predicted it would (this false alarm, the third such, was
Y7870-Douglass.indb 17
9/1/21 4:16 PM
A NOTE OF THANKS
17
to our list. Should such friends respond to this call, and comply with this plan, I have no question but that the paper will be permanently and usefully established. That you may be moved to co-operate with me in this labor of good will, is the sincere desire of Your friend and co-worker in the cause of Human Freedom, FREDERICK DOUGLASS. 1. Douglass labeled the North Star of 28 December 1849 as the first issue of the publication’s third volume.
A NOTE OF THANKS (1852) William W. Layton Collection, Millwood, Va. Other text in William W. Layton Collection, DNA.
Known by her family as Jenny, Permelia Jane Marsh Parker (1836–1913) was the third and youngest child of the Reverend Joseph Marsh and his wife, Sarah Adams. Between 1839 and 1843, Joseph Marsh served both as pastor of a Christian Connection church in Union Mills, New York, and as the editor of the denomination’s bimonthly paper, the Christian Palladium. In 1843, however, both he and his wife became followers of the apocalyptic preacher William Miller. After delivering a series of sermons supporting Miller’s views on the Second Coming and the imminent end of the world, Marsh was summarily dismissed by his congregation and fired from the newspaper. The family relocated to Rochester, New York, where Marsh rented space in the Talman Building, known locally as the Talman Block, and began publishing a Millerite newspaper, the Voice of Truth and Glad Tidings of the Kingdom at Hand. Subsequently, Marsh purchased a home on Alexander Street. It was during this period, according to Jane Marsh Parker, that her parents joined the abolitionist movement and became involved with the Underground Railroad. By the time Douglass arrived in Rochester (where he too set up a newspaper office in the Talman Building) in 1847, William Miller’s followers had experienced the failure of the apocalypse to occur in 1844 as he had predicted it would (this false alarm, the third such, was
Y7870-Douglass.indb 17
9/1/21 4:16 PM
18
A NOTE OF THANKS
known as the “Great Disappointment”) and split into a number of rival sects. Joseph Marsh became a leader within the Adventist movement and continued to publish his newspaper under a new title, the Advent Harbinger (later changed to the Advent Harbinger and Bible Advocate). Although it is unclear when Douglass first became acquainted with Joseph Marsh and his family, it is known that in April 1848, Marsh played a role in facilitating Douglass’s purchase of his first house in Rochester, which was located next to his own home on Alexander Street. Lacking any known surviving correspondence between Douglass and Joseph Marsh, it is impossible to know for certain how close their relationship may have been. What is certain, however, is that Marsh’s daughter Jenny, who as a girl had befriended the younger Rosetta Douglass, maintained a lifelong friendship with her. 1850 U.S. Census, New York, Monroe County, 319A; Jane Marsh Parker, Rochester: A Story Historical (Rochester, 1884), 251–54, 256; Daniel L. Rowe, “Millerites: A Shadow Portrait,” in Millerism and Millenarianism in the Nineteenth Century, ed. Ronald L. Numbers and Jonathan M. Butler (Knoxville, Tenn., 1993); McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 149–54; Jane Marsh Parker, “Reminisces of Frederick Douglass,” in The Cradle of Freedom: A History of the Negro in Rochester, Western New York, and Canada, ed. Howard W. Coles (1941; Rochester, 1943), 156–63; Tom Calarco, People of the Underground Railroad: A Biographical Dictionary (Westport, Conn., 2008), 105. A note of thanks for your lines miss Jenny1 For I really think them very pretty; you need not despair of high success In writing yourself a poetess. F.D. FREDERICK DOUGLASS— 1. Douglass’s faith in Permelia Jane Marsh Parker’s literary talents proved justified by her later career. In 1854, Parker’s writing appeared in periodicals such as the Knickerbocker and the Waverley. That year, she published more than twenty-five stories, poems, and articles. On 26 August 1856, she married George Tann Parker, a lawyer from Rochester, and together they raised two children. A devout Episcopalian, she wrote almost exclusively for juvenile and religious readers in the years
Y7870-Douglass.indb 18
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
19
following her marriage. In 1874 her husband decided to leave his law practice and move the family to New Albany, Indiana, in the hopes of making money in the hickory mills of the Ohio River. Jane Parker compared the move to exile and published several articles in the Rochester Express indicating her displeasure with the “Southwest.” To her delight, the family returned to their home in Rochester in July 1877, and she was able to once again focus on her writing. Later in her life, she became known as a leading local historian of western New York State, and in December 1887, Parker became one of the founders of the Rochester Historical Society. In 1889 she traveled to Haiti with Douglass and wrote many articles based on her travels. On 6 April 1895, the Outlook magazine published a short article Parker wrote, entitled “Reminiscences of Frederick Douglass.” In the article, she gave a brief synopsis of her encounters with Douglass as well as the main aspects of his public and family life. Her husband died in 1895, and she spent her remaining years in California. Some of her best-known works include Barley Wood (1860), Taking Sides (1860), Rochester: A Story Historical (1884), and The Midnight Cry (1886). Jane Marsh Parker, “Reminiscences of Frederick Douglass,” Outlook, 51:552–53 (April 1895); John Howard Brown, ed., Lamb’s Biographical Dictionary of the United States (Boston, 1903), 6:135; Marcelle LeMénager Lane, “The Life and Work of Jane Marsh Parker,” The Rochester Historical Society: Publication Fund Series, 25 vols. (Rochester, 1946), 23:1–106; ANB (online).
THE HEROIC SLAVE (1853) Frederick Douglass, “The Heroic Slave,” in Autographs for Freedom, ed. Julia Griffiths (Boston, 1853), 174–239. Other texts in Frederick Douglass’ Paper, 4, 11, 18, 25 March 1853.
In October 1841, as the brig Creole sailed through waters near the northern Bahamas, Madison Washington led his fellow slaves in a rebellion that won control of the vessel. The slave rebels sailed to New Providence at Nassau, where they all were eventually freed by British authorities, over vehement protests from the U.S. government. The courage of Washington and his compatriots was widely celebrated by American abolitionists, including Douglass, who had only recently joined their ranks as a lecturer. Douglass long nurtured the desire to prepare an historical account of Washington and his exploits, but discovered that specific details about his subject were hard to obtain. Instead, in 1852, he wrote The Heroic Slave, a short historical novella about the Creole uprising. The novella was published in the 1853 Autographs for Freedom, a fund-raising gift book edited by Douglass’s British friend Julia Griffiths, who had settled in Rochester to assist in the publication of his newspaper. In addition to celebrating Madison Washington, The Heroic Slave marked an important step in Douglass’s ideological break from the nonresistance ideology of his original
Y7870-Douglass.indb 19
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
19
following her marriage. In 1874 her husband decided to leave his law practice and move the family to New Albany, Indiana, in the hopes of making money in the hickory mills of the Ohio River. Jane Parker compared the move to exile and published several articles in the Rochester Express indicating her displeasure with the “Southwest.” To her delight, the family returned to their home in Rochester in July 1877, and she was able to once again focus on her writing. Later in her life, she became known as a leading local historian of western New York State, and in December 1887, Parker became one of the founders of the Rochester Historical Society. In 1889 she traveled to Haiti with Douglass and wrote many articles based on her travels. On 6 April 1895, the Outlook magazine published a short article Parker wrote, entitled “Reminiscences of Frederick Douglass.” In the article, she gave a brief synopsis of her encounters with Douglass as well as the main aspects of his public and family life. Her husband died in 1895, and she spent her remaining years in California. Some of her best-known works include Barley Wood (1860), Taking Sides (1860), Rochester: A Story Historical (1884), and The Midnight Cry (1886). Jane Marsh Parker, “Reminiscences of Frederick Douglass,” Outlook, 51:552–53 (April 1895); John Howard Brown, ed., Lamb’s Biographical Dictionary of the United States (Boston, 1903), 6:135; Marcelle LeMénager Lane, “The Life and Work of Jane Marsh Parker,” The Rochester Historical Society: Publication Fund Series, 25 vols. (Rochester, 1946), 23:1–106; ANB (online).
THE HEROIC SLAVE (1853) Frederick Douglass, “The Heroic Slave,” in Autographs for Freedom, ed. Julia Griffiths (Boston, 1853), 174–239. Other texts in Frederick Douglass’ Paper, 4, 11, 18, 25 March 1853.
In October 1841, as the brig Creole sailed through waters near the northern Bahamas, Madison Washington led his fellow slaves in a rebellion that won control of the vessel. The slave rebels sailed to New Providence at Nassau, where they all were eventually freed by British authorities, over vehement protests from the U.S. government. The courage of Washington and his compatriots was widely celebrated by American abolitionists, including Douglass, who had only recently joined their ranks as a lecturer. Douglass long nurtured the desire to prepare an historical account of Washington and his exploits, but discovered that specific details about his subject were hard to obtain. Instead, in 1852, he wrote The Heroic Slave, a short historical novella about the Creole uprising. The novella was published in the 1853 Autographs for Freedom, a fund-raising gift book edited by Douglass’s British friend Julia Griffiths, who had settled in Rochester to assist in the publication of his newspaper. In addition to celebrating Madison Washington, The Heroic Slave marked an important step in Douglass’s ideological break from the nonresistance ideology of his original
Y7870-Douglass.indb 19
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
20
Garrisonian abolitionist mentors. The Heroic Slave was also serialized in four issues of Frederick Douglass’ Paper in March 1853 with only accidental changes to the text. A detailed discussion of editorial policies employed in determining an authoritative text for the novella appears in “Textual Notes on The Heroic Slave” at the end of this volume. Douglass, The Heroic Slave, xi–xii, xviii– xxvi, 53–55; McKivigan and Pattillo, “Autographs for Freedom,” 35–51.
PART I. Oh! child of grief, why weepest thou? Why droops thy sad and mournful brow? Why is thy look so like despair? What deep, sad sorrow lingers there?1 THE State of Virginia is famous in American annals for the multitudinous array of her statesmen and heroes. She has been dignified by some the mother of statesmen. History has not been sparing in recording their names, or in blazoning their deeds. Her high position in this respect, has given her an enviable distinction among her sister States. With Virginia for his birth-place, even a man of ordinary parts, on account of the general partiality for her sons, easily rises to eminent stations. Men, not great enough to attract special attention in their native States, have, like a certain distinguished citizen in the State of New York, sighed and repined that they were not born in Virginia.2 Yet not all the great ones of the Old Dominion have, by the fact of their birth-place, escaped undeserved obscurity.3 By some strange neglect, one of the truest, manliest, and bravest of her children,—one who, in after years, will, I think, command the pen of genius to set his merits forth, holds now no higher place in the records of that grand old Commonwealth than is held by a horse or an ox. Let those account for it who can, but there stands the fact, that a man who loved liberty as well as did Patrick Henry,4 —who deserved it as much as Thomas Jefferson,5—and who fought for it with a valor as high, an arm as strong, and against odds as great, as he who led all the armies of the American colonies through the great war for freedom and independence, lives now only in the chattel records of his native State.6 Glimpses of this great character are all that can now be presented. He is brought to view only by a few transient incidents, and these afford
Y7870-Douglass.indb 20
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
21
but partial satisfaction. Like a guiding star on a stormy night, he is seen through the parted clouds and the howling tempests; or, like the gray peak of a menacing rock on a perilous coast, he is seen by the quivering flash of angry lightning, and he again disappears covered with mystery. Curiously, earnestly, anxiously we peer into the dark, and wish even for the blinding flash, or the light of northern skies to reveal him. But alas! he is still enveloped in darkness, and we return from the pursuit like a wearied and disheartened mother, (after a tedious and unsuccessful search for a lost child,) who returns weighed down with disappointment and sorrow. Speaking of marks, traces, possibles, and probabilities, we come before our readers. * * * * * * In the spring of 1835, on a Sabbath morning, within hearing of the solemn peals of the church bells at a distant village, a Northern traveller through the State of Virginia drew up his horse to drink at a sparkling brook, near the edge of a dark pine forest. While his weary and thirsty steed drew in the grateful water, the rider caught the sound of a human voice, apparently engaged in earnest conversation. Following the direction of the sound, he descried, among the tall pines, the man whose voice had arrested his attention. “To whom can he be speaking?” thought the traveller. “He seems to be alone.” The circumstance interested him much, and he became intensely curious to know what thoughts and feelings, or, it might be, high aspirations, guided those rich and mellow accents. Tieing his horse at a short distance from the brook, he stealthily drew near the solitary speaker; and, concealing himself by the side of a huge fallen tree, he distinctly heard the following soliloquy:— “What, then, is life to me? it is aimless and worthless, and worse than worthless. Those birds, perched on yon swinging boughs, in friendly conclave, sounding forth their merry notes in seeming worship of the rising sun, though liable to the sportsman’s fowling-piece, are still my superiors. They live free, though they may die slaves. They fly where they list by day, and retire in freedom at night. But what is freedom to me, or I to it? I am a slave,—born a slave, an abject slave,—even before I made part of this breathing world, the scourge was platted for my back; the fetters were forged for my limbs. How mean a thing am I. That accursed and crawling snake, that miserable reptile, that has just glided into its slimy home, is freer and better off than I. He escaped my blow, and is safe. But here
Y7870-Douglass.indb 21
9/1/21 4:16 PM
22
THE HEROIC SLAVE
am I, a man,—yes, a man!—with thoughts and wishes, with powers and faculties as far as angel’s flight above that hated reptile,—yet he is my superior, and scorns to own me as his master, or to stop to take my blows. When he saw my uplifted arm, he darted beyond my reach, and turned to give me battle. I dare not do as much as that. I neither run nor fight, but do meanly stand, answering each heavy blow of a cruel master with doleful wails and piteous cries. I am galled with irons; but even these are more tolerable than the consciousness, the galling consciousness of cowardice and indecision. Can it be that I dare not run away? Perish the thought, I dare do any thing which may be done by another. When that young man struggled with the waves for life, and others stood back appalled in helpless horror, did I not plunge in, forgetful of life, to save his? The raging bull from whom all others fled, pale with fright, did I not keep at bay with a single pitchfork? Could a coward do that? No,—no,—I wrong myself,— I am no coward. Liberty I will have, or die in the attempt to gain it. This working that others may live in idleness! This cringing submission to insolence and curses! This living under the constant dread and apprehension of being sold and transferred, like a mere brute, is too much for me. I will stand it no longer. What others have done, I will do. These trusty legs, or these sinewy arms shall place me among the free. Tom escaped; so can I. The North Star will not be less kind to me than to him.7 I will follow it. I will at least make the trial. I have nothing to lose. If I am caught, I shall only be a slave. If I am shot, I shall only lose a life which is a burden and a curse. If I get clear, (as something tells me I shall,) liberty, the inalienable birth-right of every man, precious and priceless, will be mine. My resolution is fixed. I shall be free.” At these words the traveller raised his head cautiously and noiselessly, and caught, from his hiding-place, a full view of the unsuspecting speaker. Madison8 (for that was the name of our hero) was standing erect, a smile of satisfaction rippled upon his expressive countenance, like that which plays upon the face of one who has but just solved a difficult problem, or vanquished a malignant foe; for at that moment he was free, at least in spirit. The future gleamed brightly before him, and his fetters lay broken at his feet. His air was triumphant. Madison was of manly form. Tall, symmetrical, round, and strong. In his movements he seemed to combine, with the strength of the lion, the lion’s elasticity. His torn sleeves disclosed arms like polished iron. His face was “black, but comely.”9 His eye, lit with emotion, kept guard under a brow as dark and as glossy as the raven’s wing. His whole appearance
Y7870-Douglass.indb 22
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
23
betokened Herculean strength; yet there was nothing savage or forbidding in his aspect.10 A child might play in his arms, or dance on his shoulders. A giant’s strength, but not a giant’s heart was in him. His broad mouth and nose spoke only of good nature and kindness. But his voice, that unfailing index of the soul, though full and melodious, had that in it which could terrify as well as charm. He was just the man you would choose when hardships were to be endured, or danger to be encountered,—intelligent and brave. He had the head to conceive, and the hand to execute. In a word, he was one to be sought as a friend, but to be dreaded as an enemy. As our traveller gazed upon him, he almost trembled at the thought of his dangerous intrusion. Still he could not quit the place. He had long desired to sound the mysterious depths of the thoughts and feelings of a slave. He was not, therefore, disposed to allow so providential an opportunity to pass unimproved. He resolved to hear more; so he listened again for those mellow and mournful accents which, he says, made such an impression upon him as can never be erased. He did not have to wait long. There came another gush from the same full fountain; now bitter, and now sweet. Scathing denunciations of the cruelty and injustice of slavery; heart-touching narrations of his own personal suffering, intermingled with prayers to the God of the oppressed for help and deliverance, were followed by presentations of the dangers and difficulties of escape, and formed the burden of his eloquent utterances; but his high resolution clung to him,—for he ended each speech by an emphatic declaration of his purpose to be free. It seemed that the very repetition of this, imparted a glow to his countenance. The hope of freedom seemed to sweeten, for a season, the bitter cup of slavery, and to make it, for a time, tolerable; for when in the very whirlwind of anguish,—when his heart’s cord seemed screwed up to snapping tension, hope sprung up and soothed his troubled spirit. Fitfully he would exclaim, “How can I leave her? Poor thing! What can she do when I am gone? Oh! oh! ’tis impossible that I can leave poor Susan!”11 A brief pause intervened. Our traveller raised his head, and saw again the sorrow-smitten slave. His eye was fixed upon the ground. The strong man staggered under a heavy load. Recovering himself, he argued thus aloud: “All is uncertain here. To-morrow’s sun may not rise before I am sold, and separated from her I love. What, then, could I do for her? I should be in more hopeless slavery, and she no nearer to liberty,— whereas if I were free,—my arms my own,—I might devise the means to rescue her.”
Y7870-Douglass.indb 23
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
24
This said, Madison cast around a searching glance, as if the thought of being overheard had flashed across his mind. He said no more, but, with measured steps, walked away, and was lost to the eye of our traveller amidst the wildering woods. Long after Madison had left the ground, Mr. Listwell (our traveller) remained in motionless silence, meditating on the extraordinary revelations to which he had listened. He seemed fastened to the spot, and stood half hoping, half fearing the return of the sable preacher to his solitary temple. The speech of Madison rung through the chambers of his soul, and vibrated through his entire frame. “Here is indeed a man,” thought he, “of rare endowments,—a child of God,—guilty of no crime but the color of his skin,—hiding away from the face of humanity, and pouring out his thoughts and feelings, his hopes and resolutions to the lonely woods; to him those distant church bells have no grateful music. He shuns the church, the altar, and the great congregation of christian worshippers, and wanders away to the gloomy forest, to utter in the vacant air complaints and griefs, which the religion of his times and his country can neither console nor relieve. Goaded almost to madness by the sense of the injustice done him, he resorts hither to give vent to his pent up feelings, and to debate with himself the feasibility of plans, plans of his own invention, for his own deliverance. From this hour I am an abolitionist. I have seen enough and heard enough, and I shall go to my home in Ohio resolved to atone for my past indifference to this ill-starred race, by making such exertions as I shall be able to do, for the speedy emancipation of every slave in the land.” PART II. “The gaudy, blabbling and remorseful day Is crept into the bosom of the sea; And now loud-howling wolves arouse the jades That drag the tragic melancholy night; Who with their drowsy, slow, and flagging wings Clip dead men’s graves, and from their misty jaws Breathe foul contagions, darkness in the air.” Shakspeare.12 Five years after the foregoing singular occurrence, in the winter of 1840, Mr. and Mrs. Listwell sat together by the fireside of their own happy
Y7870-Douglass.indb 24
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
25
home, in the State of Ohio. The children were all gone to bed. A single lamp burnt brightly on the centre-table. All was still and comfortable within; but the night was cold and dark; a heavy wind sighed and moaned sorrowfully around the house and barn, occasionally bringing against the clattering windows a stray leaf from the large oak trees that embowered their dwelling. It was a night for strange noises and for strange fancies. A whole wilderness of thought might pass through one’s mind during such an evening. The smouldering embers, partaking of the spirit of the restless night, became fruitful of varied and fantastic pictures, and revived many bygone scenes and old impressions. The happy pair seemed to sit in silent fascination, gazing on the fire. Suddenly this reverie was interrupted by a heavy growl. Ordinarily such an occurrence would have scarcely provoked a single word, or excited the least apprehension. But there are certain seasons when the slightest sound sends a jar through all the subtle chambers of the mind; and such a season was this. The happy pair started up, as if some sudden danger had come upon them. The growl was from their trusty watch-dog. “What can it mean? certainly no one can be out on such a night as this,” said Mrs. Listwell. “The wind has deceived the dog, my dear; he has mistaken the noise of falling branches, brought down by the wind, for that of the footsteps of persons coming to the house. I have several times to-night thought that I heard the sound of footsteps. I am sure, however, that it was but the wind. Friends would not be likely to come out at such an hour, or such a night; and thieves are too lazy and self-indulgent to expose themselves to this biting frost; but should there be any one about, our brave old Monte, who is on the lookout, will not be slow in sounding the alarm.” Saying this they quietly left the window, whither they had gone to learn the cause of the menacing growl, and re-seated themselves by the fire, as if reluctant to leave the slowly expiring embers, although the hour was late. A few minutes only intervened after resuming their seats, when again their sober meditations were disturbed. Their faithful dog now growled and barked furiously, as if assailed by an advancing foe. Simultaneously the good couple arose, and stood in mute expectation. The contest without seemed fierce and violent. It was, however, soon over,—the barking ceased, for, with true canine instinct, Monte quickly discovered that a friend, not an enemy of the family, was coming to the house, and instead of rushing to repel the supposed intruder, he was now at the door, whimpering and dancing for the admission of himself and his newly made friend.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 25
9/1/21 4:16 PM
26
THE HEROIC SLAVE
Mr. Listwell knew by this movement that all was well; he advanced and opened the door, and saw by the light that streamed out into the darkness, a tall man advancing slowly towards the house, with a stick in one hand, and a small bundle in the other. “It is a traveller,” thought he, “who has missed his way, and is coming to inquire the road. I am glad we did not go to bed earlier,—I have felt all the evening as if somebody would be here to-night.” The man had now halted a short distance from the door, and looked prepared alike for flight or battle. “Come in, sir, don’t be alarmed, you have probably lost your way.” Slightly hesitating, the traveller walked in; not, however, without regarding his host with a scrutinizing glance. “No, sir,” said he, “I have come to ask you a greater favor.” Instantly Mr. Listwell exclaimed, (as the recollection of the Virginia forest scene flashed upon him,) “Oh, sir, I know not your name, but I have seen your face, and heard your voice before. I am glad to see you. I know all. You are flying for your liberty,—be seated,—be seated,—banish all fear. You are safe under my roof.” This recognition, so unexpected, rather disconcerted and disquieted the noble fugitive. The timidity and suspicion of persons escaping from slavery are easily awakened, and often what is intended to dispel the one, and to allay the other, has precisely the opposite effect. It was so in this case. Quickly observing the unhappy impression made by his words and action, Mr. Listwell assumed a more quiet and inquiring aspect, and finally succeeded in removing the apprehensions which his very natural and generous salutation had aroused. Thus assured, the stranger said, “Sir, you have rightly guessed, I am, indeed, a fugitive from slavery. My name is Madison,—Madison Washington my mother13 used to call me. I am on my way to Canada, where I learn that persons of my color are protected in all the rights of men;14 and my object in calling upon you was, to beg the privilege of resting my weary limbs for the night in your barn. It was my purpose to have continued my journey till morning; but the piercing cold, and the frowning darkness compelled me to seek shelter; and, seeing a light through the lattice of your window, I was encouraged to come here to beg the privilege named. You will do me a great favor by affording me shelter for the night.” “A resting-place, indeed, sir, you shall have; not, however, in my barn, but in the best room of my house. Consider yourself, if you please, un-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 26
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
27
der the roof of a friend; for such I am to you, and to all your deeply injured race.” While this introductory conversation was going on, the kind lady had revived the fire, and was diligently preparing supper; for she, not less than her husband, felt for the sorrows of the oppressed and hunted ones of the earth, and was always glad of an opportunity to do them a service. A bountiful repast was quickly prepared, and the hungry and toil-worn bondman was cordially invited to partake thereof. Gratefully he acknowledged the favor of his benevolent benefactress; but appeared scarcely to understand what such hospitality could mean. It was the first time in his life that he had met so humane and friendly a greeting at the hands of persons whose color was unlike his own; yet it was impossible for him to doubt the charitableness of his new friends, or the genuineness of the welcome so freely given; and he therefore, with many thanks, took his seat at the table with Mr. and Mrs. Listwell, who, desirous to make him feel at home, took a cup of tea themselves, while urging upon Madison the best that the house could afford. Supper over, all doubts and apprehensions banished, the three drew around the blazing fire, and a conversation commenced which lasted till long after midnight. “Now,” said Madison to Mr. Listwell, “I was a little surprised and alarmed when I came in, by what you said; do tell me, sir, why you thought you had seen my face before, and by what you knew me to be a fugitive from slavery; for I am sure that I never was before in this neighborhood, and I certainly sought to conceal what I supposed to be the manner of a fugitive slave.” Mr. Listwell at once frankly disclosed the secret; describing the place where he first saw him; rehearsing the language which he (Madison) had used; referring to the effect which his manner and speech had made upon him; declaring the resolution he there formed to be an abolitionist; telling how often he had spoken of the circumstance, and the deep concern he had ever since felt to know what had become of him; and whether he had carried out the purpose to make his escape, as in the woods he declared he would do. “Ever since that morning,” said Mr. Listwell, “you have seldom been absent from my mind, and though now I did not dare to hope that I should ever see you again, I have often wished that such might be my fortune; for, from that hour, your face seemed to be daguerreotyped on my memory.”15
Y7870-Douglass.indb 27
9/1/21 4:16 PM
28
THE HEROIC SLAVE
Madison looked quite astonished, and felt amazed at the narration to which he had listened. After recovering himself he said, “I well remember that morning, and the bitter anguish that wrung my heart; I will state the occasion of it. I had, on the previous Saturday, suffered a cruel lashing; had been tied up to the limb of a tree, with my feet chained together, and a heavy iron bar placed between my ankles. Thus suspended, I received on my naked back forty stripes, and was kept in this distressing position three or four hours, and was then let down, only to have my torture increased; for my bleeding back, gashed by the cow-skin, was washed by the overseer with old brine, partly to augment my suffering, and partly, as he said, to prevent inflammation. My crime was that I had stayed longer at the mill, the day previous, than it was thought I ought to have done, which, I assured my master and the overseer, was no fault of mine; but no excuses were allowed. ‘Hold your tongue, you impudent rascal,’ met my every explanation. Slave-holders are so imperious when their passions are excited, as to construe every word of the slave into insolence. I could do nothing but submit to the agonizing infliction. Smarting still from the wounds, as well as from the consciousness of being whipt for no cause, I took advantage of the absence of my master, who had gone to church, to spend the time in the woods, and brood over my wretched lot. Oh, sir, I remember it well,—and can never forget it.” “But this was five years ago; where have you been since?” “I will try to tell you,” said Madison. “Just four weeks after that Sabbath morning, I gathered up the few rags of clothing I had, and started, as I supposed, for the North and for freedom. I must not stop to describe my feelings on taking this step. It seemed like taking a leap into the dark. The thought of leaving my poor wife and two little children caused me indescribable anguish; but consoling myself with the reflection that once free, I could, possibly, devise ways and means to gain their freedom also, I nerved myself up to make the attempt.16 I started, but ill-luck attended me; for after being out a whole week, strange to say, I still found myself on my master’s grounds; the third night after being out, a season of clouds and rain set in, wholly preventing me from seeing the North Star, which I had trusted as my guide, not dreaming that clouds might intervene between us. “This circumstance was fatal to my project, for in losing my star, I lost my way; so when I supposed I was far towards the North, and had almost gained my freedom, I discovered myself at the very point from which I had started. It was a severe trial, for I arrived at home in great destitution;
Y7870-Douglass.indb 28
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
29
my feet were sore, and in travelling in the dark, I had dashed my foot against a stump, and started a nail, and lamed myself. I was wet and cold; one week had exhausted all my stores; and when I landed on my master’s plantation, with all my work to do over again,—hungry, tired, lame, and bewildered,—I almost cursed the day that I was born. In this extremity I approached the quarters. I did so stealthily, although in my desperation I hardly cared whether I was discovered or not. Peeping through the rents of the quarters, I saw my fellow-slaves seated by a warm fire, merrily passing away the time, as though their hearts knew no sorrow. Although I envied their seeming contentment, all wretched as I was, I despised the cowardly acquiescence in their own degradation which it implied, and felt a kind of pride and glory in my own desperate lot. I dared not enter the quarters,—for where there is seeming contentment with slavery, there is certain treachery to freedom. I proceeded towards the great house, in the hope of catching a glimpse of my poor wife, whom I knew might be trusted with my secrets even on the scaffold. Just as I reached the fence which divided the field from the garden, I saw a woman in the yard, who in the darkness I took to be my wife; but a nearer approach told me it was not she. I was about to speak; had I done so, I would not have been here this night; for an alarm would have been sounded, and the hunters been put on my track. Here were hunger, cold, thirst, disappointment, and chagrin, confronted only by the dim hope of liberty. I tremble to think of that dreadful hour. To face the deadly cannon’s mouth in warm blood unterrified, is, I think, a small achievement, compared with a conflict like this with gaunt starvation. The gnawings of hunger conquers by degrees, till all that a man has he would give in exchange for a single crust of bread. Thank God, I was not quite reduced to this extremity. “Happily for me, before the fatal moment of utter despair, my good wife made her appearance in the yard. It was she; I knew her step. All was well now. I was, however, afraid to speak lest I should frighten her. Yet speak I did; and, to my great joy, my voice was known. Our meeting can be more easily imagined than described. For a time hunger, thirst, weariness, and lameness were forgotten. But it was soon necessary for her to return to the house. She being a house-servant, her absence from the kitchen, if discovered, might have excited suspicion. Our parting was like tearing the flesh from my bones; yet it was the part of wisdom for her to go. She left me with the purpose of meeting me at midnight in the very forest where you last saw me. She knew the place well, as one of my melancholy resorts, and could easily find it, though the night was dark.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 29
9/1/21 4:16 PM
30
THE HEROIC SLAVE
“I hastened away, therefore, and concealed myself, to await the arrival of my good angel. As I lay there among the leaves, I was strongly tempted to return again to the house of my master and give myself up; but remembering my solemn pledge on that memorable Sunday morning, I was able to linger out the two long hours between ten and midnight. I may well call them long hours. I have endured much hardship; I have encountered many perils; but the anxiety of those two hours, was the bitterest I ever experienced. True to her word, my wife came laden with provisions, and we sat down on the side of a log, at that dark and lonesome hour of the night. I cannot say we talked; our feelings were too great for that; yet we came to an understanding that I should make the woods my home, for if I gave myself up, I should be whipped and sold away; and if I started for the North, I should leave a wife doubly dear to me. We mutually determined, therefore, that I should remain in the vicinity. In the dismal swamps I lived, sir, five long years,—a cave for my home during the day.17 I wandered about at night with the wolf and the bear,—sustained by the promise that my good Susan would meet me in the pine woods at least once a week. This promise was redeemed, I assure you, to the letter, greatly to my relief. I had partly become contented with my mode of life, and had made up my mind to spend my days there; but the wilderness that sheltered me thus long took fire, and refused longer to be my hiding-place. “I will not harrow up your feelings by portraying the terrific scene of this awful conflagration. There is nothing to which I can liken it. It was horribly and indescribably grand. The whole world seemed on fire, and it appeared to me that the day of judgment had come; that the burning bowels of the earth had burst forth, and that the end of all things was at hand. Bears and wolves, scorched from their mysterious hiding-places in the earth, and all the wild inhabitants of the untrodden forest, filled with a common dismay, ran forth, yelling, howling, bewildered amidst the smoke and flame. The very heavens seemed to rain down fire through the towering trees; it was by the merest chance that I escaped the devouring element. Running before it, and stopping occasionally to take breath, I looked back to behold its frightful ravages, and to drink in its savage magnificence. It was awful, thrilling, solemn, beyond compare. When aided by the fitful wind, the merciless tempest of fire swept on, sparkling, creaking, cracking, curling, roaring, out-doing in its dreadful splendor a thousand thunderstorms at once. From tree to tree it leaped, swallowing them up in its lurid, baleful glare; and leaving them leafless, limbless, charred, and lifeless behind. The scene was overwhelming, stunning,—
Y7870-Douglass.indb 30
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
31
nothing was spared,—cattle, tame and wild, herds of swine and of deer, wild beasts of every name and kind,—huge night-birds, bats, and owls, that had retired to their homes in lofty tree-tops to rest, perished in that fiery storm. The long-winged buzzard and croaking raven mingled their dismal cries with those of the countless myriads of small birds that rose up to the skies, and were lost to the sight in clouds of smoke and flame. Oh, I shudder when I think of it! Many a poor wandering fugitive, who, like myself, had sought among wild beasts the mercy denied by our fellow men, saw, in helpless consternation, his dwelling-place and city of refuge reduced to ashes forever.18 It was this grand conflagration that drove me hither; I ran alike from fire and from slavery.” After a slight pause, (for both speaker and hearers were deeply moved by the above recital,) Mr. Listwell, addressing Madison, said, “If it does not weary you too much, do tell us something of your journeyings since this disastrous burning,—we are deeply interested in everything which can throw light on the hardships of persons escaping from slavery; we could hear you talk all night; are there no incidents that you could relate of your travels hither? or are they such that you do not like to mention them?” “For the most part, sir, my course has been uninterrupted; and, considering the circumstances, at times even pleasant. I have suffered little for want of food; but I need not tell you how I got it. Your moral code may differ from mine, as your customs and usages are different. The fact is, sir, during my flight, I felt myself robbed by society of all my just rights; that I was in an enemy’s land, who sought both my life and my liberty. They had transformed me into a brute; made merchandise of my body, and, for all the purposes of my flight, turned day into night,—and guided by my own necessities, and in contempt of their conventionalities, I did not scruple to take bread where I could get it.” “And just there you were right,” said Mr. Listwell; “I once had doubts on this point myself, but a conversation with Gerrit Smith,19 (a man, by the way, that I wish you could see, for he is a devoted friend of your race, and I know he would receive you gladly,) put an end to all my doubts on this point. But do not let me interrupt you.” “I had but one narrow escape during my whole journey,” said Madison. “Do let us hear of it,” said Mr. Listwell. “Two weeks ago,” continued Madison, “after travelling all night, I was overtaken by daybreak, in what seemed to me an almost interminable wood. I deemed it unsafe to go farther, and, as usual, I looked around for a suitable tree in which to spend the day. I liked one with a bushy top, and
Y7870-Douglass.indb 31
9/1/21 4:16 PM
32
THE HEROIC SLAVE
found one just to my mind. Up I climbed, and hiding myself as well as I could, I, with this strap, (pulling one out of his old coat-pocket,) lashed myself to a bough, and flattered myself that I should get a good night’s sleep that day; but in this I was soon disappointed. I had scarcely got fastened to my natural hammock, when I heard the voices of a number of persons, apparently approaching the part of the woods where I was. Upon my word, sir, I dreaded more these human voices than I should have done those of wild beasts. I was at a loss to know what to do. If I descended, I should probably be discovered by the men; and if they had dogs I should, doubtless, be ‘treed.’ It was an anxious moment, but hardships and dangers have been the accompaniments of my life; and have, perhaps, imparted to me a certain hardness of character, which, to some extent, adapts me to them. In my present predicament, I decided to hold my place in the tree-top, and abide the consequences. But here I must disappoint you; for the men, who were all colored, halted at least a hundred yards from me, and began with their axes, in right good earnest, to attack the trees. The sound of their laughing axes was like the report of as many well-charged pistols. By and by there came down at least a dozen trees with a terrible crash. They leaped upon the fallen trees with an air of victory. I could see no dog with them, and felt myself comparatively safe, though I could not forget the possibility that some freak or fancy might bring the axe a little nearer my dwelling than comported with my safety. “There was no sleep for me that day, and I wished for night. You may imagine that the thought of having the tree attacked under me was far from agreeable, and that it very easily kept me on the look-out. The day was not without diversion. The men at work seemed to be a gay set; and they would often make the woods resound with that uncontrolled laughter for which we, as a race, are remarkable. I held my place in the tree till sunset,—saw the men put on their jackets to be off. I observed that all left the ground except one, whom I saw sitting on the side of a stump, with his head bowed, and his eyes apparently fixed on the ground. I became interested in him. After sitting in the position to which I have alluded ten or fifteen minutes, he left the stump, walked directly towards the tree in which I was secreted, and halted almost under the same. He stood for a moment and looked around, deliberately and reverently took off his hat, by which I saw that he was a man in the evening of life, slightly bald and quite gray. After laying down his hat carefully, he knelt and prayed aloud, and such a prayer, the most fervent, earnest, and solemn, to which I think I ever listened. After reverently addressing the Almighty, as the all-wise, all-good, and the common Father of all mankind, he besought God for
Y7870-Douglass.indb 32
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
33
grace, for strength, to bear up under, and to endure, as a good soldier, all the hardships and trials which beset the journey of life, and to enable him to live in a manner which accorded with the gospel of Christ. His soul now broke out in humble supplication for deliverance from bondage. ‘O thou,’ said he, ‘that hearest the raven’s cry,20 take pity on poor me! O deliver me! O deliver me! in mercy, O God, deliver me from the chains and manifold hardships of slavery! With thee, O Father, all things are possible.21 Thou canst stand and measure the earth. Thou hast beheld and drove asunder the nations,—all power is in thy hand,—thou didst say of old, “I have seen the affliction of my people, and am come to deliver them,”22—‘Oh look down upon our afflictions, and have mercy upon us.’ But I cannot repeat his prayer, nor can I give you an idea of its deep pathos. I had given but little attention to religion, and had but little faith in it; yet, as the old man prayed, I felt almost like coming down and kneel by his side, and mingle my broken complaint with his. “He had already gained my confidence; as how could it be otherwise? I knew enough of religion to know that the man who prays in secret is far more likely to be sincere than he who loves to pray standing in the street, or in the great congregation. When he arose from his knees, like another Zacheus,23 I came down from the tree. He seemed a little alarmed at first, but I told him my story, and the good man embraced me in his arms, and assured me of his sympathy. “I was now about out of provisions, and thought I might safely ask him to help me replenish my store. He said he had no money; but if he had, he would freely give it me. I told him I had one dollar; it was all the money I had in the world. I gave it to him, and asked him to purchase some crackers and cheese, and to kindly bring me the balance; that I would remain in or near that place, and would come to him on his return, if he would whistle. He was gone only about an hour. Meanwhile, from some cause or other, I know not what, (but as you shall see very wisely,) I changed my place. On his return I started to meet him; but it seemed as if the shadow of approaching danger fell upon my spirit, and checked my progress. In a very few minutes, closely on the heels of the old man, I distinctly saw fourteen men, with something like guns in their hands.” “Oh! the old wretch!” exclaimed Mrs. Listwell, “he had betrayed you, had he?” “I think not,” said Madison, “I cannot believe that the old man was to blame. He probably went into a store, asked for the articles for which I sent, and presented the bill I gave him; and it is so unusual for slaves in the country to have money, that fact, doubtless, excited suspicion, and
Y7870-Douglass.indb 33
9/1/21 4:16 PM
34
THE HEROIC SLAVE
gave rise to inquiry. I can easily believe that the truthfulness of the old man’s character compelled him to disclose the facts; and thus were these blood-thirsty men put on my track. Of course I did not present myself; but hugged my hiding-place securely. If discovered and attacked, I resolved to sell my life as dearly as possible.24 “After searching about the woods silently for a time, the whole company gathered around the old man; one charged him with lying, and called him an old villain; said he was a thief; charged him with stealing money; said if he did not instantly tell where he got it, they would take the shirt from his old back, and give him thirty-nine lashes. “ ‘I did not steal the money,’ said the old man, ‘it was given me, as I told you at the store; and if the man who gave it me is not here, it is not my fault.’ “ ‘Hush! you lying old rascal; we’ll make you smart for it. You shall not leave this spot until you have told where you got that money.’ “They now took hold of him, and began to strip him; while others went to get sticks with which to beat him. I felt, at the moment, like rushing out in the midst of them; but considering that the old man would be whipped the more for having aided a fugitive slave, and that, perhaps, in the melée25 he might be killed outright, I disobeyed this impulse. They tied him to a tree, and began to whip him. My own flesh crept at every blow, and I seem to hear the old man’s piteous cries even now. They laid thirty-nine lashes on his bare back, and were going to repeat that number, when one of the company besought his comrades to desist. ‘You’ll kill the d——d old scoundrel! You’ve already whipt a dollar’s worth out of him, even if he stole it!’ ‘O yes,’ said another, ‘let him down. He’ll never tell us another lie, I’ll warrant ye!’ With this, one of the company untied the old man, and bid him go about his business. “The old man left, but the company remained as much as an hour, scouring the woods. Round and round they went, turning up the underbrush, and peering about like so many bloodhounds. Two or three times they came within six feet of where I lay. I tell you I held my stick with a firmer grasp than I did in coming up to your house to-night. I expected to level one of them at least. Fortunately, however, I eluded their pursuit, and they left me alone in the woods. “My last dollar was now gone, and you may well suppose I felt the loss of it; but the thought of being once again free to pursue my journey, prevented that depression which a sense of destitution causes; so swinging my little bundle on my back, I caught a glimpse of the Great Bear (which ever points the way to my beloved star,) and I started again on my jour-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 34
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
35
ney.26 What I lost in money I made up at a hen-roost that same night, upon which I fortunately came.” “But you did’nt eat your food raw? How did you cook it?” said Mrs. Listwell. “O no, Madam,” said Madison, turning to his little bundle;—”I had the means of cooking.” Here he took out of his bundle an old-fashioned tinder-box, and taking up a piece of a file, which he brought with him, he struck it with a heavy flint, and brought out at least a dozen sparks at once. “I have had this old box,” said he, “more than five years. It is the only property saved from the fire in the dismal swamp. It has done me good service. It has given me the means of broiling many a chicken!” It seemed quite a relief to Mrs. Listwell to know that Madison had, at least, lived upon cooked food. Women have a perfect horror of eating uncooked food. By this time thoughts of what was best to be done about getting Madison to Canada, began to trouble Mr. Listwell; for the laws of Ohio were very stringent against any one who should aid, or who were found aiding a slave to escape through that State.27 A citizen, for the simple act of taking a fugitive slave in his carriage, had just been stripped of all his property, and thrown penniless upon the world. Notwithstanding this, Mr. Listwell was determined to see Madison safely on his way to Canada. “Give yourself no uneasiness,” said he to Madison, “for if it cost my farm, I shall see you safely out of the States, and on your way to a land of liberty. Thank God that there is such a land so near us! You will spend to-morrow with us, and to-morrow night I will take you in my carriage to the Lake.28 Once upon that, and you are safe.” “Thank you! thank you,” said the fugitive; “I will commit myself to your care.” For the first time during five years, Madison enjoyed the luxury of resting his limbs on a comfortable bed, and inside a human habitation. Looking at the white sheets, he said to Mr. Listwell, “What, sir! you don’t mean that I shall sleep in that bed?” “Oh yes, oh yes.” After Mr. Listwell left the room, Madison said he really hesitated whether or not he should lie on the floor; for that was far more comfortable and inviting than any bed to which he had been used. * * * * * * We pass over the thoughts and feelings, the hopes and fears, the plans and purposes, that revolved in the mind of Madison during the day that
Y7870-Douglass.indb 35
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
36
he was secreted at the house of Mr. Listwell. The reader will be content to know that nothing occurred to endanger his liberty, or to excite alarm. Many were the little attentions bestowed upon him in his quiet retreat and hiding-place. In the evening, Mr. Listwell, after treating Madison to a new suit of winter clothes, and replenishing his exhausted purse with five dollars, all in silver, brought out his two-horse wagon, well provided with buffaloes, and silently started off with him to Cleveland.29 They arrived there without interruption, a few minutes before sunrise the next morning. Fortunately the steamer Admiral lay at the wharf, and was to start for Canada at nine o’clock.30 Here the last anticipated danger was surmounted. It was feared that just at this point the hunters of men might be on the look-out, and, possibly, pounce upon their victim. Mr. Listwell saw the captain of the boat; cautiously sounded him on the matter of carrying liberty-loving passengers, before he introduced his precious charge. This done, Madison was conducted on board. With usual generosity this true subject of the emancipating queen31 welcomed Madison, and assured him that he should be safely landed in Canada, free of charge. Madison now felt himself no more a piece of merchandise, but a passenger, and, like any other passenger, going about his business, carrying with him what belonged to him, and nothing which rightfully belonged to anybody else. Wrapped in his new winter suit, snug and comfortable, a pocket full of silver, safe from his pursuers, embarked for a free country, Madison gave every sign of sincere gratitude, and bade his kind benefactor farewell, with such a grip of the hand as bespoke a heart full of honest manliness, and a soul that knew how to appreciate kindness. It need scarcely be said that Mr. Listwell was deeply moved by the gratitude and friendship he had excited in a nature so noble as that of the fugitive. He went to his home that day with a joy and gratification which knew no bounds. He had done something “to deliver the spoiled out of the hands of the spoiler,”32 he had given bread to the hungry, and clothes to the naked;33 he had befriended a man to whom the laws of his country forbade all friendship,—and in proportion to the odds against his righteous deed, was the delightful satisfaction that gladdened his heart. On reaching home, he exclaimed, “He is safe,—he is safe,—he is safe,”—and the cup of his joy was shared by his excellent lady. The following letter was received from Madison a few days after: “WINDSOR, CANADA WEST, DEC. 16, 1840.
My dear Friend,—for such you truly are:—
Y7870-Douglass.indb 36
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
37
Madison is out of the woods at last; I nestle in the mane of the British lion, protected by his mighty paw from the talons and the beak of the American eagle.34 I AM FREE, and breathe an atmosphere too pure for slaves, slave-hunters, or slave-holders. My heart is full. As many thanks to you, sir, and to your kind lady, as there are pebbles on the shores of Lake Erie; and may the blessing of God rest upon you both. You will never be forgotten by your profoundly grateful friend, MADISON WASHINGTON.”
PART III. —His head was with his heart, And that was far away! Childe Harold.35 Just upon the edge of the great road from Petersburg, Virginia, to Richmond,36 and only about fifteen miles from the latter place, there stands a somewhat ancient and famous public tavern, quite notorious in its better days, as being the grand resort for most of the leading gamblers, horse-racers, cock-fighters, and slave-traders from all the country round about. This old rookery, the nucleus of all sorts of birds, mostly those of ill omen, has, like everything else peculiar to Virginia, lost much of its ancient consequence and splendor; yet it keeps up some appearance of gaiety and high life, and is still frequented, even by respectable travellers, who are unacquainted with its past history and present condition.37 Its fine old portico looks well at a distance, and gives the building an air of grandeur. A nearer view, however, does little to sustain this pretension. The house is large, and its style imposing, but time and dissipation, unfailing in their results, have made ineffaceable marks upon it, and it must, in the common course of events, soon be numbered with the things that were. The gloomy mantle of ruin is, already, out[/]spread to envelop it, and its remains, even but now remind one of a human skull, after the flesh has mingled with the earth. Old hats and rags fill the places in the upper windows once occupied by large panes of glass, and the moulding boards along the roofing have dropped off from their places, leaving holes and crevices in the rented wall for bats and swallows to build their nests in. The platform of the portico, which fronts the highway is a rickety affair, its planks are loose, and in some places entirely gone, leaving effective man[-]traps in their stead for nocturnal ramblers. The wooden pillars,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 37
9/1/21 4:16 PM
38
THE HEROIC SLAVE
which once supported it, but which now hang as encumbrances, are all rotten, and tremble with the touch. A part of the stable, a fine old structure in its day, which has given comfortable shelter to hundreds of the noblest steeds of “the Old Dominion”38 at once, was blown down many years ago, and never has been, and probably never will be, rebuilt. The doors of the barn are in wretched condition; they will shut with a little human strength to help their worn out hinges, but not otherwise. The side of the great building seen from the road is much discolored in sundry places by slops poured from the upper windows, rendering it unsightly and offensive in other respects. Three or four great dogs, looking as dull and gloomy as the mansion itself, lie stretched out along the door-sills under the portico; and double the number of loafers, some of them completely rum-ripe, and others ripening, dispose themselves like so many sentinels about the front of the house. These latter understand the science of scraping acquaintance to perfection. They know every-body, and almost every-body knows them. Of course, as their title implies, they have no regular employment. They are (to use an expressive phrase) hangers on,39 or still better, they are what sailors would denominate holders-on to the slack,40 in every-body’s mess, and in no-body’s watch. They are, however, as good as the newspaper for the events of the day, and they sell their knowledge almost as cheap. Money they seldom have; yet they always have capital the most reliable. They make their way with a succeeding traveller by intelligence gained from a preceding one. All the great names of Virginia they know by heart, and have seen their owners often. The history of the house is folded in their lips, and they rattle off stories in connection with it, equal to the guides at Dryburgh Abbey.41 He must be a shrewd man, and well skilled in the art of evasion, who gets out of the hands of these fellows without being at the expense of a treat. It was at this old tavern, while on a second visit to the State of Virginia in 1841, that Mr. Listwell, unacquainted with the fame of the place, turned aside, about sunset, to pass the night. Riding up to the house, he had scarcely dismounted, when one of the half dozen bar-room fraternity met and addressed him in a manner exceedingly bland and accommodating. “Fine evening, sir.” “Very fine,” said Mr. Listwell. “This is a tavern, I believe?” “O yes, sir, yes; although you may think it looks a little the worse for wear, it was once as good a house as any in Virginy. I make no doubt if ye spend the night here, you’ll think it a good house yet; for there aint a more accommodating man in the country than you’ll find the landlord.”
Y7870-Douglass.indb 38
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
39
Listwell. “The most I want is a good bed for myself, and a full manger for my horse. If I get these, I shall be quite satisfied.” Loafer. “Well, I alloys like to hear a gentleman talk for his horse; and just becase the horse can’t talk for itself. A man that don’t care about his beast, and don’t look arter it when he’s travelling, aint much in my eye anyhow. Now, sir, I likes a horse, and I’ll guarantee your horse will be taken good care on here. That old stable, for all you see it looks so shabby now, once sheltered the great Eclipse, when he run here agin Batchelor and Jumping Jemmy.42 Them was fast horses, but he beat ’em both.” Listwell. “Indeed.” Loafer. “Well, I rather reckon you’ve travelled a right smart distance to-day, from the look of your horse?” Listwell. “Forty miles only.” Loafer. “Well! I’ll be darned if that aint a pretty good only. Mister, that beast of yours is a singed cat, I warrant you. I never see’d a creature like that that was’nt good on the road. You’ve come about forty miles, then?” Listwell. “Yes, yes, and a pretty good pace at that.” Loafer. “You’re somewhat in a hurry, then, I make no doubt? I reckon I could guess if I would, what you’re going to Richmond for? It would’nt be much of a guess either; for it’s rumored hereabouts, that there’s to be the greatest sale of niggers at Richmond to-morrow that has taken place there in a long time; and I’ll be bound you’re a going there to have a hand in it.” Listwell. “Why, you must think, then, that there’s money to be made at that business?” Loafer. “Well, ’pon my honor, sir, I never made any that way myself; but it stands to reason that it’s a money making business; for almost all other business in Virginia is dropped to engage in this. One thing is sartain, I never see’d a nigger-buyer yet that had’nt a plenty of money, and he was’nt as free with it as water. I has known one on ’em to treat as high as twenty times in a night; and, ginerally speaking, they’s men of edication, and knows all about the government. The fact is, sir, I alloys like to hear ’em talk, bekase I alloys can learn something from them.” Listwell. “What may I call your name, sir?” Loafer. “Well, now, they calls me Wilkes. I’m known all around by the gentlemen that comes here. They all knows old Wilkes.” Listwell. “Well, Wilkes, you seem to be acquainted here, and I see you have a strong liking for a horse. Be so good as to speak a kind word for mine to the hostler to-night, and you’ll not lose anything by it.”
Y7870-Douglass.indb 39
9/1/21 4:16 PM
40
THE HEROIC SLAVE
Loafer. “Well, sir, I see you don’t say much, but you’ve got an insight into things. It’s alloys wise to get the good will of them that’s acquainted about a tavern; for a man don’t know when he goes into a house what may happen, or how much he may need a friend.” Here the loafer gave Mr. Listwell a significant grin, which expressed a sort of triumphant pleasure at having, as he supposed, by his tact succeeded in placing so fine appearing a gentleman under obligations to him. The pleasure, however, was mutual; for there was something so insinuating in the glance of this loquacious customer, that Mr. Listwell was very glad to get quit of him, and to do so more successfully, he ordered his supper to be brought to him in his private room, private to the eye, but not to the ear. This room was directly over the bar, and the plastering being off, nothing but pine boards and naked laths separated him from the disagreeable company below,—he could easily hear what was said in the bar-room, and was rather glad of the advantage it afforded, for, as you shall see, it furnished him important hints as to the manner and deportment he should assume during his stay at that tavern. Mr. Listwell says he had got into his room but a few moments, when he heard the officious Wilkes below, in a tone of disappointment, exclaim, “Whar’s that gentleman?” Wilkes was evidently expecting to meet with his friend at the bar-room, on his return, and had no doubt of his doing the handsome thing. “He has gone to his room,” answered the landlord, “and has ordered his supper to be brought to him.” Here some one shouted out, “Who is he, Wilkes? Where’s he going?” “Well, now, I’ll be hanged if I know; but I’m willing to make any man a bet of this old hat agin a five dollar bill, that that gent is as full of money as a dog is of fleas. He’s going down to Richmond to buy niggers, I make no doubt. He’s no fool, I warrant ye.” “Well, he acts d——d strange,” said another, “anyhow. I likes to see a man, when he comes up to a tavern, to come straight into the bar-room, and show that he’s a man among men.43 Nobody was going to bite him.” “Now, I don’t blame him a bit for not coming in here. That man knows his business, and means to take care on his money,” answered Wilkes. “Wilkes, you’re a fool. You only say that, becase you hope to get a few coppers out on him.” “You only measure my corn by your half-bushel, I won’t say that you’re only mad becase I got the chance of speaking to him first.” “O Wilkes! you’re known here. You’ll praise up any body that will give you a copper; besides, ’tis my opinion that that fellow who took his
Y7870-Douglass.indb 40
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
41
long slab-sides up stairs, for all the world just like a half-scared woman, afraid to look honest men in the face, is a Northerner, and as mean as dish-water.” “Now what will you bet of that,” said Wilkes. The speaker said, “I make no bets with you, ’kase you can get that fellow up stairs there to say anything.” “Well,” said Wilkes, “I am willing to bet any man in the company that that gentleman is a nigger-buyer. He did’nt tell me so right down, but I reckon I knows enough about men to give a pretty clean guess as to what they are arter.” The dispute as to who Mr. Listwell was, what his business, where he was going, etc., was kept up with much animation for some time, and more than once threatened a serious disturbance of the peace. Wilkes had his friends as well as his opponents. After this sharp debate, the company amused themselves by drinking whiskey, and telling stories. The latter consisting of quarrels, fights, rencontres,44 and duels, in which distinguished persons of that neighborhood, and frequenters of that house, had been actors. Some of these stories were frightful enough, and were told, too, with a relish which bespoke the pleasure of the parties with the horrid scenes they portrayed. It would not be proper here to give the reader any idea of the vulgarity and dark profanity which rolled, as “a sweet morsel,”45 under these corrupt tongues. A more brutal set of creatures, perhaps, never congregated. Disgusted, and a little alarmed withal, Mr. Listwell, who was not accustomed to such entertainment, at length retired, but not to sleep. He was too much wrought upon by what he had heard to rest quietly, and what snatches of sleep he got, were interrupted by dreams which were anything than pleasant. At eleven o’clock, there seemed to be several hundreds of persons crowding into the house. A loud and confused clamour, cursing and cracking of whips, and the noise of chains startled him from his bed; for a moment he would have given the half of his farm in Ohio to have been at home. This uproar was kept up with undulating course, till near morning. There was loud laughing,—loud singing,—loud cursing,—and yet there seemed to be weeping and mourning in the midst of all. Mr. Listwell said he had heard enough during the forepart of the night to convince him that a buyer of men and women stood the best chance of being respected. And he, therefore, thought it best to say nothing which might undo the favorable opinion that had been formed of him in the bar-room by at least one of the fraternity that swarmed about it. While he
Y7870-Douglass.indb 41
9/1/21 4:16 PM
42
THE HEROIC SLAVE
would not avow himself a purchaser of slaves, he deemed it not prudent to disavow it. He felt that he might, properly, refuse to cast such a pearl before parties which, to him, were worse than swine.46 To reveal himself, and to impart a knowledge of his real character and sentiments would, to say the least, be imparting intelligence with the certainty of seeing it and himself both abused. Mr. Listwell confesses, that this reasoning did not altogether satisfy his conscience, for, hating slavery as he did, and regarding it to be the immediate duty of every man to cry out against it, “without compromise and without concealment,”47 it was hard for him to admit to himself the possibility of circumstances wherein a man might, properly, hold his tongue on the subject. Having as little of the spirit of a martyr as Erasmus,48 he concluded, like the latter, that it was wiser to trust the mercy of God for his soul, than the humanity of slave-traders for his body. Bodily fear, not conscientious scruples, prevailed. In this spirit he rose early in the morning, manifesting no surprise at what he had heard during the night. His quondam49 friend was soon at his elbow, boring him with all sorts of questions. All, however, directed to find out his character, business, residence, purposes, and destination. With the most perfect appearance of good nature and carelessness, Mr. Listwell evaded these meddlesome inquiries, and turned conversation to general topics, leaving himself and all that specially pertained to him, out of discussion. Disengaging himself from their troublesome companionship, he made his way towards an old bowling-alley, which was connected with the house, and which, like all the rest, was in very bad repair. On reaching the alley Mr. Listwell saw, for the first time in his life, a slave-gang on their way to market. A sad sight truly. Here were one hundred and thirty human beings,—children of a common Creator—guilty of no crime—men and women, with hearts, minds, and deathless spirits, chained and fettered, and bound for the market, in a christian country,— in a country boasting of its liberty, independence, and high civilization! Humanity converted into merchandise, and linked in iron bands, with no regard to decency or humanity! All sizes, ages, and sexes, mothers, fathers, daughters, brothers, sisters,—all huddled together, on their way to market to be sold and separated from home, and from each other forever. And all to fill the pockets of men too lazy to work for an honest living, and who gain their fortune by plundering the helpless, and trafficking in the souls and sinews of men. As he gazed upon this revolting and heartrending scene, our informant said he almost doubted the existence of a God of justice! And he stood wondering that the earth did not open and swallow up such wickedness.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 42
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
43
In the midst of these reflections, and while running his eye up and down the fettered ranks, he met the glance of one whose face he thought he had seen before. To be resolved, he moved towards the spot. It was MADISON WASHINGTON! Here was a scene for the pencil! Had Mr. Listwell been confronted by one risen from the dead, he could not have been more appalled. He was completely stunned. A thunderbolt could not have struck him more dumb. He stood, for a few moments, as motionless as one petrified; collecting himself, he at length exclaimed, “Madison! is that you?” The noble fugitive, but little less astonished than himself, answered cheerily, “O yes, sir, they’ve got me again.” Thoughtless of consequences for the moment, Mr. Listwell ran up to his old friend, placing his hands upon his shoulders, and looked him in the face! Speechless they stood gazing at each other as if to be doubly resolved that there was no mistake about the matter, till Madison motioned his friend away, intimating a fear lest the keepers should find him there, and suspect him of tampering with the slaves. “They will soon be out to look after us. You can come when they go to breakfast, and I will tell you all.” Pleased with this arrangement, Mr. Listwell passed out of the alley; but only just in time to save himself, for, while near the door, he observed three men making their way to the alley. The thought occurred to him to await their arrival, as the best means of diverting the ever ready suspicions of the guilty. While the scene between Mr. Listwell and his friend Madison was going on, the other slaves stood as mute spectators,—at a loss to know what all this could mean. As he left, he heard the man chained to Madison ask, “Who is that gentleman?” “He is a friend of mine. I cannot tell you now. Suffice it to say he is a friend. You shall hear more of him before long, but mark me! whatever shall pass between that gentleman and me, in your hearing, I pray you will say nothing about it. We are all chained here together,—ours is a common lot; and that gentleman is not less your friend than mine.” At these words, all mysterious as they were, the unhappy company gave signs of satisfaction and hope. It seems that Madison, by that mesmeric power which is the invariable accompaniment of genius, had already won the confidence of the gang, and was a sort of general-in-chief among them. By this time the keepers arrived. A horrid trio, well fitted for their demoniacal work. Their uncombed hair came down over foreheads “villainously low,”50 and with eyes, mouths, and noses to match. “Hallo! hallo!” they growled out as they entered. “Are you all there?”
Y7870-Douglass.indb 43
9/1/21 4:16 PM
44
THE HEROIC SLAVE
“All here,” said Madison. “Well, well, that’s right! your journey will soon be over. You’ll be in Richmond by eleven to-day, and then you’ll have an easy time on it.” “I say, gal, what in the devil are you crying about?” said one of them. “I’ll give you something to cry about, if you don’t mind.” This was said to a girl, apparently not more than twelve years old, who had been weeping bitterly. She had, probably, left behind her a loving mother, affectionate sisters, brothers, and friends, and her tears were but the natural expression of her sorrow, and the only solace. But the dealers in human flesh have no respect for such sorrow. They look upon it as a protest against their cruel injustice, and they are prompt to punish it. This is a puzzle not easily solved. How came he here? what can I do for him? may I not even now be in some way compromised in this affair? were thoughts that troubled Mr. Listwell, and made him eager for the promised opportunity of speaking to Madison. The bell now sounded for breakfast, and keepers and drivers, with pistols and bowie-knives gleaming from their belts, hurried in, as if to get the best places. Taking the chance now afforded, Mr. Listwell hastened back to the bowling-alley. Reaching Madison, he said, “Now do tell me all about the matter. Do you know me?” “Oh, yes,” said Madison, “I know you well, and shall never forget you nor that cold and dreary night you gave me shelter. I must be short,” he continued, “for they’ll soon be out again. This, then, is the story in brief. On reaching Canada, and getting over the excitement of making my escape, sir, my thoughts turned to my poor wife, who had well deserved my love by her virtuous fidelity and undying affection for me. I could not bear the thought of leaving her in the cruel jaws of slavery, without making an effort to rescue her. First, I tried to get money to buy her; but oh! the process was too slow. I despaired of accomplishing it. She was in all my thoughts by day, and my dreams by night. At times I could almost hear her voice, saying, ‘O Madison! Madison! will you then leave me here? can you leave me here to die? No! no! you will come! you will come!’ I was wretched. I lost my appetite. I could neither work, eat, nor sleep, till I resolved to hazard my own liberty, to gain that of my wife! But I must be short. Six weeks ago I reached my old master’s place. I laid about the neighborhood nearly a week, watching my chance, and, finally, I ventured upon the desperate attempt to reach my poor wife’s room by means of a ladder. I reached the window, but the noise in raising it frightened my wife, and she screamed and fainted. I took her in my arms, and was de-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 44
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
45
scending the ladder, when the dogs began to bark furiously, and before I could get to the woods the white folks were roused. The cool night air soon restored my wife, and she readily recognized me. We made the best of our way to the woods, but it was now too late,—the dogs were after us as though they would have torn us to pieces. It was all over with me now! My old master and his two sons ran out with loaded rifles, and before we were out of gunshot, our ears were assailed with ‘Stop! stop! or be shot down.’ Nevertheless we ran on. Seeing that we gave no heed to their calls, they fired, and my poor wife fell by my side dead, while I received but a slight flesh wound. I now became desperate, and stood my ground, and awaited their attack over her dead body. They rushed upon me, with their rifles in hand. I parried their blows, and fought them ’till I was knocked down and overpowered.” “Oh! it was madness to have returned,” said Mr. Listwell. “Sir, I could not be free with the galling thought that my poor wife was still a slave. With her in slavery, my body, not my spirit, was free. I was taken to the house,—chained to a ring-bolt,—my wounds dressed. I was kept there three days. All the slaves, for miles around, were brought to see me. Many slave-holders came with their slaves, using me as proof of the completeness of their power, and of the impossibility of slaves getting away. I was taunted, jeered at, and berated by them, in a manner that pierced me to the soul. Thank God, I was able to smother my rage, and to bear it all with seeming composure. After my wounds were nearly healed, I was taken to a tree and stripped, and I received sixty lashes on my naked back. A few days after, I was sold to a slave-trader, and placed in this gang for the New Orleans market.”51 “Do you think your master would sell you to me?” “O no, sir! I was sold on condition of my being taken South. Their motive is revenge.” “Then, then,” said Mr. Listwell, “I fear I can do nothing for you. Put your trust in God, and bear your sad lot with the manly fortitude which becomes a man. I shall see you at Richmond, but don’t recognize me.” Saying this, Mr. Listwell handed Madison ten dollars; said a few words to the other slaves; received their hearty “God bless you,” and made his way to the house. Fearful of exciting suspicion by too long delay, our friend went to the breakfast table, with the air of one who half reproved the greediness of those who rushed in at the sound of the bell. A cup of coffee was all that he could manage. His feelings were too bitter and excited, and his heart
Y7870-Douglass.indb 45
9/1/21 4:16 PM
46
THE HEROIC SLAVE
was too full with the fate of poor Madison (whom he loved as well as admired) to relish his breakfast; and although he sat long after the company had left the table, he really did little more than change the position of his knife and fork. The strangeness of meeting again one whom he had met on two several occasions before, under extraordinary circumstances, was well calculated to suggest the idea that a supernatural power, a wakeful providence, or an inexorable fate, had linked their destiny together; and that no efforts of his could disentangle him from the mysterious web of circumstances which enfolded him. On leaving the table, Mr. Listwell nerved himself up and walked firmly into the bar-room. He was at once greeted again by that talkative chatter-box, Mr. Wilkes. “Them’s a likely set of niggers in the alley there,” said Wilkes. “Yes, they’re fine looking fellows, one of them I should like to purchase, and for him I would be willing to give a handsome sum.” Turning to one of his comrades, and with a grin of victory, Wilkes said, “Aha, Bill, did you hear that? I told you I know’d that gentleman wanted to buy niggers, and would bid as high as any purchaser in the market.” “Come, come,” said Listwell, “don’t be too loud in your praise, you are old enough to know that prices rise when purchasers are plenty.” “That’s a fact,” said Wilkes, “I see you knows the ropes—and there’s not a man in old Virginy whom I’d rather help to make a good bargain than you, sir.” Mr. Listwell here threw a dollar at Wilkes, (which the latter caught with a dexterous hand,) saying, “Take that for your kind good will.” Wilkes held up the dollar to his right eye, with a grin of victory, and turned to the morose grumbler in the corner who had questioned the liberality of a man of whom he knew nothing. Mr. Listwell now stood as well with the company as any other occupant of the bar-room. We pass over the hurry and bustle, the brutal vociferations of the slave-drivers in getting their unhappy gang in motion for Richmond; and we need not narrate every application of the lash to those who faltered in the journey. Mr. Listwell followed the train at a long distance, with a sad heart; and on reaching Richmond, left his horse at a hotel, and made his way to the wharf in the direction of which he saw the slave-coffle driven. He was just in time to see the whole company embark for New Orleans. The thought struck him that, while mixing with the multitude, he might do his friend Madison one last service, and he stept into a hardware store
Y7870-Douglass.indb 46
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
47
and purchased three strong files. These he took with him, and standing near the small boat, which lay in waiting to bear the company by parcels to the side of the brig that lay in the stream, he managed, as Madison passed him, to slip the files into his pocket, and at once darted back among the crowd. All the company now on board, the imperious voice of the captain sounded, and instantly a dozen hardy seamen were in the rigging, hurrying aloft to unfurl the broad canvas of our Baltimore built American Slaver.52 The sailors hung about the ropes, like so many black cats, now in the round[-]tops, now in the cross-trees, now on the yard-arms; all was bluster and activity. Soon the broad fore topsail, the royal and top gallant sail were spread to the breeze. Round went the heavy windlass, clank, clank went the fall-bit,—the anchors weighed,—jibs, mainsails, and topsails hauled to the wind, and the long, low, black slaver, with her cargo of human flesh, careened and moved forward to the sea.53 Mr. Listwell stood on the shore, and watched the slaver till the last speck of her upper sails faded from sight, and announced the limit of human vision. “Farewell! farewell! brave and true man! God grant that brighter skies may smile upon your future than have yet looked down upon your thorny pathway.” Saying this to himself, our friend lost no time in completing his business, and in making his way homewards, gladly shaking off from his feet the dust of Old Virginia. PART IV. Oh, where’s the slave so lowly Condemn’d to chains unholy, Who could he burst His bonds at first Would pine beneath them slowly? Moore.54 ——Know ye not Who would be free, themselves must strike the blow. Childe Harold.55 What a world of inconsistency, as well as of wickedness, is suggested by the smooth and gliding phrase, AMERICAN SLAVE TRADE; and how strange and perverse is that moral sentiment which loathes, execrates, and brands as piracy and as deserving of death the carrying away into
Y7870-Douglass.indb 47
9/1/21 4:16 PM
48
THE HEROIC SLAVE
captivity men, women, and children from the African coast; but which is neither shocked nor disturbed by a similar traffic, carried on with the same motives and purposes, and characterized by even more odious peculiarities on the coast of our MODEL REPUBLIC. We execrate and hang the wretch guilty of this crime on the coast of Guinea,56 while we respect and applaud the guilty participators in this murderous business on the enlightened shores of the Chesapeake. The inconsistency is so flagrant and glaring, that it would seem to cast a doubt on the doctrine of the innate moral sense of mankind. Just two months after the sailing of the Virginia slave brig, which the reader has seen move off to sea so proudly with her human cargo for the New Orleans market, there chanced to meet, in the Marine Coffee-house at Richmond, a company of ocean birds,57 when the following conversation, which throws some light on the subsequent history, not only of Madison Washington, but of the hundred and thirty human beings with whom we last saw him chained. “I say, shipmate, you had rather rough weather on your late passage to Orleans?” said Jack Williams, a regular old salt, tauntingly, to a trim, compact, manly looking person, who proved to be the first mate of the slave brig in question.58 “Foul play, as well as foul weather,” replied the firmly knit personage, evidently but little inclined to enter upon a subject which terminated so ingloriously to the captain and officers of the American slaver. “Well, betwixt you and me,” said Williams, “that whole affair on board of the Creole59 was miserably and disgracefully managed. Those black rascals got the upper hand of ye altogether; and, in my opinion, the whole disaster was the result of ignorance of the real character of darkies60 in general. With half a dozen resolute white men, (I say it not boastingly,) I could have had the rascals in irons in ten minutes, not because I’m so strong, but I know how to manage ’em. With my back against the caboose,61 I could, myself, have flogged a dozen of them; and had I been on board, by every monster of the deep, every black devil of ’em all would have had his neck stretched from the yard-arm. Ye made a mistake in yer manner of fighting ’em. All that is needed in dealing with a set of rebellious darkies, is to show that yer not afraid of ’em. For my own part, I would not honor a dozen niggers by pointing a gun at one on ’em,—a good stout whip, or a stiff rope’s end, is better than all the guns at Old Point62 to quell a nigger insurrection. Why, sir, to take a gun to a nigger is the best way you can select to tell him you are afraid of him, and the best way of inviting his attack.”
Y7870-Douglass.indb 48
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
49
This speech made quite a sensation among the company, and a part of them indicated solicitude for the answer which might be made to it. Our first mate replied, “Mr. Williams, all that you’ve now said sounds very well here on shore, where, perhaps, you have studied negro character. I do not profess to understand the subject as well as yourself; but it strikes me, you apply the same rule in dissimilar cases. It is quite easy to talk of flogging niggers here on land, where you have the sympathy of the community, and the whole physical force of the government, State and national, at your command; and where, if a negro shall lift his hand against a white man, the whole community, with one accord, are ready to unite in shooting him down. I say, in such circumstances, it’s easy to talk of flogging negroes and of negro cowardice; but, sir, I deny that the negro is, naturally, a coward, or that your theory of managing slaves will stand the test of salt water. It may do very well for an overseer, a contemptible hireling, to take advantage of fears already in existence, and which his presence has no power to inspire; to swagger about whip in hand, and discourse on the timidity and cowardice of negroes; for they have a smooth sea and a fair wind. It is one thing to manage a company of slaves on a Virginia plantation, and quite another thing to quell an insurrection on the lonely billows of the Atlantic, where every breeze speaks of courage and liberty. For the negro to act cowardly on shore, may be to act wisely; and I’ve some doubts whether you, Mr. Williams, would find it very convenient were you a slave in Algiers, to raise your hand against the bayonets of a whole government.” “By George, shipmate,” said Williams, “you’re coming rather too near. Either I’ve fallen very low in your estimation, or your notions of negro courage have got up a button-hole too high. Now I more than ever wish I’d been on board of that luckless craft. I’d have given ye practical evidence of the truth of my theory. I don’t doubt there’s some difference in being at sea. But a nigger’s a nigger, on sea or land; and is a coward, find him where you will; a drop of blood from one on ’em will skeer a hundred. A knock on the nose, or a kick on the shin, will tame the wildest ‘darkey’ you can fetch me. I say again, and will stand by it, I could, with half a dozen good men, put the whole nineteen on ’em in irons, and have carried them safe to New Orleans too.63 Mind, I don’t blame you, but I do say, and every gentleman here will bear me out in it, that the fault was somewhere, or them niggers would never have got off as they have done. For my part I feel ashamed to have the idea go abroad, that a ship load of slaves can’t be safely taken from Richmond to New Orleans. I should like, merely to
Y7870-Douglass.indb 49
9/1/21 4:16 PM
50
THE HEROIC SLAVE
redeem the character of Virginia sailors, to take charge of a ship load on ’em to-morrow.” Williams went on in this strain, occasionally casting an imploring glance at the company for applause for his wit, and sympathy for his contempt of negro courage. He had, evidently, however, waked up the wrong passenger; for besides being in the right, his opponent carried that in his eye which marked him a man not to be trifled with. “Well, sir,” said the sturdy mate, “you can select your own method for distinguishing yourself;—the path of ambition in this direction is quite open to you in Virginia, and I’ve no doubt that you will be highly appreciated and compensated for all your valiant achievements in that line; but for myself, while I do not profess to be a giant, I have resolved never to set my foot on the deck of a slave ship, either as officer, or common sailor again; I have got enough of it.” “Indeed! indeed!” exclaimed Williams, derisively. “Yes, indeed,” echoed the mate; “but don’t misunderstand me. It is not the high value that I set upon my life that makes me say what I have said; yet I’m resolved never to endanger my life again in a cause which my conscience does not approve. I dare say here what many men feel, but dare not speak, that this whole slave-trading business is a disgrace and scandal to Old Virginia.” “Hold! hold on! shipmate,” said Williams, “I hardly thought you’d have shown your colors so soon,—I’ll be hanged if you’re not as good an abolitionist as Garrison himself.”64 The mate now rose from his chair, manifesting some excitement. “What do you mean, sir,” said he, in a commanding tone. “That man does not live who shall offer me an insult with impunity.” The effect of these words was marked; and the company clustered around. Williams, in an apologetic tone, said, “Shipmate! keep your temper. I mean’t no insult. We all know that Tom Grant65 is no coward, and what I said about your being an abolitionist was simply this: you might have put down them black mutineers and murderers, but your conscience held you back.” “In that, too,” said Grant, “you were mistaken. I did all that any man with equal strength and presence of mind could have done. The fact is, Mr. Williams, you underrate the courage as well as the skill of these negroes, and further, you do not seem to have been correctly informed about the case in hand at all.”
Y7870-Douglass.indb 50
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
51
“All I know about it is,” said Williams, “that on the ninth day after you left Richmond, a dozen or two of the niggers ye had on board, came on deck and took the ship from you;—had her steered into a British port, where, by the by, every wooly head of them went ashore and was free. Now I take this to be a discreditable piece of business, and one demanding explanation.” “There are a great many discreditable things in the world,” said Grant. “For a ship to go down under a calm sky is, upon the first flush of it, disgraceful either to sailors or caulkers.66 But when we learn, that by some mysterious disturbance in nature, the waters parted beneath, and swallowed the ship up, we lose our indignation and disgust in lamentation of the disaster, and in awe of the Power which controls the elements.” “Very true, very true,” said Williams, “I should be very glad to have an explanation which would relieve the affair of its present discreditable features. I have desired to see you ever since you got home, and to learn from you a full statement of the facts in the case. To me the whole thing seems unaccountable. I cannot see how a dozen or two of ignorant negroes, not one of whom had ever been to sea before, and all of them were closely ironed between decks, should be able to get their fetters off, rush out of the hatchway in open daylight, kill two white men, the one the captain and the other their master, and then carry the ship into a British port, where every ‘darkey’ of them was set free. There must have been great carelessness, or cowardice somewhere!” The company which had listened in silence during most of this discussion, now became much excited. One said, I agree with Williams; and several said the thing looks black enough. After the temporary tumultuous exclamations had subsided,— “I see,” said Grant, “how you regard this case, and how difficult it will be for me to render our ship’s company blameless in your eyes. Nevertheless, I will state the facts precisely as they came under my own observation. Mr. Williams speaks of ‘ignorant negroes,’ and, as a general rule, they are ignorant; but had he been on board the Creole as I was, he would have seen cause to admit that there are exceptions to this general rule. The leader of the mutiny in question was just as shrewd a fellow as ever I met in my life, and was as well fitted to lead in a dangerous enterprise as any one white man in ten thousand. The name of this man, strange to say, (ominous of greatness,) was MADISON WASHINGTON. In the short time he had been on board, he had secured the confidence of every officer.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 51
9/1/21 4:16 PM
52
THE HEROIC SLAVE
The negroes fairly worshipped him. His manner and bearing were such, that no one could suspect him of a murderous purpose. The only feeling with which we regarded him was, that he was a powerful, good-disposed negro. He seldom spake to any one, and when he did speak, it was with the utmost propriety. His words were well chosen, and his pronunciation equal to that of any schoolmaster. It was a mystery to us where he got his knowledge of language; but as little was said to him, none of us knew the extent of his intelligence and ability till it was too late. It seems he brought three files with him on board, and must have gone to work upon his fetters the first night out; and he must have worked well at that; for on the day of the rising, he got the irons off eighteen besides himself. “The attack began just about twilight in the evening. Apprehending a squall, I had commanded the second mate67 to order all hands on deck, to take in sail. A few minutes before this I had seen Madison’s head above the hatchway, looking out upon the white-capped waves at the leeward. I think I never saw him look more good-natured. I stood just about midship, on the larboard side. The captain was pacing the quarter-deck on the starboard side, in company with Mr. Jameson, the owner of most of the slaves on board.68 Both were armed. I had just told the men to lay aloft, and was looking to see my orders obeyed, when I heard the discharge of a pistol on the starboard side; and turning suddenly around, the very deck seemed covered with fiends from the pit. The nineteen negroes were all on deck, with their broken fetters in their hands, rushing in all directions. I put my hand quickly in my pocket to draw out my jack-knife; but before I could draw it, I was knocked senseless to the deck. When I came to myself, (which I did in a few minutes, I suppose, for it was yet quite light,) there was not a white man on deck. The sailors were all aloft in the rigging, and dared not come down. Captain Clarke69 and Mr. Jameson lay stretched on the quarter-deck,—both dying,—while Madison himself stood at the helm unhurt. “I was completely weakened by the loss of blood, and had not recovered from the stunning blow which felled me to the deck; but it was a little too much for me, even in my prostrate condition, to see our good brig commanded by a black murderer. So I called out to the men to come down and take the ship, or die in the attempt. Suiting the action to the word, I started aft. You murderous villain, said I, to the imp at the helm, and rushed upon him to deal him a blow, when he pushed me back with his strong, black arm, as though I had been a boy of twelve. I looked around for the men. They were still in the rigging. Not one had come down. I started towards
Y7870-Douglass.indb 52
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
53
Madison again. The rascal now told me to stand back. ‘Sir,’ said he, ‘your life is in my hands. I could have killed you a dozen times over during this last half hour, and could kill you now. You call me a black murderer. I am not a murderer. God is my witness that LIBERTY, not malice, is the motive for this night’s work. I have done no more to those dead men yonder, than they would have done to me in like circumstances. We have struck for our freedom, and if a true man’s heart be in you, you will honor us for the deed. We have done that which you applaud your fathers for doing, and if we are murderers, so were they.’70 “I felt little disposition to reply to this impudent speech. By heaven, it disarmed me. The fellow loomed up before me. I forgot his blackness in the dignity of his manner, and the eloquence of his speech. It seemed as if the souls of both the great dead (whose names he bore) had entered him. To the sailors in the rigging he said: ‘Men! the battle is over,—your captain is dead. I have complete command of this vessel. All resistance to my authority will be in vain. My men have won their liberty, with no other weapons but their own BROKEN FETTERS. We are nineteen in number. We do not thirst for your blood, we demand only our rightful freedom. Do not flatter yourselves that I am ignorant of chart or compass.71 I know both. We are now only about sixty miles from Nassau.72 Come down, and do your duty. Land us in Nassau, and not a hair of your heads shall be hurt.’ “I shouted, Stay where you are, men,—when a sturdy black fellow ran at me with a handspike, and would have split my head open, but for the interference of Madison, who darted between me and the blow. ‘I know what you are up to,’ said the latter to me. ‘You want to navigate this brig into a slave port, where you would have us all hanged; but you’ll miss it; before this brig shall touch a slave-cursed shore while I am on board, I will myself put a match to the magazine, and blow her, and be blown with her, into a thousand fragments. Now I have saved your life twice within these last twenty minutes,—for, when you lay helpless on deck, my men were about to kill you. I held them in check. And if you now (seeing I am your friend and not your enemy) persist in your resistance to my authority, I give you fair warning YOU SHALL DIE.’ “Saying this to me, he cast a glance into the rigging where the terror-stricken sailors were clinging, like so many frightened monkeys, and commanded them to come down, in a tone from which there was no appeal; for four men stood by with muskets in hand, ready at the word of command to shoot them down.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 53
9/1/21 4:16 PM
54
THE HEROIC SLAVE
“I now became satisfied that resistance was out of the question; that my best policy was to put the brig into Nassau, and secure the assistance of the American consul at that port. I felt sure that the authorities would enable us to secure the murderers, and bring them to trial. “By this time the apprehended squall had burst upon us. The wind howled furiously,—the ocean was white with foam, which, on account of the darkness, we could see only by the quick flashes of lightning that darted occasionally from the angry sky. All was alarm and confusion. Hideous cries came up from the slave women. Above the roaring billows a succession of heavy thunder rolled along, swelling the terrific din. Owing to the great darkness, and a sudden shift of the wind, we found ourselves in the trough of the sea. When shipping a heavy sea over the starboard bow, the bodies of the captain and Mr. Jameson were washed overboard. For awhile we had dearer interests to look after than slave property. A more savage thunder-gust never swept the ocean. Our brig rolled and creaked as if every bolt would be started, and every thread of oakum73 would be pressed out of the seams. To the pumps! to the pumps! I cried, but not a sailor would quit his grasp. Fortunately this squall soon passed over, or we must have been food for sharks. “During all the storm, Madison stood firmly at the helm,—his keen eye fixed upon the binnacle.74 He was not indifferent to the dreadful hurricane; yet he met it with the equanimity of an old sailor. He was silent but not agitated. The first words he uttered after the storm had slightly subsided, were characteristic of the man. ‘Mr. Mate, you cannot write the bloody laws of slavery on those restless billows. The ocean, if not the land, is free.’ I confess, gentlemen, I felt myself in the presence of a superior man; one who, had he been a white man, I would have followed willingly and gladly in any honorable enterprise. Our difference of color was the only ground for difference of action. It was not that his principles were wrong in the abstract; for they are the principles of 1776.75 But I could not bring myself to recognize their application to one whom I deemed my inferior. “But to my story. What happened now is soon told. Two hours after the frightful tempest had spent itself, we were plump at the wharf in Nassau. I sent two of our men immediately to our consul with a statement of facts, requesting his interference in our behalf. What he did, or whither he did anything, I don’t know; but, by order of the authorities, a company of black soldiers came on board, for the purpose, as they said, of protecting the property.76 These impudent rascals, when I called on them to assist me
Y7870-Douglass.indb 54
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
55
in keeping the slaves on board, sheltered themselves adroitly under their instructions only to protect property,—and said they did not recognize persons as property. I told them that by the laws of Virginia and the laws of the United States, the slaves on board were as much property as the barrels of flour in the hold. At this the stupid blockheads showed their ivory, rolled up their white eyes in horror, as if the idea of putting men on a footing with merchandise were revolting to their humanity. When these instructions were understood among the negroes, it was impossible for us to keep them on board. They deliberately gathered up their baggage before our eyes, and, against our remonstrances, poured through the gangway,—formed themselves into a procession on the wharf,—bid farewell to all on board, and, uttering the wildest shouts of exultation, they marched, amidst the deafening cheers of a multitude of sympathizing spectators, under the triumphant leadership of their heroic chief and deliverer, MADISON WASHINGTON.” [FACSIMILE SIGNATURE OF FREDERICK DOUGLASS]77 1. From the hymn “God Is Love,” in George N. Allen, Oberlin Social and Sabbath School Hymn Book (Oberlin, Ohio, 1846), 23. 2. Probably a reference to New Yorker Martin Van Buren (1782–1862), eighth president of the United States (1837–41). Douglass was angered by Van Buren’s support of the Compromise of 1850, which included the notorious Fugitive Slave Law requiring Northerners to assist in the capture of runaway slaves. Donald B. Cole, Martin Van Buren and the American Political System (Princeton, N.J., 1984), 284, 419. 3. Virginia had won this popular nickname in the nineteenth century on account of the large number of Revolutionary War and early Federal-period political leaders it had contributed to the United States. George Earlie Shankle, State Names, Flags, Seals, Songs, Birds, Flowers, and Other Symbols (1838; New York, 1941), 152. 4. Patrick Henry (1736–99), a Virginia patriot, lawyer, and Revolutionary statesman, attended the First Continental Congress at Philadelphia and was governor of Virginia from 1776 to 1779. DAB, 7:554–59. 5. Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826), a planter and statesman from Virginia, was the third president of the United States (1801–09) and author of the Declaration of Independence. Noble Cunningham, In Pursuit of Reason: The Life of Thomas Jefferson (New York, 1987); DAB, 10:17–35. 6. The Virginia planter George Washington (1732–99) commanded the principal American field army in the Revolution and became the first president of the United States (1789–97). Ron Chernow, Washington: A Life (New York, 2011); Douglas Southall Freeman, Washington: A Biography, 7 vols. (New York, 1948); DAB, 19:509–13. 7. In the years before and during the Civil War, escaped slaves fled northward, hiding by day and moving furtively at night. Often their only guide was Polaris, the North Star, which they found by tracing the handle of the Big Dipper (or Drinking Gourd) constellation. J. Blaine Hudson, Encyclopedia of the Underground Railroad (Jefferson, N.C., 2006), 157; Mary Ellen Snodgrass, The Underground Railroad: An Encyclopedia of People, Places, and Operations (Armonk, N.Y., 2008), 2:385. 8. The few details of Madison Washington’s life that can be confirmed come from the people he met while a fugitive slave and from the testimony gathered from white witnesses after the Creole
Y7870-Douglass.indb 55
9/1/21 4:16 PM
56
THE HEROIC SLAVE
uprising. A runaway slave from Virginia, Washington managed to reach the free black settlement of Dawn in Ontario, Canada, which was led by the white abolitionist Hiram Wilson, in late 1839 or early 1840. Wilson’s family members later described Washington as “a very large and strong slave.” Sometime in 1841, Washington left Dawn to return to Virginia to free his still-enslaved wife. He went to Rochester, New York, where the Quaker abolitionist Lindley Murray Moore raised ten dollars to assist Washington. He traveled to Utica, where he conferred with the black abolitionist minister Henry Highland Garnet, who attempted to persuade Washington to abandon his quest. Moving southward, Washington encountered the wealthy free black Robert Purvis of Philadelphia and the British abolitionist Joseph Gurney, visiting the United States, who also advised him not to risk his freedom by returning to Virginia. It is not known how, but Washington was recaptured by his master and promptly sold to a Richmond slave trader named Thomas McCargo. Washington was incarcerated temporarily in that city and then shipped out aboard the brig Creole on a voyage to New Orleans, where he would be resold. Perhaps because he was literate, Washington was assigned as a cook for the slaves aboard the ship. White witnesses reported Washington to be the leader of the slave mutiny on the Creole, but they also reported that he acted to prevent unnecessary bloodshed after gaining control of the ship. After reaching Nassau, Washington and the other mutineers were briefly held in British custody. After his release, Washington disappeared from the historical record. George Hendrick and Willene Hendrick, The Creole Mutiny: A Tale of Revolt aboard a Slave Ship (Chicago, 2008), 13–14, 27–32, 38–40, 43, 56–57, 77–81, 89–90, 95, 109–111. 9. Sol. 1:15. 10. The Greek mythological hero Heracles, known to the Romans as Hercules, was a mortal son of the chief god Zeus and famed for his strength, which was often employed in his famous twelve labors. Pierre Grimal, The Dictionary of Classical Mythology, trans. A. R. Maxwell-Hyslop (Oxford, 1985), 193–209. 11. The name of Madison Washington’s wife is not recorded in surviving historical records. Douglass knew several of the people whom Washington met in Canada and in the United States after initially escaping from slavery, so Douglass either learned her first name from these people or invented a fictional one. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 14, 131. 12. Henry VI, Part II, sc. 1, lines 1–7. Douglass uses a common nineteenth-century spelling of Shakespeare. 13. No historical source exists to identify this person. 14. Fugitive slaves from the United States began to settle in Upper Canada (later known as Canada West) in the early 1820s. There they formed their own communities, including Amherstburg, Ontario, and Wilberforce. Although not legally restricted, the fugitives were not welcomed by most white Canadians. In the 1840s, conditions in Canadian black communities worsened. Many fugitives fled to Canada West, greatly increasing the black population and intensifying the negative reaction of whites. Jason H. Silverman, Unwelcome Guests: Canada West’s Response to American Fugitive Slaves, 1800–1865 (Millwood, N.Y., 1985), 21–22, 53–64. 15. The daguerreotype was the first commercially successful photographic process. The image is a direct positive made in the camera on a silvered copper plate. The French inventor Louis J. M. Daguerre perfected the process after a decade of experimentation. M. Susan Barger and William B. White, The Daguerreotype: Nineteenth-Century Technology and Modern Science (Washington, D.C., 1991), 1, 20–24, 28, 44–46. 16. As with Washington’s wife’s name, Douglass either learned about the existence of the slave rebel’s children from abolitionist friends or invented them for literary purposes. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 14. 17. Possibly a reference to the Great Dismal Swamp, located along the coastal plain of southeastern Virginia and northeastern North Carolina. The region had been a site of runaway slave maroon colonies since colonial times. In 1805, completion of a canal through the region opened the locality to timbering. Raymond L. Harper, A History of Chesapeake, Virginia (Charleston, S.C., 2008), 124–28.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 56
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
57
18. In the Old Testament, the cities of refuge were towns in the Kingdom of Israel and Kingdom of Judah in which the perpetrators of manslaughter could claim the right of asylum. The six cities were Golan, Ramoth, and Bosor on the east side of the Jordan River, and Kedesh, Shechum, and Hebron on the west side. Num. 35:11–34; Deut. 19:3–13. 19. Gerrit Smith (1797–1874), a New York businessman and land speculator, became best known for his philanthropic work in such reforms as temperance and abolition. Between 1828 and 1835, he donated large sums of money to the American Colonization Society, but abandoned that movement in 1835 when his sympathies shifted to immediate abolition. In the 1840s, he gave approximately 140,000 acres of land in upstate New York to three thousand black settlers, thus enabling them to qualify to vote. Smith was a founder and frequent candidate of the Liberty party, running for governor of New York on that ticket in 1840 and winning a seat in Congress in 1852. When the Free Soil merger with moderate antislavery Democrats and Whigs lured away many Liberty party supporters, Smith helped bankroll the Liberty party until 1860. Smith befriended Douglass when the latter moved to Rochester, and he frequently assisted in financing Frederick Douglass’ Paper. Like Douglass, Smith supported John Brown, but psychological stress caused by the failure at Harpers Ferry brought on the first of a series of bipolar episodes that greatly reduced his subsequent reform activities. Ralph Volney Harlow, Gerrit Smith: Philanthropist and Reformer (1939; New York, 1972); Gerald Sorin, The New York Abolitionists: A Test Case of Political Radicalism (Westport, Conn., 1971), 269–87; Lewis Perry, Radical Abolitionism: Anarchy and the Government of God in Antislavery Thought (Ithaca, N.Y., 1973), 170–80; John R. McKivigan and Madeleine Leveille, “The ‘Black Dream’ of Gerrit Smith, New York Abolitionist,” Syracuse University Library Associates Courier, 20:61–76 (Fall 1985); DAB, 17:270–71. 20. The phrase, adapted from Ps. 147:9, is found in a number of hymns from the nineteenth century. Douglass’s source may have been Charles Wesley’s “Son of Thy Sire’s Eternal Love.” Charles Wesley, “Son of Thy Sire’s Eternal Love,” A Collection of Hymns, for the Use of the Methodist Episcopal Church, Principally from the Collection of the Rev. John Wesley, A. M. (New York, 1839), 412. 21. Paraphrase of Matt. 19:26. 22. Paraphrase of Ex. 3:7, Acts 7:34. 23. A corrupt tax collector, Zacchaeus climbed a tree to view Jesus and then publicly repented for his sins after receiving Jesus’s love. Luke 19:1–10. 24. Lord Byron attributed the phrase to the Spartans in his 24 August 1821 letter to Thomas Moore. Thomas Moore, The Works of Lord Byron: With His Letters and Journals, and His Life, 17 vols. (London, 1832–33), 5:349. 25. Fight (French). 26. The constellation Ursa Major (Latin for “Great Bear”) is visible throughout the year in most of the Northern Hemisphere. This constellation is better known in the United States as the Big Dipper. An imaginary line running from the cup of the Big Dipper points to the North Star, which many fugitive slaves used to guide themselves to freedom in the North. Snodgrass, Underground Railroad, 2:385. 27. It has been estimated that 40,000 runaway slaves escaped to freedom in Canada through Ohio. A secret and successful network of over 700 safe houses and “depots” waited for those fugitives fortunate enough to make it across the Ohio River. Although a “free state,” a designation indicating only that its residents could not own slaves, Ohio was a distinctly dangerous host to the escapees. Bounty hunters crisscrossed the state, and proslavery factions existed in many villages and cities. The Ohio Black Laws rewarded those who turned in or reported runaways. Law officers were aggressive in slave-rendition efforts, particularly following passage of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850. Stephen Middleton, The Black Laws: Race and the Legal Process in Early Ohio (Athens, Ohio, 2005), 157–240. 28. An allusion to Lake Erie. Passage northward across Lake Erie would carry a fugitive slave to safety in Canada.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 57
9/1/21 4:16 PM
58
THE HEROIC SLAVE
29. Incorporated in 1814, Cleveland, Ohio, lies on the southern shore of Lake Erie, which allowed the city to experience rapid economic growth as a Great Lakes port and later as a railroad transportation center. Carol Poh Miller and Robert A. Wheeler, Cleveland: A Concise History, 1796–1996, 2d ed. (Bloomington, Ind., 1997), 7–48; Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 419. 30. Donald Bethune, a Canadian shipowner, operated the steamer Admiral on Lake Erie on the cross-lake route from Rochester to Toronto, which stopped in Cobourg and Port Hope in Ontario until it broke down in 1851. Gerald T. Girvin, “The Maple Leaf Story prior to the Civil War,” in The Maple Leaf: An Extraordinary American Civil War Shipwreck, ed. Keith V. Holland, Lee B. Manley, and James W. Towart (Jacksonville, Fla., 1993), 72–73. 31. An allusion to Queen Victoria (1819–1901) and the antislavery actions taken by the British government in the early nineteenth century in its empire, including the Canadian provinces. E1izabeth Longford, Queen Victoria: Born to Succeed (New York, 1964); Silverman, Unwelcome Guests, 11–15, 37–42. 32. Variants of this phrase appear in Jer. 2:14, 2:16, 1 Sam. 14:28. 33. Paraphrase of Ezek. 18:7, 18:16, Isa. 58:7, Matt. 25:35. 34. The lion had become a visual symbol of Great Britain by the eighteenth century. Similarly, the eagle has been used by Americans as a comparable symbol for their collective identity since the era of the Revolution. Adrian Ailes, The Origins of the Royal Arms of England (Reading, Eng., 1982), 52–63; Elizabeth Atwood Lawrence, “Symbol of a Nation: The Bald Eagle in American Culture,” Journal of American Culture, 13:63–69 (Spring 1990). 35. From Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage (1818), canto 4, stanza 140, by the English poet George Gordon, Lord Byron (1788–1824), though with a key change. Bryon wrote: “his eyes / Were with his heart—and that was far away.” 36. Chartered in 1816 to connect the cities of Richmond and Petersburg, the ManchesterPetersburg Turnpike was part of a road-building boom in that portion of the state to improve dirt roads that became largely impassible in winter months. By the 1840s, the road was popularly known as the Richmond-Petersburg Turnpike, becoming a part of U.S. Route 1 in the twentieth century. Writers’ Program of the Works Progress Administration in the State of Virginia, Virginia: A Guide to the Old Dominion, 6th ed. (Richmond, 1956), 92. 37. Possibly the Half Way House, one of the earliest taverns in Chesterfield County, Virginia. The original Half Way House was built in 1760 along the river to serve passengers using the ferry. After the Manchester-Petersburg Turnpike was built, the original Half Way House slowly went to ruin. The second Half Way House along the turnpike route was built by William Hatcher in 1789. The tavern derived its name from its location halfway between Richmond and Petersburg. During the Civil War, the building served as a military hospital and was used as the headquarters for the Union general Benjamin F. Butler during the Second Battle of Drewry’s Bluff in May 1864. John B. Watkins, Chesterfield County, Virginia: Its History and Present Condition (Richmond, 1906), 20, 24; John S. Salmon, A Guidebook to Virginia’s Historical Markers, rev. ed. (Charlottesville, Va., 1994), 147. 38. After the English Civil War in the mid-seventeenth century, the Virginia Colony was nicknamed the “Old Dominion” by King Charles II for its perceived loyalty to the English monarchy during the era of Oliver Cromwell’s Commonwealth. After independence from Great Britain in 1776, the Virginia Colony became the Commonwealth of Virginia, one of the original thirteen states of the United States. Old Dominion is one of its best-known nicknames. Shankle, State Names, Flags, Seals, 151–52. 39. Sycophantic followers or dependents, especially those hoping for personal gain. 40. Slack is the part of a rope or sail that hangs loose. Joseph P. O’Flynn, Nautical Dictionary: Over 3800 Terms (Boyne City, Mich., 1992), 86. 41. Dryburgh Abbey, located on the banks of the River Tweed in the Scottish Borders, was founded in 1150 and served as the scene of considerable religious and political history because of its location between two contesting monarchies. It survived for four centuries as an active monastery, and after the abbey became the burial site of Sir Walter Scott in 1832, travelers frequently visited. Douglass, who took his surname from a character in one of Scott’s romances, visited the region near
Y7870-Douglass.indb 58
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
59
the abbey while on an abolitionist speaking tour in April 1846. Stewart Cruden, Scottish Abbeys: An Introduction to the Medieval Abbeys and Priories of Scotland (Edinburgh, 1960), 82–84; Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 1:xcvii. 42. These details of significant events in American horse-racing history are badly scrambled. There was a racehorse named American Eclipse (1814–47) to distinguish it from a more famous British racehorse of the 1770s and 1780s. Bred on Long Island, American Eclipse raced exclusively in the North before defeating Virginia’s Sir Charles in the nation’s capital in 1822. Southerners, who regarded their region as producing the best racehorses in the United States, arranged a series of competitions to select a suitable challenger to race American Eclipse. Several of these tryouts were held in the Petersburg region, though none of the horses named by Douglass were entered. The ultimate winner, Henry, raced American Eclipse in New York City in May 1823, but lost the $20,000 purse to the Northern horse. American Eclipse never raced again. Less famous horses by the names of Bachelor and Jumping Jimmy were noted for racing mile heats in Washington, D.C., in the 1810s. J. S. Skinner, ed., American Turf Register and Sporting Magazine 4:36 (September 1833); John Eisenberg, The Great Match Race: When North Met South in America’s First Sports Spectacle (New York, 2006) viii–xii, 1–16, 64–65, 234; William H. P. Robertson, The History of Thoroughbred Racing in America (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1964), 50–60. 43. This phrase connotes praise for men who exhibit exceptional masculinity in the traditional sense. It denotes bravery, chivalry and uncommon character. The phrase may have its origins in Shakespeare’s Antony and Cleopatra, sc. 5, line 82. 44. French idiom for unusual encounters. 45. From Job 20:12. 46. In Matt. 7:6, Jesus advises his disciples: “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet.” 47. This was the motto of the Garrisonian abolitionist newspaper, the National Anti-Slavery Standard, published in New York City. The Standard, rather than Garrison’s own Boston Liberator, was the official weekly newspaper of the American Anti-Slavery Society. Merton L. Dillon, The Abolitionists: The Growth of a Dissenting Minority (DeKalb, Ill., 1974), 213. 48. Most likely an allusion to the Dutch priest and biblical scholar Desiderius Erasmus (1466– 1536), who cautiously tried to avoid antagonizing either Catholic or Protestant authorities in the heated theological controversies of the early years of the Reformation. Christine Christ-von Wedel, Erasmus of Rotterdam: Advocate of a New Christianity (Toronto, 2013). 49. Former (Latin). 50. The Shakespearean character Caliban uses the phrase “foreheads villainously low” in The Tempest, sc. 8, line 1703. 51. As a principal port, New Orleans played a major role during the antebellum era in the Atlantic slave trade. The river in front of the city was filled with steamboats, flatboats, and sailing ships. Despite its dealings in the slave trade, New Orleans had the largest and most prosperous community of free persons of color in the nation, who were often educated and middle-class property owners. Collins, Domestic Slave Trade, 100–105; Randall M. Miller and John David Smith, eds., Dictionary of Afro-American Slavery (Westport, Conn., 1997), 686–88. 52. In Baltimore, a shipbuilding city since early colonial times, shipyards had constructed craft for the intercoastal and international slave trade since the mid-seventeenth century. After Congress made the importation of slaves from Africa illegal in 1808, a number of Baltimore shipbuilders were chosen to construct vessels that could provide the speed and versatility necessary for an illegal trade in slaves with the Caribbean and Africa. Vessels would be built and partially outfitted in local shipyards and then completed in a secondary location. So common was the perception that Baltimore was the city of origin of the majority of slavers that one reporter, unable to determine the port from which a seized trader had originated, indicated, “It was probably Baltimore Built.” A major report, published in the spring of 1840, revealed a list of twenty-one American vessels engaged in the slave trade during the spring and summer of 1839. Of the vessels discussed, eleven, or more than 52 percent, were identified as having been built in Baltimore. Extremely high profits continued to
Y7870-Douglass.indb 59
9/1/21 4:16 PM
60
THE HEROIC SLAVE
promote the furtherance of the illegal trade for many years. In 1849, reports surfaced indicating that a Baltimore clipper had cleared $400,000 from eleven slave-trading voyages over a four-year period. J. Thomas Scharf, History of Baltimore City and County: From the Earliest Period to the Present Day (Philadelphia, 1881), 293; Howard I. Chapelle, The Search for Speed under Sail, 1700–1855 (New York, 1967), 297–312. 53. Having worked in or around the shipyards and wharves of both Baltimore and New Bedford, Douglass accurately employs numerous nautical terms in describing a large square-rigged sailing vessel: a fore topsail is the most forward of a pair of sails immediately above the lowermost sail on the ship’s foremast; a topgallant sail refers to the sails above the top sail; and a royal sail, or royal topgallant sail, is the smaller sail above the topgallant sail. A jib is a triangular staysail that sits ahead of the foremast of a sailing vessel. On a square-rigged vessel, the mainsail is the lowest and largest sail on the principal, or main, mast or masts. The topsail is a square sail rigged above the lowest sail mounted on a mast and below the topgallant sail where carried. O’Flynn, Nautical Dictionary, 41, 53, 60, 76, 98; McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 59–69, 79–83. 54. From the poem, also adapted into song “Oh! Where’s the Slave” by Thomas Moore (1780–1852). 55. From Lord Byron’s Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, canto 2, stanza 76. 56. A popular reference in the nineteenth century to the entire west coast of Africa, where most slaves in the United States could trace their origin. 57. Sailors. 58. The first mate of the Creole was actually named Zephaniah Chadwick Gifford (1814–86), who was wounded during the revolt of the ship’s slaves but survived. After the ship reached Nassau, Gifford, with the aid of the American consul, John F. Bacon, led an unsuccessful raid to recapture the Creole and its slaves and sail them to Florida. After the British authorities freed the slaves, Gifford took command of the Creole and sailed it to New Orleans in December 1841. He later testified on behalf of the owners in their insurance claims. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 11–12, 83, 100–101. 59. The Creole, carrying 135 slaves, 9 crewmen, 6 white passengers, and a shipment of tobacco, set sail from Richmond, Virginia, to New Orleans on 25 October 1843. Nineteen of the slaves on board, led by Madison Washington, revolted on the evening of 7 November 1841. The mutineers killed one white slave agent, John R. Hewell, wounded the captain and both mates, and overpowered the rest of the crew. Washington had wanted to sail the Creole to Liberia, but one of the captured passengers convinced him they would be safer if the ship sailed to British-controlled Nassau in the Bahamas. The governor of the Bahamas, Francis Cockburn, quickly freed all of the Creole’s slaves except for the 19 implicated in the bloody mutiny. The mutineers, including Washington, were eventually freed by the British, too, despite American diplomatic protests. Notwithstanding their earlier commitment to pacifist tactics, most abolitionists applauded Washington’s violent means to gain freedom. In later decades, Washington’s actions, along with those of other slave rebels, would be cited repeatedly by abolitionists as a warning to the South of the mortal danger that region faced unless it accepted emancipation. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 77–96; Stanley L. Harrold, “Romanticizing Slave Revolt: Madison Washington, the Creole Mutiny, and Abolitionist Celebration of Violent Means,” in John R. McKivigan and Stanley L. Harrold, Antislavery Violence: Sectional, Racial, and Cultural Conflict in Antebellum America (Knoxville, Tenn., 1999), 89–107; Howard Jones, “The Peculiar Institution and National Honor: The Case of the Creole Slave Revolt,” Civil War History, 21:28–50 (March 1975); Edward D. Jervey and C. Harold Huber, “The Creole Affair,” JNH, 65:196–209 (Summer 1980). 60. A derogatory designation of a person with dark skin who comes from Africa or whose ancestors came from Africa. It was first used in the eighteenth century in the South to connote the alleged ability of slaves to go undetected in the night. Philip H. Herbst, The Color of Words: An Encyclopedic Dictionary of Ethnic Bias in the United States (Boston, 1997), 68.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 60
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HEROIC SLAVE
61
61. Nautical term for a ship’s galley. 62. Probably an allusion to Fortress Monroe, located at Old Point Comfort on the Virginia shore of Chesapeake Bay. It was built in 1819 on top of seventeenth-century fortifications. During the Civil War, the military post was held by the Union. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 1375. 63. Here Douglass follows the historical record, which indicated that nineteen slaves were involved in the uprising. 64. William Lloyd Garrison (1805–79) was so closely identified with the abolitionist movement in the United States that his name became almost synonymous with the cause. He began his career as an apprentice printer on the Newburyport (Mass.) Herald at the age of thirteen. Garrison became editor of the Newburyport Free Press in 1826, but the paper closed within a year. He was then associated with a series of periodicals in Boston that advocated reform. After Benjamin Lundy introduced him to the antislavery cause, Garrison and Lundy edited the Genius of Universal Emancipation in Baltimore, Maryland, from 1829 to 1830, when a libel suit against them forced the paper to close and landed Garrison in jail. After his release, he courted the wealthy merchants of New York and Boston in order to start the Liberator (1831–65), a weekly journal based in Boston in which he advocated an immediate end to slavery. Garrison’s brand of abolition condemned any institution that tolerated the existence of slavery, including churches, political parties, and even the United States itself, and any scheme aimed at removing black people from the United States. Instead, Garrison hoped to raise the public’s awareness that slavery was morally wrong, thereby forcing its end in an almost millennial moment of emancipation. His approach appealed to both white and black antislavery advocates, but earned him many enemies among slaveholders and those only moderately opposed to slavery. Seeing the need for greater action and organization beyond the pages of the Liberator, Garrison joined with other abolitionists to form the New England Anti-Slavery Society in 1831. Two years later, he also helped form the larger American Anti-Slavery Society. In 1833, he established ties with English abolitionists after a trip to Great Britain, and he later brought the noted and notorious speaker George Thompson to the United States for a tour. Ever the radical, Garrison expanded his interests to include women’s rights after female delegates were excluded from the World’s Anti-Slavery Convention in 1840. The issue of women’s participation in the antislavery movement and Garrison’s absolute refusal to turn to politics to end slavery caused a division in the American Anti-Slavery Society. Those who opposed women acting as speakers and who hoped to use politics to work toward abolition formed the “New Organization.” Garrison’s ideas were so closely associated with the “Old Organization” that his followers became known more frequently as the “Garrisonians.” With the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment, in 1865, Garrison believed that he had accomplished his life’s work and that of the antislavery movement. He then resigned from the presidency of the American Anti-Slavery Society and closed the Liberator. Wendell Phillips Garrison and Francis Jackson Garrison, William Lloyd Garrison, 1805–1879: The Story of His Life Told By His Children, 4 vols. (New York, 1885–89); Henry Mayer, All on Fire: William Lloyd Garrison and the Abolition of Slavery (New York, 1998); James Brewer Stewart, William Lloyd Garrison and the Challenge of Emancipation (Arlington Heights, Ill., 1992); John L. Thomas, The Liberator: William Lloyd Garrison (Boston, 1963); DAB, 7:168–72. 65. Presumably a fictional character, not mentioned in records of the Creole mutiny. 66. Skilled craftsmen who made wooden ships watertight by packing seams with a waterproof material such as oakum or pitch. Douglass had been trained in this trade while a teenage slave in Baltimore. McFeely, Douglass, 59–69; O’Flynn, Nautical Dictionary, 22. 67. The Creole’s actual second mate was Lucius Stevens. He hid in a stateroom when the revolt began, but was later discovered and stabbed by one of the slaves. He took refuge in the sails, surrendered the next day to the slaves, and survived. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 87, 91–94. 68. The real owner of most of the slaves aboard the Creole was the Richmond slave trader Thomas McCargo. McCargo had a hired agent named John R. Hewell on board the Creole. Apparently very abusive to the slaves, Hewell was the only white killed by the Creole rebels. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 43–45, 54–56.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 61
9/1/21 4:16 PM
62
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
69. The actual captain of the Creole was named Robert Ensor, and he was badly wounded by the slave rebels. Ensor’s wife, daughter, and niece, who had accompanied him on the Creole, were not harmed by the rebelling slaves. Ensor attempted to rally his crew to resist the mutiny and was stabbed by the slaves in the ensuing melee. He saved himself by climbing a mast and hiding in the sails. He surrendered the next day, and the slaves permitted his wife to nurse him. Ensor survived and gave testimony in the subsequent investigation of the mutiny. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 77–78, 80–81, 91, 94, 112. 70. Named for two heroes of the American War of Independence, Washington alludes to the violent means employed by the revolutionaries who established the United States. 71. Washington may be alluding to the lack of maritime skills shown by the earlier Amistad slave rebels, which led to their capture. Hudson, Underground Railroad, 28–29. 72. Capital of the Bahamas Islands, which were under British control until 1973. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 1287–88. 73. Oakum is a preparation of tarred fiber used in shipbuilding for caulking or packing the joints of timbers in wooden vessels and the deck planking of iron and steel ships, as well as cast-iron-pipe plumbing applications. O’Flynn, Nautical Dictionary, 65. 74. A case or stand on a ship’s deck to house a compass and possibly other nautical instruments. O’Flynn, Nautical Dictionary, 20. 75. Radical political abolitionists such as Douglass and Gerrit Smith believed that the U.S. Constitution had to be interpreted in light of the egalitarian and implicitly antislavery principles of the Declaration of Independence. William M. Wiecek, The Sources of Antislavery Constitutionalism in America, 1760–1848 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1977), 251–75. 76. Governor Francis Cockburn of the Bahamas sent a detachment of twenty black soldiers under a white officer to take control of the Creole soon after it arrived in Nassau harbor on 9 November 1841. The British authorities spent the next several days gathering depositions from all on board the ship. An aborted effort, supported by the American consul in Nassau, to seize control of the ship on 12 November caused the British to free all but the nineteen slaves active in the mutiny. Those freed, except for five electing to stay and be returned to servitude in the United States, immediately went ashore aboard a “mosquito fleet” of sympathetic Bahamian black boatmen. The other nineteen were held by the British until a special session of the admiralty court held on 16 April 1842 freed the seventeen still alive. The Creole incident impaired American-British relations for a time. In 1853, a joint Anglo-American claims commission ordered the British to compensate the owners of the Creole slaves $110,330, but the slaves themselves remained free. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 98–120; Jones, “Peculiar Institution and National Honor,” 28–50. 77. There is a reproduction of Douglass’s signature at this point in the text of “The Heroic Slave” as published in Autographs for Freedom. All of the pieces in Autographs were signed by the authors. Julia Griffiths, ed., Autographs for Freedom (Boston, 1853), 239.
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES (1853) Frederick Douglass’ Paper, 15 July 1853. Other texts in Proceedings of the Colored National Convention, 7–18; Bell, Proceedings of the National Negro Conventions, n.p.; Foner, Life and Writings, 2:254–68.
Douglass was one of 42 signatories to a call for a “National convention of the free people of color of the United States” to be held
Y7870-Douglass.indb 62
9/1/21 4:16 PM
62
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
69. The actual captain of the Creole was named Robert Ensor, and he was badly wounded by the slave rebels. Ensor’s wife, daughter, and niece, who had accompanied him on the Creole, were not harmed by the rebelling slaves. Ensor attempted to rally his crew to resist the mutiny and was stabbed by the slaves in the ensuing melee. He saved himself by climbing a mast and hiding in the sails. He surrendered the next day, and the slaves permitted his wife to nurse him. Ensor survived and gave testimony in the subsequent investigation of the mutiny. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 77–78, 80–81, 91, 94, 112. 70. Named for two heroes of the American War of Independence, Washington alludes to the violent means employed by the revolutionaries who established the United States. 71. Washington may be alluding to the lack of maritime skills shown by the earlier Amistad slave rebels, which led to their capture. Hudson, Underground Railroad, 28–29. 72. Capital of the Bahamas Islands, which were under British control until 1973. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 1287–88. 73. Oakum is a preparation of tarred fiber used in shipbuilding for caulking or packing the joints of timbers in wooden vessels and the deck planking of iron and steel ships, as well as cast-iron-pipe plumbing applications. O’Flynn, Nautical Dictionary, 65. 74. A case or stand on a ship’s deck to house a compass and possibly other nautical instruments. O’Flynn, Nautical Dictionary, 20. 75. Radical political abolitionists such as Douglass and Gerrit Smith believed that the U.S. Constitution had to be interpreted in light of the egalitarian and implicitly antislavery principles of the Declaration of Independence. William M. Wiecek, The Sources of Antislavery Constitutionalism in America, 1760–1848 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1977), 251–75. 76. Governor Francis Cockburn of the Bahamas sent a detachment of twenty black soldiers under a white officer to take control of the Creole soon after it arrived in Nassau harbor on 9 November 1841. The British authorities spent the next several days gathering depositions from all on board the ship. An aborted effort, supported by the American consul in Nassau, to seize control of the ship on 12 November caused the British to free all but the nineteen slaves active in the mutiny. Those freed, except for five electing to stay and be returned to servitude in the United States, immediately went ashore aboard a “mosquito fleet” of sympathetic Bahamian black boatmen. The other nineteen were held by the British until a special session of the admiralty court held on 16 April 1842 freed the seventeen still alive. The Creole incident impaired American-British relations for a time. In 1853, a joint Anglo-American claims commission ordered the British to compensate the owners of the Creole slaves $110,330, but the slaves themselves remained free. Hendrick and Hendrick, Creole Mutiny, 98–120; Jones, “Peculiar Institution and National Honor,” 28–50. 77. There is a reproduction of Douglass’s signature at this point in the text of “The Heroic Slave” as published in Autographs for Freedom. All of the pieces in Autographs were signed by the authors. Julia Griffiths, ed., Autographs for Freedom (Boston, 1853), 239.
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION TO THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES (1853) Frederick Douglass’ Paper, 15 July 1853. Other texts in Proceedings of the Colored National Convention, 7–18; Bell, Proceedings of the National Negro Conventions, n.p.; Foner, Life and Writings, 2:254–68.
Douglass was one of 42 signatories to a call for a “National convention of the free people of color of the United States” to be held
Y7870-Douglass.indb 62
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
63
in his hometown of Rochester, New York, on 6 July 1853. Delegates to this convention would “confer and deliberate upon their present condition and upon principles and measures important to their welfare, progress and general improvement.” In response, more than 140 free black representatives from nine states assembled in Rochester. The Reverend J. W. C. Pennington served as president, with Douglass, William C. Nell, and John B. Vashon sharing the position of vice president. Because of Douglass’s experience as chair of the Committee on the Declaration of Sentiments, he was charged with drafting the “Address of the Colored Convention to the People of the United States,” which outlined the group’s demands for basic civil and political rights. He read his report to the convention on its first afternoon session, 6 July 1853. In a letter written after the convention to his close associate Gerrit Smith, Douglass confessed that he “had been deeply concerned for the result of the Convention for weeks before it was held. I now feel abundantly relieved. My best hopes have been Surpassed.” Douglass to Gerrit Smith, 15 July 1853, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 2:32–34; FDP, 17, 24 June 1853; Proceedings of the Colored National Convention, 3–5.
Fellow-Citizens: Met in convention as delegates, representing the Free Colored people of the United States;1 charged with the responsibility of inquiring into the general condition of our people, and of devising measures which may, with the blessing of God, tend to our mutual improvement and elevation; conscious of entertaining no motives, ideas, or aspirations, but such as are in accordance with truth and justice, and are compatible with the highest good of our country and the world, with a cause as vital and worthy as that for which (nearly eighty years ago) your fathers and our fathers bravely contended,2 and in which they gloriously triumphed—we deem it proper, on this occasion, as one method of promoting the honorable ends for which we have met, and of discharging our duty to those in whose name we speak, to present the claims of our common cause to your candid, earnest, and favorable consideration. As an apology for addressing you, fellow-citizens! we cannot announce the discovery of any new principle adapted to ameliorate the condition of mankind. The great truths of moral and political science, upon which we rely, and which we press upon your consideration, have been evolved and enunciated by you. We point to your principles, your wisdom,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 63
9/1/21 4:16 PM
64
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
and to your great example as the full justification of our course this day. That “all men are created equal;” that “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”3 are the right of all; that “Taxation and representation”4 should go together; that governments are to protect, not to destroy, the rights of mankind; that the constitution of the United States was formed to establish justice, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessing of liberty to all the people of this country;5 that resistence to tyrants is obedience to God6 —are American principles and maxims, and together they form and constitute the constructive elements of the American government. From this elevated platform, provided by the Republic for us, and for all the children of man, we address you. In doing so, we would have our spirit properly discerned. On this point we would gladly free ourselves and our cause from all misconception. We shall affect no especial timidity, nor can we pretend to any great boldness. We know our poverty and weakness, and your wealth and greatness.—Yet we will not attempt to repress the spirit of liberty within us, or to conceal, in any wise, our sense of the justice and the dignity of our cause. We are Americans, and as Americans, we would speak to Americans. We address you not as aliens nor as exiles, humbly asking to be permitted to dwell among you in peace; but we address you as American citizens asserting their rights on their own native soil. Neither do we address you as enemies, (although the recipients of innumerable wrongs;) but in the spirit of patriotic good will. In assembling together as we have done, our object is not to excite pity for ourselves, but to command respect for our cause, and to obtain justice for our people. We are not malifactors imploring mercy; but we trust we are honest men, honestly appealing for righteous judgment, and ready to stand or fall by that judgment. We do not solicit unusual favor, but will be content with rough-handed “fair play.” We are neither lame nor blind, that we should seek to throw off the responsibility of our own existence, or to cast ourselves upon public charity for support. We would not lay our burdens upon other men’s shoulders; but we do ask, in the name of all that is just and magnanimous among men, to be freed from all the unnatural burdens and impediments with which American customs and American legislation have hindered our progress and improvement. We ask to be disencumbered of the load of popular reproach heaped upon us—for no better cause than that we wear the complexion given to us by our God and our Creator.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 64
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
65
We ask that in our native land, we shall not be treated as strangers, and worse than strangers. We ask that, being friends of America, we should not be treated as enemies of America. We ask that, speaking the same language and being of the same religion, worshipping the same God, owing our redemption to the same Savior, and learning our duties from the same Bible, we shall not be treated as barbarians. We ask that, having the same physical, moral, mental, and spiritual wants, common to other members of the human family, we shall also have the same means which are granted and secured to others, to supply those wants. We ask that the doors of the school-house, the work-shop, the church, the college, shall be thrown open as freely to our children as to the children of other members of the community. We ask that the American government shall be so administered as that beneath the broad shield of the Constitution, the colored American seaman shall be secure in his life, liberty and property, in every State in the Union. We ask that as justice knows no rich, no poor, no black, no white, but, like the government of God, renders alike to every man reward or punishment, according as his works shall be—the white and black man may stand upon an equal footing before the laws of the land. We ask that (since the right of trial by jury is a safe guard to liberty, against the encroachments of power, only as it is a trial by impartial men, drawn indiscriminately from the country) colored men shall not, in every instance, be tried by white persons; and that colored men shall not be either by custom or enactment excluded from the jury-box. We ask that (inasmuch as we are, in common with other American citizens, supporters of the State, subjects to its laws, interested in its welfare, liable to be called upon to defend it in time of war, contributors to its wealth in time of peace) the complete and unrestricted right of suffrage, which is essential to the dignity even of the white man, be extended to the Free Colored man also. Whereas, the colored people of the United States have too long been retarded and impeded in the development and improvement of their natural faculties and powers, ever to become dangerous rivals to white men, in the honorable pursuits of life, liberty and happiness; and whereas,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 65
9/1/21 4:16 PM
66
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
the proud Anglo-Saxon can need no arbitrary protection from open and equal competition with any variety of the human family; and whereas, laws have been enacted limiting the aspirations of colored men, as against white men—we respectfully submit that such laws are flagrantly unjust to the man of color, and plainly discreditable to white men; and for these and other reasons, such laws ought to be repealed.7 We especially urge that all laws and usages which preclude the enrollment of colored men in the militia, and prohibit their bearing arms in the navy, disallow their rising, agreeable to their merits and attainments—are unconstitutional8—the constitution knowing no color—are anti-Democratic, since Democracy respects men as equals—are unmagnanimous since such laws are made by the many, against the few, and by the strong against the weak. We ask that all those cruel and oppressive laws, whether enacted at the South or the North, which aim at the expatriation of the free people of color, shall be stamped with national reprobation, denounced as contrary to the humanity of the American people, and as an outrage upon the Christianity and civilization of the nineteenth century. We ask that the right of pre-emption, enjoyed by all white settlers upon the public lands, shall also be enjoyed by colored settlers; and that the word “white” be struck from the pre-emption act.9 We ask that no appropriations whatever, state or national, shall be granted to the colonization scheme; and we would have our right to leave or to remain in the United States placed above legislative interference.10 We ask, that the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850,11 that legislative monster of modern times, by whose atrocious provisions the writ of “habeas corpus,”12 the “right of trial by jury,” have been virtually abolished, shall be repealed. We ask, that the law of 1793 be so construed as to apply only to apprentices, and others really owing service or labor; and not to slaves, who can owe nothing.13 Finally, we ask that slavery in the United States shall be immediately, unconditionally, and forever abolished. To accomplish these just and reasonable ends, we solemnly pledge ourselves to God, to each other, to our country, and to the world, to use all and every means consistent with the just rights of our fellow men, and with the precepts of Christianity. We shall speak, write and publish, organize and combine to accomplish them. We shall invoke the aid of the pulpit and the press to gain them.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 66
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
67
We shall appeal to the church and to the government to gain them. We shall vote; and expend our money to gain them. We shall send eloquent men of our own condition to plead our cause before the people. We shall invite the co-operation of good men in this country and throughout the world—and, above all, we shall look to God, the Father and Creator of all men, for wisdom to direct us and strength to support us in the holy cause to which we this day solemnly pledge ourselves. Such, fellow-citizens, are our aims, ends, aspirations and determinations. We place them before you, with the earnest hope that upon further investigation, they will meet your cordial and active approval. And yet, again, we would free ourselves from the charge of unreasonableness and self-sufficiency. In numbers we are few and feeble; but in the goodness of our cause, in the rectitude of our motives, and in the abundance of argument on our side, we are many and strong. We count our friends, in the heavens above, in the earth beneath, among good men and holy angels. The subtle and mysterious cords of human sympathy have connected us with philanthropic hearts throughout the civilized world. The number in our land who already recognize the justice of our cause, and are laboring to promote it, are great and encreasing. It is also a source of encouragement, that the genuine American, brave and independent himself, will respect bravery and independence in others. He spurns servility and meanness, whether they be manifested by nations or by individuals. We submit, therefore, that there is neither necessity for, nor disposition on our part to assume a tone of excessive humility. While we would be respectful, we must address you as men, as citizens, as brothers, as dwellers in a common country, equally interested with you for its welfare, its honor, and for its prosperity. To be still more explicit: we would, first of all, be understood to range ourselves no lower among our fellow-countrymen than is implied in the high appellation of “citizen.” Notwithstanding the impositions and deprivations which have fettered us—notwithstanding the disabilities and liabilities, pending and impending—notwithstanding the cunning, cruel, and scandalous efforts to blot out that right, we declare that we are, and of right we ought to be American citizens. We claim this right, and we claim all the rights and privileges, and duties which, properly, attach to it.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 67
9/1/21 4:16 PM
68
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
It may, and it will, probably, be disputed that we are citizens. We may, and, probably, shall be denounced for this declaration, as making an inconsiderate, impertinent and absurd claim to citizenship; but a very little reflection will vindicate the position we have assumed, from so unfavorable a judgment. Justice is never inconsiderate; truth is never impertinent; right is never absurd. If the claim we set up be just, true and right, it will not be deemed improper or ridiculous in us so to declare it. Nor is it disrespectful to our fellow-citizens, who repudiate the aristocratic notions of the old world, that we range ourselves with them in respect to all the rights and prerogatives belonging to American citizens. Indeed, we believe, when you have duly considered this subject, you will commend us for the mildness and the modesty with which we have taken our ground. By birth, we are American citizens; by the principles of the Declaration of Independence, we are American citizens; within the meaning of the United States Constitution, we are American citizens; by the facts of history, and the admissions of American statesmen, we are American citizens; by the hardships and trials endured—by the courage and fidelity displayed by our ancestors in defending the liberties and in achieving the independence of our land, we are American citizens. In proof of the justice of this primary claim, we might cite numerous authorities, facts and testimonies—a few only must suffice. In the Convention of New York, held for amending the constitution of that State, in the year 1821, an interesting discussion took place, upon a proposition to prefix the word “white” to male citizens. Nathan Sandford,14 then late Chancellor of the State, said, “Here there is but one estate—the people—and to me the only qualification seems to be their virtue and morality. If they may be safely trusted to vote for one class of rulers, why not for all? The principle of the scheme is, that those who bear the burdens of the State shall choose those that rule it.”15 Dr. Robert Clark,16 in the same debate, said, “I am unwilling to retain the word ‘white,’ because it is repugnant to all the principles and notions of liberty, to which we have, heretofore, professed to adhere, and to our ‘Declaration of Independence,’ which is a concise and just expose of those principles.” He said “it had been appropriately observed by the Hon. Gentleman from West Chester, (Mr. Jay,)17 that by retaining this word, you violate the constitution of the United States.”18 Chancellor Kent19 supported the motion of Mr. Jay to strike out the word “white.” “He did not come to this Convention,” said he, “to disfranchise any portion of the community.”20 Peter A. Jay, on the same occasion, said, “It is insisted that this Convention, clothed with all
Y7870-Douglass.indb 68
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
69
the powers of the sovereign people of the State, have a right to construct the government in the manner they think most conductive to the general good. If, Sir, right and power be equivalent terms, then I am far from disputing the rights of this assembly. We have power, Sir, I acknowledge, not only to disfranchise every black family, but as many white families also, as we may think expedient.—We may place the whole government in the hands of a few, and thus construct an aristocracy. ****** But, Sir, right and power are not convertible terms. No man, no body of men, however powerful, have a right to do wrong.”21—In the same Convention Martin Van Buren said, “there were two words which has come into common use with our revolutionary strugle—words which contained an abridgment of our political rights—words which, at that day, had a talismanic effect—which led our fathers from the bosom of their families to the tented field—which for seven long years of toil and suffering had keft them to their arms, and which, finally, conducted them to a glorious triumph. They were ‘Taxation and Representation.’ Nor did they lose their influence with the close of that struggle. They were never heard in our halls of legislation without bringing to our recollection the consecrated feelings of those who won our liberties, or, reminding us of everything that was sacred in principle.”22 Ogden Edwards23 without said “he considered it no better than robbery to demand the contributions of colored people towards defraying the public expenses, and at the same time to disfranchise them.”24 But we must close our quotations from these debates.—Much more could be cited to show that colored men are not only citizens, but that they have a right to the exercise of the elective franchise in the State of New York. If the right to citizenship is established in the State of New York, it is in consequence of the same facts which exist in at least every free State of the Union. We turn from the debates in the State of New York to the nation; and here we find testimony abundant and incontestable, that Free Colored people are esteemed as citizens by the highest authorities in the United States. The Constitution of the United States declares “that the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the United States.”25 There is, in this clause of the Constitution, nothing whatever, of that watchful malignity which has manifested itself lately in the insertion of the word “white,” before the term “citizen.” The word “white” was unknown to the framers of the Constitution of the United States in such connections—unknown to the signers of the Declaration of Independence—
Y7870-Douglass.indb 69
9/1/21 4:16 PM
70
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
unknown to the brave men at Bunker Hill,26 Ticonderoga,27 and at Red Bank.28 It is a modern word, brought into use by modern legislators, despised in revolutionary times. The question of our citizenship came up as a national question, and was settled during the pendency of the Missouri question, in 1820.29 It will be remembered that that State presented herself for admission into the Union, with a clause in her Constitution prohibiting the settlement of colored citizens with her borders. Resistance was made to her admission into the Union, upon that very ground; and it was not until that State receded from her unconstitutional position, that President Monroe declared the admission of Missouri into the Union to be complete.30 According to Nile’s Register, August 18th, vol. 20, page 338 and 339, the refusal to admit Missouri into the Union was not withdrawn until the General Assembly of that State, in conformity to a fundamental condition imposed by Congress, had, by an act passed for that purpose, solemnly enacted and declared, “That this State (Missouri) has assented, and does assent, that the fourth clause of the 26th section of the third article of their Constitution should never be construed to authorize the passage of any law, and that no law shall be passed in conformity thereto, by which any citizen of either of the United States shall be excluded from the enjoyment of any of the privileges and immunities to which such citizens are entitled, under the Constitution of the United States.”31 Upon this action by the State of Missouri, President Monroe proclaimed the admission of Missouri into the Union. Here, fellow-citizens, we have a recognition of our citizenship by the highest authority of the United States; and here we might rest our claim to citizenship. But there have been services performed, hardships endured, courage displayed by our fathers, which modern American historians forget to record—a knowledge of which is essential to an intelligent judgment of the merits of our people. Thirty years ago, slavery was less powerful than now; American statesmen were more independent then, than now; and, as a consequence, the black man’s patriotism and bravery were more readily recognized. —The age of slave-hunting had not then come on. In the memorable debate on the Missouri question, the meritorious deeds of our fathers obtained respectful mention. The Hon. Wm. Eustis,32 who had himself been a soldier of the revolution, and Governor of the State of Massachusetts, made a speech in the Congress of the United States, 12th December, and said: “The question to be determined is, Whether the article
Y7870-Douglass.indb 70
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
71
in the Constitution of Missouri, requiring the legislation to provide by law, ‘that free negroes and mulattoes shall not be admitted into that State,’ is, or is not repugnant to that clause of the constitution of the United States which declares ‘that the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States[’]? This is the question. Those who contend that the article is not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States, take the position that free blacks and mulattoes are not citizens. Now, I invite the gentlemen who maintained this, to go with me and examine this question to its root. At the early part of the revolutionary war, there were found, in the middle and northern States, many blacks, and other people of color, capable of bearing arms, a part of them free, and a greater part of them slaves. The freemen entered our ranks with the whites. The time of those who were slaves were purchased by the State, and they were induced to enter the service in consequence of a law, by which, on condition of their serving in the ranks during the war, they were made freemen. In Rhode Island, where their numbers were more considerable, they were formed under the same considerations into a regiment, commanded by white officers; and it is required, in justice to them, to add, that they discharged their duty with zeal and fidelity. The gallant defense of Red Bank, in which the black regiment bore a part, is among the proofs of their valor.” “Not only the rights, but the character of these men do not appear to have been understood; nor is it to me, at all extraordinary that gentlemen from other States, in which the condition, character, the moral facilities, and the rights of men of color differ so widely, should entertain opinions so variant from ours. In Massachusetts, Sir, there are among them who possess all the virtues which are deemed estimable in civil and social life. They have their public teachers of religion and morality—their schools and other institutions. On anniversaries, which they consider interesting to them, they have their public processions, in all of which they conduct themselves with order and decorum. Now we ask only, that in a disposition to accommodate others, their avowed rights and privileges be not taken from them. If their number be small, and they are feebly represented, we, to whom they are known, are proportionately bound to protect them. But their defence is not founded on their numbers; it rests on the immutable principles of justice. If there be only one family, or a solitary individual who has rights guaranteed to him by the Constitution, whatever may be his color or complexion, it is not in the power, nor can it be the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 71
9/1/21 4:16 PM
72
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
inclination of Congress to deprive him of them. And I trust, Sir, that the decision on this occasion will show that we will extend good faith even to the blacks.”—Nat. Intelligencer, Jan. 2, 1821.33 The following is an extract from a speech of the Hon. Mr. Morrill, of New Hampshire,34 delivered, in the United States Senate in the same month, and reported in the National Intelligencer, Jan. 11th, 1821. “Sir, you excluded, not only the citizens from their constitutional privileges and immunities, but also your soldiers of color, to whom you have given patents of land. You had a company of this description. They have fought your battles. They have defended your country. They have preserved your privileges; but have lost their own.—What did you say to them on their enlistment? ‘We will give you a monthly compensation, and, at the end of the war, 160 acres of good land, on which you may settle, and by cultivating the soil, spend your declining years in peace and in the enjoyment of those immunities for which you have fought and bled.’ Now, Sir, you restrict them, and will not allow them to enjoy the fruit of their labor. Where is the public faith in this case? Did they suppose, with a patent in their hand declaring their title to land in Missouri with the seal of the nation and the President’s signature affixed thereto, it would be said unto them by any authority you shall not possess the premises? This could never have been anticipated; and yet this must follow if colored men are not citizens.”35 Mr. Strong, of New York,36 said, in the same great debate, “The federal constitution knows but two descriptions of freemen: these are citizens and aliens. Now Congress can naturalize only aliens—i.e., persons who owe allegiance to a foreign government. But a slave has no country, and owes no allegiance except to his master. How, then, is he an alien. If restored to his liberty, and made a freeman, what is his national character? It must be determined by the federal constitution, and without reference to policy; for it respects liberty. Is it that of a citizen, or alien? But it has been shown that he is not an alien. May we not, therefore, conclude—nay, are we not bound to conclude that he is a citizens of the United States?”37 Charles Pinckney, of South Carolina,38 speaking of the colored people, in Congress, and with reference to the same question, bore this testimony: “They then were (during the Revolution) as they still are, as valuable a part of our population to the Union, as any other equal number of inhabitants.—They were, in numerous instances, the pioneers; and in all the labors of your armies, to their hands were owing the erection of the greatest part of the fortifications raised for the protection of our country.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 72
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
73
Fort Moultrie gave, at an early period the experience and untired valor of our citizens immortality to American arms; and in the Northern States, numerous bodies of them was enrolled, and fought, side by side, with the whites, the battles of the Revolution.”39 General Jackson, in his celebrated proclamations to the Free Colored inhabitants of Louisiana, uses these expressions: “Your white fellowcitizens;” and again: “Our brave citizens are united, and all contention has ceased among them.”
FIRST PROCLAMATION. extracts. Head Quarters, 7th Military Dis’t., Mobile, Sept. 21st, 1814. To the Free Colored inhabitants of Louisiana: Through a mistaken policy you have heretofore been deprived of a participation in the glorious struggle for national rights, in which your country is engaged. This no longer shall exist. As sons of freedom you are now called on to defend our most inestimable blessings.—As Americans, your country looks with confidence to her adopted children for a valorous support. As fathers, husbands, and brothers, you are summoned to rally round the standard of the Eagle, to defend all which is dear to existence. Your country, although calling for your exertions, does not wish you to engage in her cause without remunerating you for the services rendered. In the sincerity of a soldier, and in the language of truth I address you. To every noble-hearted free man of color, volunteering to serve during the present contest with Great Britain, and no longer, there will be paid the same bounty in money and land now received by the white soldiers of the United States, viz: $124 in money, and 160 acres of land. The non-commissioned officers and privates will also be entitled to the same monthly pay and daily rations, and clothes, furnished to any American soldier. The Major General commanding will select officers for your government from your white fellow-citizens. Your non-commissioned officers will be selected from yourselves. Due regard will be paid to the feelings of freemen and soldiers. As a distinct, independent battalion or
Y7870-Douglass.indb 73
9/1/21 4:16 PM
74
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
regiment, pursuing the path of glory, you will, undivided, receive the applause and gratitude of your countrymen. ANDREW JACKSON, Major Gen. Commanding. —Nile’s Register, Dec. 3, 1814, Vol. 7. p. 205.
SECOND PROCLAMATION. To the Free People of Color: Soldiers! when on the banks of the Mobile I called you to take up arms, inviting you to partake the perils and glory of your white fellowcitizens, I expected much from you; for I was not ignorant that you possessed qualities most formidable to an invading enemy. I knew with what fortitude you could endure hunger and thirst, and all the fatigues of a campaign. I knew well how you loved your native country, and that you, as well as ourselves, had to defend what man holds most dear—his parents, wife, children, and property. You have done more than I expected. In addition to the previous qualities I before knew you to possess, I found among you a noble enthusiasm which leads to the performance of great things. Soldiers! the President of the United States shall hear how praiseworthy was your conduct in the hour of danger, and the representatives of the American people will give you the praise your exploits entitle you to. Your General anticipates them in applauding your noble ardor. The enemy approaches—his vessels cover our lakes—our brave citizens are united, and all contention has ceased among them.—Their only dispute is, who shall win the prize of valor, or who the most glory, its noblest reward. By order, THOMAS BUTLER, Aid-de Camp.40 Such, fellow-citizens, is but a sample of a mass of testimony upon which we found our claim to be American citizens. There is, we think, no flaw in the evidence. The case is made out. We and you stand upon the same broad national basis. Whether at home or abroad, we and you owe equal allegiance to the same government—have a right to look for protection on the same ground. We have been born and reared on the same soil; we have been animated by, and have displayed the same patriotic impulses; we have acknowledged and performed the same duty; we have fought and bled in the battles; we have gained and gloried in the same victories; and we are equally entitled to the blessings resulting therefrom.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 74
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
75
In view of this array of evidence of services bravely rendered, how base and monstrous would be the ingratitude, should the republic disown us and drive us into exile!—how faithless and selfish, should the nation persist in degrading us! But we will not remind you of obligations—we will not appeal to your generous feelings—a naked statement of the case is our best appeal. Having, now, upon the testimony of your own great and venerated names, completely vindicated our rights to be regarded and treated as American citizens, we hope you will now permit us to address you in the plainness of speech, becoming the dignity of American citizens. Fellow-citizens, we have had, and still have, great wrongs of which to complain. A heavy and cruel hand has been laid upon us. As a people, we feel ourselves to be not only deeply injured, but grossly misunderstood. Our white fellow-countrymen do not know us. They are strangers to our character, ignorant of our capacity, oblivious of our history and progress, and are misinformed as to the principles and ideas that control and guide us as a people. The great mass of American citizens estimate us as being a characterless and purposeless people; and hence we hold up our heads, if at all, against the withering influence of a nation’s scorn and contempt. It will not be surprising that we are so misunderstood and misused when the motives for misrepresenting us and for degrading us are duly considered. Indeed, it will seem strange, (in view of the ten thousand channels through which malign feelings find utterance and influence,) that we have not even fallen lower in public estimation than we have done. For, with the single exception of the Jews, under the whole heavens, there is not to be found a people pursued with a more relentless prejudice and persecution, than are the Free Colored people of the U. S. Without pretending to have exerted ourselves as we ought, in view of an intelligent understanding of our interest to avert from us the unfavorable opinions and unfriendly action of the American people, we feel that the imputations cast upon us, for our want of intelligence, morality and exalted character, may be mainly accounted for by the injustice we have received at your hands.—What stone had been left unturned41 to degrade us? What hand has refused to fan the flame of popular prejudice against us? What American artist has not caricatured us?—What wit has not laughed at us in our wretchedness? What songster has not made merry over our depressed spirits? What press has not ridiculed and contemned us? What pulpit has withheld from our devoted heads its angry lightning,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 75
9/1/21 4:16 PM
76
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
or its sanctimonious hate. Few, few, very few; and that we have borne up with it all—that we have tried to be wise, though denounced by all to be fools—that we have tried to be upright, when all around us have esteemed us as knaves—that we have striven to be gentlemen, although all around us have been teaching us its impossibility—that we have remained here, when all our neighbors have advised us to leave, proves that we possess qualities of head and heart, such as cannot but be commended by impartial men. It is believed, that no other nation on the globe could have made more progress in the midst of such an universal and stringent disparagement. It would humble the proudest, crush the energies of the strongest, and retard the progress of the swiftest. In view of our circumstances, we can, without boasting, thank God, and take courage, having placed ourselves where we may fairly challenge comparison with more highly favored men. Among the colored people, we can point, with pride and hope, to men of education and refinement, who have become such, despite of the most unfavorable influences; we can point to mechanics, farmers, merchants, teachers, ministers, doctors, lawyers, editors, and authors, against whose progress the concentrated energies of American prejudice has proved quite unavailing. Now, what is the motive for ignoring and discouraging our improvement in this country? The answer is ready. The intelligent and upright free man of color is an unanswerable argument in favor of liberty, and a killing condemnation of American slavery. It is easily seen that, in proportion to the progress of the free man of color, in knowledge, temperance, industry, and righteousness, in just that proportion will he endanger the stability of slavery; hence, all the powers of slavery are exerted to prevent the elevation of the free people of color. The force of fifteen hundred million dollars is arrayed against us;42 hence, the press, the pulpit, and the platform, against all the natural promptings of uncontaminated manhood, point their deadly missiles of ridicule, scorn and contempt at us; and bid us, on pain of being pierced through and through, to remain in our degradation. Let the same amount of money be employed against the interest of any other class of persons, however favored by nature they may be, the result could scarcely be different from that seen in our own case. Such a people would be regarded with aversion; the money-ruled multitude would heap contumely upon them, and money-ruled institutions would proscribe them. Besides the money consideration, fellow-citizens, an explanation of the erroneous opinion, prevalent concerning us is furnished
Y7870-Douglass.indb 76
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
77
in the fact, less creditable to human nature, that men are apt to hate most those whom they have injured most.—Having despised us, it is not strange that Americans should seek to render us despicable; having enslaved us, it is natural that they should strive to prove us unfit for freedom; having denounced us as indolent, it is not strange that they should cripple our enterprise; having assumed our inferiority, it would be extraordinary if they sought to surround us with circumstances which would serve to make us direct contradictions to their assumption. In conclusion, fellow-citizens, while conscious of the immense disadvantages, which beset our pathway, and fully appreciating our own weakness, we are encouraged to persevere, in efforts adapted to our improvement, by a firm reliance upon God, and a settled conviction, as immovable as the everlasting hills, that all the truths in the whole universe of God, are allied to our cause. FREDERICK DOUGLASS, J. M. WHITFIELD, H. O. WAGONER, REV. A. N. FREEMAN, GEORGE B. VASHON. 1. In addition to calling for equal rights for African Americans, the Rochester convention debated the controversial proposition of founding and sponsoring a labor college. The delegates also established the National Council of the Colored People to support educational programs, economic cooperatives, employment opportunities, and the creation of a black press. Despite meeting only three times before its disbandment, this council made the first major attempt to organize black action for advancement. Philip S. Foner, History of Black Americans: From the Emergence of the Cotton Kingdom to the Eve of the Compromise of 1850 (Westport, Conn., 1983), 316–18; C. Peter Ripley, ed., The Black Abolitionist Papers, 5 vols. (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1985–92), 4:170–73. 2. An allusion to the American Revolution (1775–83). 3. The preface of the Declaration of Independence. 4. Douglass is alluding to the famous Revolutionary War–era slogans “no taxation without representation” and “taxation without representation is tyranny.” Although both statements’ origins are obscure, the former is usually attributed to a sermon first preached in 1750 by the Reverend Jonathan Mayhew, a Boston-based Congregational minister. The latter is linked with a Massachusetts lawyer and politician, James Otis, from a trial that took place in 1760. Martin J. Manning and Clarence R. Vyatt, eds., Encyclopedia of Media and Propaganda in Wartime America, 2 vols. (Santa Barbara, Calif., 2011), 1:108–09. 5. The Preamble of the U.S. Constitution. 6. A slight misquotation of a motto on the seal of Thomas Jefferson’s tomb. The seal reads: “Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.” John Bartlett, Familiar Quotations: A Collection of Passages, Phrases and Proverbs Traced to Their Sources in Ancient and Modern Literature, 17th ed. (1855; Boston, 2002), 846. 7. Although slavery had been abolished in the Northern states by the 1820s, most of those states, over the following decades, enacted laws barring free blacks from voting, holding public office, and
Y7870-Douglass.indb 77
9/1/21 4:16 PM
78
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
serving on juries. Indeed, some scholars argue that the Jim Crow statutes, which were implemented across the South in the years following the Civil War, were largely modeled upon the Northern states’ discriminatory antebellum legislation. Mary Block, “African American Responses to Early Jim Crow,” in African Americans in the Nineteenth Century: People and Perspectives, ed. Dixie Ray Haggard (Santa Barbara, Calif., 2010), 111–12; EAAH, 2:272–76. 8. The 1792 National Militia Act called for “every free able-bodied white male citizen of the representative states” to serve in the federal militia, effectively barring free blacks. The ban remained in place until the passage of the 1862 Militia Act, which cleared the path for the Lincoln administration to enlist African Americans in the military. Although the 1792 Militia Act did not explicitly prohibit any state from enlisting African Americans in its state militia, every state had done so by 1835. As a result, free blacks were denied citizenship in some states, since service in the state militia was a duty required of all free able-bodied male residents. In 1798, both the navy and the marines barred African Americans from serving in their ranks. The marines maintained this ban until 1942, but the navy began ignoring the restriction almost immediately. Congress legitimated the navy’s failure to restrict recruitment of black sailors by lifting the ban in 1813. In 1839, however, the navy imposed a monthly 5 percent quota on African American recruits. The quota was lifted in 1861 by Lincoln’s secretary of the navy, Gideon Welles. John Whiteclay Chambers II, ed., The Oxford Companion to American Military History (New York, 1999), 584–86; EAAH, 2:272–76. 9. In 1826, Congress barred free African Americans from any pre-exemption or preemption rights to all public lands. Preemption was the right of settlers to purchase public lands at a minimum price determined by the federal government. Lawrence H. Fuchs, The American Kaleidoscope: Race, Ethnicity, and the Civic Culture (Hanover, N.H., 1990), 92; Meizhu Lui et al., eds., The Color of Wealth: The Story behind the U.S. Racial Wealth Divide (New York, 2008), 241. 10. After languishing for several decades, colonization schemes once again gained support in the early 1850s. In 1851, U.S. senator Daniel Webster of Massachusetts proposed federal funds for colonization. Later that year, Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri, and Virginia revived colonization programs of their own and appropriated state funds for the cause. The following year, Indiana started a colonization fund, petitioning Congress to use federal funds to colonize African Americans away from the United States. Indiana’s fund remained on the books until 1865. David W. Bulla, Lincoln’s Censor: Milo Hascall and Freedom of the Press in Civil War Indiana (West Lafayette, Ind., 2009), 39–40; Nikki M. Taylor, America’s First Black Socialist: The Radical Life of Peter H. Clark (Lexington, Ky., 2013), 48–50. 11. The Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, part of that year’s infamous sectional compromise, replaced a similar 1793 federal law and created a federal position of “commissioner.” The commissioner’s purpose was to issue arrest warrants for fugitives and to certify the removal of captives to the South. This law sparked a rise in antislavery sentiment in the North, where opposition centered on the inherent bias of the commissioners—while they were paid ten dollars each time they ordered the removal of a fugitive, they received only five dollars if they judged that the captive was not a fugitive slave. Many people also objected to the creation of a bureau of federal officials, since it would enforce the property rights of slave owners in the South. Stanley W. Campbell, The Slave Catchers: Enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law, 1850–1860 (1968; Chapel Hill, N.C., 1970), 23–25; Miller and Smith, Dictionary of Afro-American Slavery, 275–76. 12. Latin for “have the body,” habeas corpus originated in English common law as a way of protecting individuals from illegal detention. Habeas corpus, which appears in the U.S. Constitution as part of the Suspension Clause (article 1, section 9, clause 2), is the means by which federal courts determine the validity of the state’s detention of a prisoner. Charles E. Chadman, A Concise Legal Dictionary (Chicago, 1909), 190; Archibald Brown, A New Law Dictionary and Institute of the Whole Laws (1916; Clark, N.J., 2005), 254. 13. The Fugitive Slave Law of 1793 stated that in the case of the escape of any person held to the service of labor under the law (slaves), the person who owned such laborers might seize the fugitives
Y7870-Douglass.indb 78
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
79
and bring them before any U.S. judge or magistrate. The judge or magistrate, upon determining the validity of the slave’s fugitive status, could issue a warrant for the removal of the slave from the state to which they fled. Any person harboring or obstructing the removal of a fugitive slave was liable to pay a penalty of $500. C. W. A. David, “The Fugitive Slave Law of 1793,” JNH, 9:18–25 (January 1924); Paul Finkelman, “The Kidnapping of John Davis and the Adoption of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1793,” Journal of Southern History, 56:397–422 (August 1990); Miller and Smith, Dictionary of Afro-American Slavery, 275–76. 14. Nathan Sanford (1777–1838) was born in Bridgehampton, Long Island, New York. He was educated at the Clinton Academy and later at Yale University, though he did not graduate from the latter. In 1799, Sanford was admitted to the bar and opened a law office in New York City. Closely affiliated with the Tammany Hall organization, he was appointed U.S. commissioner in bankruptcy in 1802 and U.S. Attorney for the District of New York from 1803 to 1816. Sanford served in the state assembly from 1808 to 1809, and again in 1811. For a brief period of time in 1811, he also served as Speaker, and from 1812 to 1815, he was a member of the state senate. In 1815, he was elected to the U.S. Senate, but he lost his bid for reelection to Martin Van Buren in 1821. That year, Sanford also served as a delegate to the New York State Constitutional Convention. In 1823 he succeeded James Kent as chancellor of New York, serving in that office until 1826. In the complicated election of 1824, Sanford received Electoral College votes for vice president from both the Henry Clay and William Crawford camps, but he finished far behind the winner, John C. Calhoun. In 1825 he was reelected to the U.S. Senate, where he remained until his retirement from politics in 1831. DAB, 16:349–50; BDUSC (online). 15. The source of this statement, as is the case with much of the material that Douglass quotes in this document, appears to have been William Yates’s Rights of Colored Men to Suffrage, Citizenship and Trial by Jury, published in Philadelphia in 1838. Yates’s work provides lengthy excerpts from several earlier publications, most notably the official transcript of the 1821 New York State Constitutional Convention. Comparisons between the original publications and the versions published by Yates, however, indicate that he occasionally made small changes to the original texts. Those alterations appear in the passages Douglass quotes throughout this address. William Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, Citizenship and Trial by Jury: Being a Book of Facts, Arguments and Authorities, Historical Notices and Sketches of Debates with Notes (Philadelphia, 1838), 2; Nathaniel R. Carter and William L. Stone, Reports of the Proceedings and Debates of the Convention of 1821, Assembled for the Purpose of Amending of the Constitution of the State of New York (Albany, N.Y., 1821). 16. Robert Clark (1777–1837) was born in Washington County, New York, six months after his family emigrated from Scotland. He was privately educated and studied medicine in his brother’s office. Clark settled in Delaware County, New York, and opened a medical practice in 1799. From 1812 to 1815, Clark represented Delaware County in the New York General Assembly, and in 1819 he was elected as a Democratic-Republican to a single term in the U.S. Congress. In 1821, Clark became a delegate to the New York State Constitutional Convention. In 1823, he moved to a farm in Monroe County, Michigan, where he once again set up a private medical practice and pursued an interest in the scientific cultivation of fruits and grasses. Between 1823 and 1831, Clark served as the register of the Land Office of the Second Land District of the Michigan Territory. Talcott E. Wing, ed., History of Monroe County, Michigan (New York, 1890), 144–48; BDUSC (online). 17. Born on his maternal grandparents’ estate, known as Liberty Hall, in Elizabeth Town, New Jersey, Peter Augustus Jay (1776–1843) was the eldest child of John Jay, first chief justice of the United States, and his wife, Sarah Van Brugh Livingston. In 1794, he graduated from Columbia College. Later that year, the chief justice was sent to London by President Washington to negotiate a trade agreement with the British, and the younger Jay served as his secretary. Upon returning to the United States, Jay studied law with a cousin and was admitted to the bar in 1797. While in Paris during the signing of the Louisiana Purchase Treaty in 1802, he was entrusted with delivering the document
Y7870-Douglass.indb 79
9/1/21 4:16 PM
80
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
to Washington, D.C. After failing to be elected to Congress in both 1812 and 1814, he succeeded in being elected to the New York General Assembly in 1816. While serving, Jay promoted legislation to build the Erie Canal and to abolish slavery in New York. From 1819 to 1821, he was the recorder of New York City, and in 1821 he served as a delegate to the New York State Constitutional Convention. He served as president of the New York Hospital from 1827 to 1833, and in 1833 he was a member of the commission that set the boundary between New York and New Jersey. From 1840 until his death in 1843, Jay was president of the New-York Historical Society. Appleton’s Cyclopaedia of American Biography, 6 vols. (New York, 1888–89), 3:411; DAB, 10:11. 18. Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 13. 19. James Kent (1763–1847) was chancellor of New York Court of Chancery from 1814 until 1823. A Yale graduate, Kent practiced law in Poughkeepsie, served three terms in the New York Assembly, held a law professorship at Columbia, and sat on the New York Supreme Court for sixteen years before his appointment as chancellor. After retiring from the chancery, Kent briefly resumed teaching at Columbia and completed his Commentaries on American Law, a classic American legal treatise. Kent’s conservatism in politics and law was influenced by the Federalists, and Alexander Hamilton in particular. Concerning the slave trade, Kent declared in his Commentaries: “The constitution of the United States laid the foundation of a series of provisions, to put a final stop to the progress of this moral pestilence, by admitting a power in Congress to prohibit the importation of slaves, after the expiration of the year 1807. The Constitution evidently looked forward to the year 1808 as the commencement of an epoch in the history of human improvement.” In 1821, Kent was a member of the New York State Constitutional Convention, where he, along with John Jay, Jr., unsuccessfully fought against the retention of the property qualification for African American voters. James Kent, Commentaries on American Law, 4 vols. (New York, 1826–30), 1:191–200, 2:247–58; John Theodore Horton, James Kent: A Study in Conservatism, 1763–1847 (New York, 1939); Charles B. Elliott, An American Chancellor (Indianapolis, Ind., 1903); ACAB, 3:521–22; National Cyclopaedia of American Biography (New York, 1898), 3:55–56; DAB, 10:344–47. 20. Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 17. 21. Ibid., 21. 22. Ibid., 29. 23. Ogden Edwards (1781–1862) was born in New Haven, Connecticut. His father, Pierpont Edwards, was a member of the Continental Congress, a delegate to the Connecticut State Constitutional Convention, and the U.S. district judge for the District of Connecticut. Edwards’s grandfather was the Reverend Jonathan Edwards, a famous theologian and president of Princeton University. Educated at Princeton and the Litchfield Law School, Edwards was admitted to the New York bar in 1802 and went into private practice in New York City before being elected a judge on New York’s Surrogate Court in 1807. From 1814 to 1817, Edwards was a member of the New York General Assembly. In 1816, he was appointed counsel for the corporation of the City of New York, serving in that capacity until 1822. In 1821, he was a delegate to the New York State Constitutional Convention, and between 1822 and 1841, he was a judge on the First Circuit Court of the State of New York. While serving on the Circuit Court, he presided over the notorious Helen Jewett murder trial in 1836. After an unsuccessful run for governor of New York (as the Whig candidate) in 1846, Edwards returned to private practice and became one of New York City’s most prominent attorneys. H. Clay Williams, Biographical Encyclopaedia of Connecticut and Rhode Island of the Nineteenth Century (New York, 1881), 133; Dwight Canfield Kilbourn, The Bench and Bar of Litchfield County, Connecticut, 1709–1909 (Litchfield, Conn., 1909), 241; Patricia Clive Cohen, The Murder of Helen Jewett (New York, 1999), 330–32; BDUSC (online). 24. Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 42 25. Article 4, section 2, clause 1, of the U.S. Constitution, also known as the Comity Clause. 26. The Battle of Bunker Hill (also referred to as the Battle of Breed’s Hill) was the first major engagement of the Revolutionary War and the bloodiest battle of the revolution, with both sides
Y7870-Douglass.indb 80
9/1/21 4:16 PM
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
81
suffering casualties of approximately 40 percent. The battle, which took place on 17 June 1775, ultimately failed to prevent the British from transporting troops across the Charles River from Boston to Charlestown Heights. Despite this, Bunker Hill helped unify colonial resistance and ended any hope of reconciliation between Great Britain and the American colonies. Terry M. Mays, Historical Dictionary of the American Revolution (Lanham, Md., 2010), 42–44, 197. 27. Douglass’s reference to Ticonderoga is unclear. Known as both “the key to the continent” and “the Gibraltar of the North,” Fort Ticonderoga (originally called Carillon by the French) was located ninety-five miles north of Albany, New York, and commanded the high ground between Lake Champlain and Lake George. Between 1758 and 1777, the fort changed hands four times and was the site of three battles. Only the first, which took place during the French and Indian War, was of any real significance. On 8 July 1758, a combined British and Colonial force of 12,000–16,000 men, under the command of General James Abercrombie, was defeated, with heavy casualties, by a force of no more than 3,000–4,000 French troops under the command of the marquis de Montcalm. Following their victory, however, the French drastically reduced the size of their garrison, and in 1759 they abandoned the fort to the British. The second Battle of Ticonderoga took place on 10 May 1775. A small force of fewer than 100 American soldiers, under the shaky joint command of Ethan Allen and Benedict Arnold, seized the fort from an even smaller force of British soldiers, with only a single, nonfatal casualty on either side. In fact, the second battle was primarily remembered for the power struggle between Allen and Arnold, as well as for the seizure of seventy-nine pieces of heavy British artillery. The third Battle of Ticonderoga simply reversed the outcome of the previous conflict. It began the following year on 30 June 1777 when a force of over 7,000 men, under the command of British general John Burgoyne, launched what would be the final siege of the fort. The battle ended, rather ignominiously, on the night of 5 July, when the American commander, General Arthur St. Clair, ordered his forces to abandon Fort Ticonderoga and retreat south. David Eggenberger, An Encyclopedia of Battles: Accounts of Over 1,560 battles from 1479 B.C. to the Present (New York, 1985), 151–52; Theodore P. Savas and J. David Dameron, A Guide to the Battles of the American Revolution (New York, 2010), 9–12, 96–100. 28. The Battle of Red Bank took place on 22 October 1777 in New Jersey outside Fort Mercer, which was one of two American forts charged with protecting the Delaware River approach to Philadelphia. During the battle, an inferior force of American soldiers was able to decisively defeat a significantly larger force of Hessian soldiers, preventing them from capturing Fort Mercer. The American victory at the Battle of Red Bank, which cheered the Patriot side, was mistakenly attributed to the efforts of Rhode Island’s all-black regiment. Although Colonel Christopher Greene, commander of Fort Mercer, eventually commanded that unit, it was not organized until 1778. Michael Lee Lanning, African Americans in the Revolutionary War (New York, 2000), 75–76; Mays, Historical Dictionary of the American Revolution, 197. 29. In 1820, the proposed Missouri Constitution included a clause prohibiting the movement of free blacks into the state. Often quite rancorous, debate in Congress over this controversial proposal contributed to a delay in Missouri’s admission into the Union. A compromise (known as the Second Missouri Compromise) was hammered out, in large part because of the efforts of Kentucky senator Henry Clay. Clay left the meaning of the rewritten clause vague enough to ensure Missouri’s admission as a state in 1821. Glover Moore, The Missouri Controversy, 1819–1821 (Lexington, Ky., 1953), 134–36, 154–58; Levine, Dislocating Race and Nation, 67–118; Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 38–39; EAAH, 2:380–82. 30. President James Monroe, like many Jeffersonian Republicans, regarded the attempt to block Missouri’s admission as a slave state as an effort motivated by the hopes of reviving Northern support for the Federalist party, rather than by a genuine opposition to slavery. Aware that the slavery question was contentious, Monroe did not discuss the issue with his cabinet. The president did tell Senator James Barbour of Virginia that he supported the compromise measure drafted by Henry Clay. Monroe signed the legislation on 6 March 1820, just one day after its passage in Congress, and
Y7870-Douglass.indb 81
9/1/21 4:16 PM
82
ADDRESS OF THE COLORED NATIONAL CONVENTION
used the influence of his office to reconcile Southern militants to the compromise. Sean Wilentz, “Jeffersonian Democracy and the Origins of Political Antislavery in the United States: The Missouri Crisis Revisited,” Journal of the Historical Society, 4:375–401 (Fall 2004). 31. Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 38–39. 32. William Eustis (1753–1825) was born in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and attended Harvard College. Upon his graduation, he studied medicine and served as an army surgeon during the Revolutionary War. After the war, Eustis went into private practice in Boston and represented the city in the Massachusetts House of Representatives from 1788 to 1794. Eustis also served two terms in Congress, from 1801 to 1805. In 1807, he was appointed secretary of war by President Jefferson, and he remained in that position under President Madison. Following harsh criticism of his handling of military affairs in the early months of the War of 1812, Eustis was forced to resign in December 1812. In 1814 he was appointed envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to the Netherlands, where he remained until 1818. He was reelected to Congress for a single term in 1820. While serving, he was the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs. Choosing not to run for a second term, Eustis was instead elected governor of Massachusetts in 1823, dying while in office in 1825. DAB, 6:193–94; ANB (online); BDUSC (online). 33. William Eustis delivered the speech Douglass described on 12 December 1820. Washington National Intelligencer, 13 December 1820; Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 39–41. 34. David Lawrence Morril (1772–1849) was born in Epping, New Hampshire. The son and grandson of Harvard-educated Congregational ministers, Morril was educated at Phillips Exeter Academy. Trained as a physician, he went into private practice in 1793 in Epsom, New Hampshire, where he remained until 1800. Following a religious awakening, he closed his practice, studied theology, was ordained, and became pastor of the Presbyterian-Congregationalist Church of Goffstown, New Hampshire, in 1802. He remained there until 1811, when his request for dismissal was granted. Before leaving the ministry, Morril had reopened his medical practice in 1808 and been elected moderator of the Goffstown town meeting. He was also elected to the New Hampshire House of Representatives, where he served until 1817. During his final year as a state representative, he served as Speaker. Elected to the U.S. Senate as a Democratic-Republican in 1816, Morril served a single term in Washington, D.C., 1817–23. Choosing not to run for reelection, he was instead elected to the state senate, where he remained until 1824. That year, he was elected to the first of three consecutive terms as governor of New Hampshire. Morril retired from politics in 1827, and in 1831 he moved from Goffstown to Concord. There he edited the New Hampshire Observer (1831–33) and served as vice president of the American Bible Society, the Sunday-School Union, and the Home Missionary Society, in addition to serving as president of the New Hampshire Missionary Society and the New Hampshire Colonization Society. DAB, 13:195–96; ANB (online); BDUSC (online). 35. Douglass follows Yates in his misspelling of Mr. Morrill’s name, which was in fact “Morril.” He also repeats Yates’s mistake regarding the date of publication of the transcript of Morril’s speech in the National Intelligencer, which was 10 January 1821, not 11 January. Washington National Intelligencer, 10 January 1821; Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 38–39. 36. James Strong (1783–1847) was born in Windham, Connecticut, and graduated from the University of Vermont in 1806. After settling in Hudson, New York, he was elected to a single term in Congress in 1819. Following a two-year absence from politics, Strong was reelected to Congress in 1823 for the first of four consecutive terms. During his last two terms in the House of Representatives, Strong was the chairman of the Committee on Territories. Retiring from politics in 1831, Strong died a bachelor in Chester, Morris County, New Jersey, in 1847. Benjamin W. Dwight, The History of the Descendants of Elder John Strong of Northampton, Massachusetts, 2 vols. (Albany, N.Y., 1871), 2:842; BDUSC (online). 37. Strong’s comments were published in the National Intelligencer on 9 December 1820. Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 45–46. 38. A native of Charleston, Charles Pinckney (1757–1824) was born into one of the wealthiest and most politically prominent families in South Carolina. Educated privately in Charleston,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 82
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT
83
Pinckney read law privately with his father and was admitted to the bar in 1779. That year, he was also elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives. Pinckney fought in the Revolutionary War and was taken prisoner by the British in 1780. In 1784, the South Carolina legislature elected Pinckney a delegate to the Continental Congress. He served in this capacity until 1787, when he was selected as a state delegate to the Constitutional Convention. At the convention, Pinckney, like James Madison, submitted a detailed plan for strengthening the federal government. While some historians maintain that Pinckney’s plan was almost as influential as the Virginia Plan in shaping the Constitution, no copy of it has survived, and the true extent of his contribution to the final document remains uncertain. In 1788, Pinckney married Mary Eleanor Laurens (with whom he had three children), the daughter of Henry Laurens, a wealthy South Carolina merchant, planter, and former president of the Continental Congress. From 1789 to 1790, Pinckney was governor of South Carolina. In 1798, he was elected to the U.S. Senate as a Democratic-Republican, resigning his seat in 1801 to serve as minister to Spain. While in Spain, Pinckney was instrumental in gaining Spanish acquiescence to the French government’s sale of Louisiana to the United States in 1803. In 1805 he returned to South Carolina and was again elected to the General Assembly (1805–06 and 1810–14) and governor (1808–10). He served one last term in Congress from 1819 to 1821. During his final years, Pinckney resumed the practice of law and pursued agricultural endeavors. DAB, 14:611–14; ANB (online); BDUSC (online). 39. Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 48–49 40. Ibid., 50–53. 41. The phrase was first known as the Delphic oracle’s response to a question from the Greek general Polycrates. Polycrates wanted to know the best means of locating the buried treasure of a defeated Persian general, Mardonius, following the Battle of Plataea in 477 B.C.E. The earliestrecorded source of this phrase in Greek is in Euripedes’s Heracleidae (ca. 419 B.C.E.). The earliestknown Latin source of the phrase is found in Pliny the Younger’s letters, which date to the first century C.E. Desiderius Erasmus, The Adages of Erasmus, ed. William Barker (Toronto, 2001), 72–73; Martin H. Manser, Facts on File Dictionary of Proverbs: Meanings and Origins of More Than 1,700 Popular Sayings (New York, 2007), 164. 42. In 1850, the total value of all the slaves in the United States was estimated at $1,280,145,000. This amount, which was calculated by the U.S. Census Bureau, was based on average value of $400 per slave. U.S. Census Bureau, A Century of Population Growth from the First Census of the United States, to the Twelfth Census, 1790–1900 (Washington, D.C., 1909), 146.
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT (1861) New York Independent, 27 June 1861. Another text in Douglass’ Monthly, 4:484 (July 1861).
Shortly after the start of the Civil War, one of the nation’s leading religious journals, the New York Independent, underwent a major reorganization in management. Its new nominal editor was the prominent Congregational minister and reformer Reverend Henry Ward Beecher, but day-to-day operations were controlled by the assistant editor, Theodore Tilton. Douglass had editorialized frequently in his own newspapers on African American emigration, usually as an opponent. In the aftermath of the Harpers
Y7870-Douglass.indb 83
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT
83
Pinckney read law privately with his father and was admitted to the bar in 1779. That year, he was also elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives. Pinckney fought in the Revolutionary War and was taken prisoner by the British in 1780. In 1784, the South Carolina legislature elected Pinckney a delegate to the Continental Congress. He served in this capacity until 1787, when he was selected as a state delegate to the Constitutional Convention. At the convention, Pinckney, like James Madison, submitted a detailed plan for strengthening the federal government. While some historians maintain that Pinckney’s plan was almost as influential as the Virginia Plan in shaping the Constitution, no copy of it has survived, and the true extent of his contribution to the final document remains uncertain. In 1788, Pinckney married Mary Eleanor Laurens (with whom he had three children), the daughter of Henry Laurens, a wealthy South Carolina merchant, planter, and former president of the Continental Congress. From 1789 to 1790, Pinckney was governor of South Carolina. In 1798, he was elected to the U.S. Senate as a Democratic-Republican, resigning his seat in 1801 to serve as minister to Spain. While in Spain, Pinckney was instrumental in gaining Spanish acquiescence to the French government’s sale of Louisiana to the United States in 1803. In 1805 he returned to South Carolina and was again elected to the General Assembly (1805–06 and 1810–14) and governor (1808–10). He served one last term in Congress from 1819 to 1821. During his final years, Pinckney resumed the practice of law and pursued agricultural endeavors. DAB, 14:611–14; ANB (online); BDUSC (online). 39. Yates, Rights of the Colored Men to Suffrage, 48–49 40. Ibid., 50–53. 41. The phrase was first known as the Delphic oracle’s response to a question from the Greek general Polycrates. Polycrates wanted to know the best means of locating the buried treasure of a defeated Persian general, Mardonius, following the Battle of Plataea in 477 B.C.E. The earliestrecorded source of this phrase in Greek is in Euripedes’s Heracleidae (ca. 419 B.C.E.). The earliestknown Latin source of the phrase is found in Pliny the Younger’s letters, which date to the first century C.E. Desiderius Erasmus, The Adages of Erasmus, ed. William Barker (Toronto, 2001), 72–73; Martin H. Manser, Facts on File Dictionary of Proverbs: Meanings and Origins of More Than 1,700 Popular Sayings (New York, 2007), 164. 42. In 1850, the total value of all the slaves in the United States was estimated at $1,280,145,000. This amount, which was calculated by the U.S. Census Bureau, was based on average value of $400 per slave. U.S. Census Bureau, A Century of Population Growth from the First Census of the United States, to the Twelfth Census, 1790–1900 (Washington, D.C., 1909), 146.
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT (1861) New York Independent, 27 June 1861. Another text in Douglass’ Monthly, 4:484 (July 1861).
Shortly after the start of the Civil War, one of the nation’s leading religious journals, the New York Independent, underwent a major reorganization in management. Its new nominal editor was the prominent Congregational minister and reformer Reverend Henry Ward Beecher, but day-to-day operations were controlled by the assistant editor, Theodore Tilton. Douglass had editorialized frequently in his own newspapers on African American emigration, usually as an opponent. In the aftermath of the Harpers
Y7870-Douglass.indb 83
9/1/21 4:16 PM
84
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT
Ferry raid, Douglass wavered in his stance on emigration, printing recruitment advertisements for James Redpath’s Haytian Emigration Bureau that attempted to encourage a selective migration of free blacks to that Caribbean nation. In the spring of 1861, Douglass contemplated visiting Haiti to learn about the conditions for prospective emigrants, but he abruptly abandoned that idea when serious fighting broke out in the Civil War. Tilton worked to recruit Douglass as a regular contributor to the Independent, and this article by Douglass on Haitian emigration marked the first of several contributions to that periodical. Theodore Tilton to Douglass, 30 April 1862, General Correspondence File, reel 1, frames 718–19, FD Papers, DLC; Altina L. Waller, Reverend Beecher and Mrs. Tilton: Sex and Class in Victorian America (Amherst, Mass., 1982), 41–43; Levine, Dislocating Race and Nation, 179–200.
One effect of the heroic attempt to liberate the slaves of Virginia by John Brown and his noble little company of brave men, was a perfect storm of pitiless wrath and fury directed against the free colored people scattered over the slaveholding states. Several of these states, in their delirium of guilt and alarm, with more than Pharaoh1-like tyranny and cruelty, proposed the expulsion of free colored people from their borders.2 This scandalous and shocking measure, supported as usual by the tyrant’s plea—necessity—designed the better to protect and preserve slavery from internal as well as external danger—was, as all know, rigorously put in force in several of the more Southern states. The colored people were sternly compelled at once to choose between a condition of life-long slavery for themselves and for their posterity, and removal from those states. Being men, they preferred the latter; and thus the heart-rending spectacle was presented to the world of thousands of American born people, guilty of no crime but the color given them by their Creator, literally driven from their homes, from the soil watered by their tears, and enriched by their very blood. They were compelled to leave all behind them, and to seek new homes they knew not whither. The continent upon which they had toiled for more than two centuries, seemed to be gradually closing all its iron gates against them, and Whither shall we go? was the plaintive wail that went out from them into the ear of all Christendom. It was in this mournful state of facts, that Geffrard,3 the patriotic and philan-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 84
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT
85
thropic President of Hayti, touched with a noble feeling of sympathy and fraternity, won for himself, and for his country, the grateful applause of humane men throughout the world, by promptly offering to this stricken and outcast people a home and country within his dominions. The buoyant humanity of the Black Republic of the tropics was in startling contrast with the leaden indifference to the fate of these people by our professedly more enlightened and Christianized white Republics of the North. This act of Hayti at once secured for her, as it deserved, the lasting gratitude of the free colored people of the United States; and hence the origin, and rapid growth, and the present magnitude of a grand scheme of colonization, contemplating the removal of not only those who had been driven out of the slave states by the inhuman legislation referred to, but that of the entire free colored population of all the states. It is this last and new phase of Haytian colonization which causes hesitation and doubt, and demands at the hands of the friends of the colored race a little closer scrutiny than seemed to be required at the first. In its inception it was a most generous outburst of humane feeling, creditable alike to the Government and people of that country.4 It was furnishing, under congenial skies, an asylum and a home to a woe-smitten and an outcast people in the dark hour of their extremest need. But now this simple overture of benevolence has hardened into a grand scheme of public policy, and claims the acceptance of the whole colored people and their friends. It has become ethnological, philosophical, political, and commercial. It has its doctrines of races, of climates, of nationalities and destinies,—and offers itself as the grand solution of the destiny of the colored people of America. In this aspect, the Haytian Emigration movement challenges criticism and leaves room to question its wisdom. It is not at all doubted that such men as James Redpath,5 John Brown, 6 Jr., and other white gentlemen associated with them in this Emigration Movement, are sincere and earnest friends of the cause of freedom and of the colored race. They have shown their faith by their works. Nor is it doubted that persons of color, accustomed to the culture of tropical and semi-tropical productions, may much improve their fortunes by emigrating to Hayti on the liberal terms offered by the Haytian Government. Fugitive slaves from the more Southern States, who know all about raising cotton, rice, sugar, and tobacco, would find in Hayti a much more desirable home and country than in Canada, or New York or Massachusetts. It may also be fully admitted that any individual emigration, self-moved, self-sustained, and independent, like that which lands the German, the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 85
9/1/21 4:16 PM
86
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT
Irishman and the Scotchman upon American soil,7 may be equally advantageous in the case of many colored men. Such emigration is simply an individual concern, and neither asks the approval nor incurs the censure of any. Colored men have already done this to advantage in going to California, Australia,8 and elsewhere; and I, for one, am decidedly in favor of this kind of emigration. But very different is the present Emigration Movement. It offers itself as a national movement. It comes to us with a national creed, addresses us with political theories, and with theories of the proper distribution of the different varieties of men over the surface of the globe, and calls upon the man of color, like the old American Colonization Society9—in the name of nationality and duty to get himself out of this land of the white man, and betake himself to a particular latitude intended for him by his Creator. It has its headquarters, its offices, its numerous Secretaries, its traveling agents, its lecturers, and an able public journal and other publications proclaiming its doctrines, and calling upon all colored men to adopt them. Through the columns of its newspaper it tolerates the publication of nothing in the shape of controversy—assumes that the wisdom of emigration cannot be questioned. It has here in Rochester, as it has doubtless elsewhere, led to the sending around a class of colored men speaking in the name of the poor colored people, ever ready to avail themselves of such opportunities, to solicit funds from the benevolent to enable them to get away from the country, thus degrading as paupers those who stay as well as those who go. It has propagated the favorite doctrine of all those who despise and hate the colored man—that the prejudice of the whites is invincible, and that the cause of human freedom and equality is hopeless for the black man in this country. The very moment Haytian Emigration began to theorize, it began to take up the old exploded ideas of prejudice and caste—upon which both the African Civilization Society10 and the African Colonization Society11 are based. It would have the black man proud of his color, and determine his local habitations and his associations in the world by that fact. This attitude of the Haytian Emigration movement compels me to say I am not an emigrationist. While I hold up both hands for Hayti, grateful for her humanity, rejoice in her prosperity, point to her example with pride and hope, and would smite down any hand that would fling a shadow upon the pathway of her glory, I wish to remind those who claim to be the best representatives of her views and feelings that those who made Hayti what she is did not leave her, but remained there and worked out their own salvation.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 86
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT
87
I assume that more than two hundred years have demonstrated the ability of black people to live and flourish in the temperate climate of the United States; that we are now more than four millions in number,12 and that no mode of emigration contemplating our entire removal can possibly succeed; that we are Americans, speaking the same language, adopting the same customs, holding the same general opinions as to religion and government, and shall rest our fate with Americans; that upon the whole our history here has been one of progress and improvement, and in all the likelihoods of the case, will become more so; that the lines of social and political distinction marking unjust and unnatural discriminations against us are gradually being effaced, and that upon the fall of slavery— as fall it must—these discriminations will disappear still more rapidly. I hold that all schemes of wholesale emigration tend to awaken, and keep alive, and confirm the popular prejudices of the whites against us. They serve to kindle hopes of getting us out of the country; and while they thus naturally produce in the whites indifference to our welfare, they distract and destroy in ourselves one very important element of progress, namely, the element of permanent location. A rolling stone gathers no moss.13 No people will much improve a land from which they are momentarily expecting to be excluded, or from which they are to go speedily of their own accord. Permanence, a local habitation, as well as a name, is essential to our progress. I object to these schemes of emigration because they uniformly assume to be true what experience even here in America has shown to be false—that prejudice against color is invincible. I hold that there is no such thing as a natural and unconquerable repugnance between varieties of men. All these artificial and arbitrary barriers give way before interest and enlightenment. “Lands intersected by a narrow frith abhor each other,”14 till they are taught by self-interest or pure enlightenment the folly of such hate. The hope of the world is in human brotherhood; in the union of mankind, not in exclusive nationalities; in bringing the ends of the earth together, not in widening the distance between them; in worldwide co-operation, not in barren and fruitless isolation; and until I give up the belief in the essential identity of human nature and human destiny, and shall adopt the belief that color is more than manhood, that progress is merely a fiction of the brain, that men were created to hate and destroy each other, and not to love, bless and improve each other, I shall continue to hope
Y7870-Douglass.indb 87
9/1/21 4:16 PM
88
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT
“It’s coming yet for a’that,— That man to man, the world all o’er, Shall brothers be” &c.15 1. The term “pharaoh” has had many uses, dating back to the third millennium B.C.E., but it traditionally refers to monarchs who sat on Egypt’s throne. In this document, the reference most likely is to Amenhotep II (1450–24 B.C.E.), the pharaoh described in the book of Exodus. David Noel Freedman et al., eds., The Anchor Bible Dictionary, 6 vols. (New York, 1992), 5:288–89. 2. Southern whites panicked in response to news of John Brown’s attempted slave insurrection at Harpers Ferry. Slave patrols were increased and free blacks were pressured to emigrate. Ira Berlin, Slaves without Masters: The Free Negro in the Antebellum South (New York, 1974), 370–80; Peter Wallenstein, “Incendiaries All: Southern Politics and the Harpers Ferry Raid,” in Paul Finkelman, ed., His Soul Goes Marching On: Responses to John Brown and the Harpers Ferry Raid (Lexington, Va., 1995), 155–56. 3. Nicolas Geffrard (1806–1878), a mulatto, was a general in the Haitian Army when he mounted a coup to overthrow President Faustin Soulouque. Geffrard became president of Haiti in 1858; during his time in office, he brought stability to his country by improving infrastructure and overhauling the educational system. Geffrard supported the emigration of African Americans from the United States to Haiti. Hoping they would work in the Haitian fields, he offered them incentives like land at reasonable prices. Geffrard was ousted in 1867. Leon D. Pamphile, Haitians and African Americans: A Heritage of Tragedy and Hope (Gainesville, Fla., 2001), 50–52, 54, 58; James D. Henderson et al., eds., A Reference Guide to Latin American History (Armonk, N.Y., 2000), 117. 4. Shortly following Harpers Ferry, the Haitian government recruited the abolitionist James Redpath to organize a bureau to encourage American blacks to immigrate to the Caribbean nation. The bureau hired agents, operated its own newspaper, and ultimately sent over two thousand free African Americans as settlers to Haiti. Willis D. Boyd, “James Redpath and American Negro Colonization in Haiti, 1860–1862,” Americas, 12:169–82 (October 1955); Peter Hinks and John McKivigan, eds., Encyclopedia of Antislavery and Abolition, 2 vols. (Westport, Conn., 2007), 2:565–66. 5. Born in Berwick-on-Tweed, Scotland, James Redpath (1833–91) immigrated with his family to the United States around 1850, and he soon found work as a reporter for Horace Greeley’s New York Daily Tribune. In the mid-1850s, he traveled throughout the South, reporting on the institution of slavery and calling for its immediate abolition. By the late 1850s, Redpath had moved to Kansas, where he edited the Doniphan Crusader of Freedom and supported the fight to make the territory a non-slaveholding state. Redpath befriended John Brown in Kansas and, after the latter’s execution, became his first biographer, writing The Public Life of Captain John Brown (Boston, 1860). In 1859 and 1860, Redpath toured Haiti as a reporter and returned to the United States as the official Haitian lobbyist for diplomatic recognition, a status he secured within two years. During the Civil War, he was a front-line correspondent with the Union army commanded by William Tecumseh Sherman. In 1865, when South Carolina was under federal military occupation, Sherman appointed Redpath superintendent of the state’s public schools. Redpath returned to the North, and in 1868, he organized the first professional lecturing bureau, which included Douglass among its clients. During the 1880s, he returned to his earlier career as a journalist-activist by editing newspapers and writing books and pamphlets on behalf of Irish nationalism, woman suffrage, and socialism. Douglass to James Redpath, 10 April 1869, Miscellaneous Manuscripts, Richard J. Daley, University of Illinois at Chicago; McKivigan, Forgotten Firebrand; Charles F. Horner, The Life of James Redpath and the Development of the Modern Lyceum (New York, 1926); Boyd, “Redpath and American Negro Colonization,” 169–82; DAB, 15:443–44. 6. The eldest son of John Brown, John Brown, Jr. (1821–95), was born near Hudson, Ohio. In 1826, he moved with his family to Pennsylvania, where he was educated. Brown assisted his father in
Y7870-Douglass.indb 88
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE HAYTIAN EMIGRATION MOVEMENT
89
farming and tanning ventures until 1849, after which the younger Brown farmed for himself in Ohio and lectured on phrenology. In 1855, he joined the rest of his family in Kansas to fight for the freestate cause. He was arrested and imprisoned for three months in Lecompton, Kansas, after his father killed five proslavery sympathizers in the Pottawatomie Creek Massacre of May 1856. Although he assisted his father in raising funds and volunteers, the younger Brown played no active role in the raid on Harpers Ferry and went into hiding in Ashtabula, Ohio, immediately following his father’s capture. In 1860–61, Brown worked as a traveling agent in Canada, recruiting potential migrants for James Redpath’s Haytian Emigration Bureau. After rheumatism ended his brief services as captain of Company K, Seventh Kansas Volunteer Cavalry Regiment during the Civil War, Brown retired to Ohio to raise grapes. Cleveland Press, 3 May 1895; Ohio Historical Society, Inventory and Calendar of the John Brown, Jr. Papers, 1830–1892 (Columbus, Ohio, 1962), 1–2; Richard J. Hinton, John Brown and His Men (1894; New York, 1968), 567; McKivigan, Forgotten Firebrand, 71, 79; Stephen Oates, To Purge This Land with Blood: A Biography of John Brown, 2d ed. (New York, 1984), 140–45, 160, 173, 316. 7. Nearly two million immigrants from Ireland arrived in the United States from 1820 to 1860. Many were refugees from the potato famine of the 1840s. They arrived economically destitute and provided much of the cheap labor for transportation improvements and industrial development across the North. Approximately one and a half million immigrants arrived in the United States during the same period from the German states. While some were political refugees from the failed revolutions of 1848, most came for economic reasons. German immigrants settled across the nation, most heavily in the emerging midwestern states. While immigrants from Scotland had played a prominent part in the colonial era, settling heavily in the Appalachian region, only about 50,000 more entered the United States from 1820 to 1850. Kerby A. Miller, Emigrants and Exiles: Ireland and the Irish Exodus to North America (New York, 1988), 131–36; LaVern J. Rippley, The German Americans (Boston, 1976), 120–28; Raymond L. Cohn, Mass Migration under Sail: European Immigration to the Antebellum United States (New York, 2009), 23–40. 8. The discovery of gold in California in 1849 and in Australia in 1851 sparked a “rush” of settlers from the eastern United States to those then-remote territories, and a very diverse population of immigrants from around the world flocked to both gold strikes. As many as 300,000 arrived in California from 1849 to 1855, of whom an estimated 4,000 were of African descent, not all from the United States. Precise numbers of African American immigrants to the Australian gold fields cannot be determined, but estimates do not rise above 100. One of them, John Joseph of Baltimore, Maryland, became famous for his leading role in a miners’ rebellion in 1854. Herbert W. Brands, The Age of Gold: The California Gold Rush and the New American Dream (New York, 2003), 103–121; Jeffrey Atkinson and David Andrew Roberts, “ ‘Men of Colour’: John Joseph and the Eureka Treason Trials,” Journal of Australian Colonial History, 10:75–98 (2008). 9. Founded in 1816, the American Colonization Society settled free black volunteer emigrants and emancipated slaves in its colony of Liberia on Africa’s west coast. Most free black leaders and later the abolitionists condemned the racist premises behind the colonization effort. Although endorsed by many prominent whites, including ministers and politicians, the society managed to transport only a few thousand to Africa before the Civil War. In the early 1850s, the longtime colonization advocate Henry Clay led an effort to revive support for the movement, which resulted in a slight increase in donations and in the number of emigrants in that decade. Philip J. Staudenraus, “The History of the American Colonization Society” (Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin, 1958); EAA, 1:33–35. 10. In the late 1850s, Henry Highland Garnet reversed his initial opposition to colonization by founding the African Civilization Society, which supported voluntary immigration to Africa and Haiti. Never insisting on the wholesale exodus of blacks from America, Garnet argued that black people should move to where they might improve their economic opportunities. Moreover, he hoped to use emigration as a means of supporting American abolition by encouraging emigrants to grow cotton, in direct competition with Southern slaveholders, thereby weakening the slaveholders’ influence
Y7870-Douglass.indb 89
9/1/21 4:16 PM
90
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
on the American economy and political life. Joel Schor, Henry Highland Garnet: A Voice of Black Radicalism in the Nineteenth Century (Westport, Conn., 1977), 91, 103; Lysle E. Meyer, “T. J. Bowen and Central Africa: A Nineteenth-Century Missionary Delusion,” International Journal of African Historical Studies, 15:247–60 (1982); Vincent Bakpetu Thompson, “Leadership in the African Diaspora in the Americas Prior to 1860,” Journal of Black Studies, 24:63–64 (September 1993). 11. Douglass probably meant to refer to the American Colonization Society. 12. The U.S. Census of 1860 actually enumerated a total of 4,441,830 slaves and free blacks. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population of the United States in 1860, 594–95. 13. Publius Syrus, The Moral Sayings of Publius Syrus, a Roman Slave, trans. D[arius] Lyman (New York, 1862), 48. 14. William Cowper, “The Time Piece,” The Poems of William Cowper, ed. J. C. Bailey (London, 1905), 267, lines 16–17. 15. Douglass paraphrases from the last stanza of “For A’ That and A’ That” by Robert Burns (1759–96). Robert Burns, Poems and Songs, ed. James Kinsley (London, 1969), 482; Robert Burns, Songs by Robert Burns (London, 1907), 7, 15, 90–92.
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN (1862) New York Independent, 20 November 1862. Other texts in San Francisco Pacific Appeal, 27 December 1862.
The Confederate States of America realized early the importance of foreign diplomatic recognition in their efforts to be seen as a legitimate nation. Such recognition would have pressured Lincoln and the Union to accept their secession peacefully. Failing that, foreign recognition might have led to military support for the Confederacy, specifically in regard to Union blockades that threatened international commerce between the South and Europe. Diplomats representing the Confederacy were dispatched to Europe as early as March 1861 and would labor throughout the war to turn both governments and public opinion to their support. In the New York Independent, a popular religious journal circulated from 1848 to 1928, Douglass wrote the following appeal to Great Britain in response to the Confederate commissioners and their attempts to gain political recognition. Following its publication, Douglass wrote to the Independent’s editor, Theodore Tilton, that “the ‘Appeal’ was written at the earnest request of a friend in England—and will very likely find its way into many of the Provincial journals in that country.” The appeal was widely republished in British newspapers, including the Daily News; excerpted in the Daily Chronicle, Newcastle Guardian, and the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 90
9/1/21 4:16 PM
90
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
on the American economy and political life. Joel Schor, Henry Highland Garnet: A Voice of Black Radicalism in the Nineteenth Century (Westport, Conn., 1977), 91, 103; Lysle E. Meyer, “T. J. Bowen and Central Africa: A Nineteenth-Century Missionary Delusion,” International Journal of African Historical Studies, 15:247–60 (1982); Vincent Bakpetu Thompson, “Leadership in the African Diaspora in the Americas Prior to 1860,” Journal of Black Studies, 24:63–64 (September 1993). 11. Douglass probably meant to refer to the American Colonization Society. 12. The U.S. Census of 1860 actually enumerated a total of 4,441,830 slaves and free blacks. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population of the United States in 1860, 594–95. 13. Publius Syrus, The Moral Sayings of Publius Syrus, a Roman Slave, trans. D[arius] Lyman (New York, 1862), 48. 14. William Cowper, “The Time Piece,” The Poems of William Cowper, ed. J. C. Bailey (London, 1905), 267, lines 16–17. 15. Douglass paraphrases from the last stanza of “For A’ That and A’ That” by Robert Burns (1759–96). Robert Burns, Poems and Songs, ed. James Kinsley (London, 1969), 482; Robert Burns, Songs by Robert Burns (London, 1907), 7, 15, 90–92.
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN (1862) New York Independent, 20 November 1862. Other texts in San Francisco Pacific Appeal, 27 December 1862.
The Confederate States of America realized early the importance of foreign diplomatic recognition in their efforts to be seen as a legitimate nation. Such recognition would have pressured Lincoln and the Union to accept their secession peacefully. Failing that, foreign recognition might have led to military support for the Confederacy, specifically in regard to Union blockades that threatened international commerce between the South and Europe. Diplomats representing the Confederacy were dispatched to Europe as early as March 1861 and would labor throughout the war to turn both governments and public opinion to their support. In the New York Independent, a popular religious journal circulated from 1848 to 1928, Douglass wrote the following appeal to Great Britain in response to the Confederate commissioners and their attempts to gain political recognition. Following its publication, Douglass wrote to the Independent’s editor, Theodore Tilton, that “the ‘Appeal’ was written at the earnest request of a friend in England—and will very likely find its way into many of the Provincial journals in that country.” The appeal was widely republished in British newspapers, including the Daily News; excerpted in the Daily Chronicle, Newcastle Guardian, and the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 90
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
91
Leeds Mercury; and may have been republished in the lost December 1862 issue of Douglass’ Monthly. Henry Richardson, an English abolitionist and longtime correspondent of Douglass’s, wrote, “I quite think there is a turn of the tide observable, and that the Northern states are beginning to be looked upon with more favour. Your appeal has doubtless helped on this change.” In the early 1860s, Tilton tried to recruit Douglass as a regular contributor to the Independent, and the two became friends. As a reporter for the New York Observer, Tilton had made the acquaintance of the Reverends Henry Ward Beecher and George B. Cheever, who were instrumental in his becoming the managing editor of the Independent in 1856. Tilton succeeded Beecher as the editor of the Independent in 1862, continuing in that position until 1871. Douglass to Theodore Tilton, 22 November 1862, Frederick Douglass Papers, NRU; Henry Richardson to Douglass, 4 December 1862, General Correspondence File, reel 1, frames 756–58, FD Papers, DLC; Charles M. Hubbard, The Burden of Confederate Diplomacy (Knoxville, Tenn., 1998), 29, 55, 61; Frank Lawrence Owsley, King Cotton Diplomacy: Foreign Relations of the Confederate States of America (Chicago, Ill., 1966), 51; ACAB, 6:120; DAB, 2:129–35.
Hear this, my humble appeal; and grant this, my most earnest request. I know your power; I know your justice; and, better still, I know your mercy; and with the more confidence, I, in my imperfect speech, venture to appeal to you. Your benevolent sons and daughters, at great sacrifice of time, of labor, and treasure, more than a quarter of a century ago, under the inspiration of enlightened Christianity, removed the yoke of cruel bondage from the bowed down necks of eight hundred thousand of my race, in your West India Islands;1 and later, a few of them, in their generosity, unasked, with silver and gold, ransomed me from him who claimed me as his slave, in the United States, and bade me speak in the cause of the dumb millions of my countrymen still in slavery.2 I am now fulfilling my appointed mission in making on the slaves’ behalf this appeal to you. I am grateful for your benevolence, jealous for your honor, but chiefly now I am concerned, lest, in the present tremendous crisis of American affairs, you should be led to adopt a policy which may defeat the now
Y7870-Douglass.indb 91
9/1/21 4:16 PM
92
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
proposed emancipation of my people, and forge new fetters of slavery for unborn millions of their posterity. You are now more than ever urged, both from within and from without your borders, to recognize the independence of the so-called Confederate States of America.3 I beseech and implore you, resist this urgency. You have nobly resisted it thus long. You can, and I ardently hope you will, resist it still longer. The proclamation of emancipation by President Lincoln will become operative on the first day of January, 1863.4 The hopes of millions, long trodden down, now rise with every advancing hour. Oh! I pray you, by all your highest and holiest memories, blast not the budding hopes of these millions by lending your countenance and extending your potent and honored hand to the blood-stained fingers of the impious slaveholding Confederate States of America. For the honor of the British name, which has hitherto carried only light and hope to the slave, and rebuke and dismay to the slaveholder, do not in this great emergency be persuaded to abandon and contradict that policy of justice and mercy to the negro which has made your character revered, and your name illustrious, throughout the civilized world. Your enemies even have been compelled to respect the sincerity of your philanthropy. Would you retain this respect, welcome not those brazen human fleshmongers, those brokers in the bodies and souls of men, who have dared to knock at your doors for admission into the family of nations. Their pretended government is but a foul, haggard, and blighting conspiracy against the sacred rights of mankind, and does not deserve the name of government. Its foundation is laid in the impudent and heaveninsulting dogma that man may rightfully hold property in man, and flog him to toil like a beast of burden. Have no fellowship, I pray you, with these merciless men-stealers; but rather with whips of scorpions5 scourge them beyond the beneficent range of national brotherhood. You long ago fixed the burning brand of your reprobation upon the guilty brow of the whole slave system. Your philanthropy, religion, and law—your noblest sons, living and dead—have taught the world to loathe and abhor slavery as the vilest of modern abominations. You have sacrificed millions of pounds and thousands of lives to arrest and put an end to the piratical slave-traffic on the coast of Africa;6 and will you now, when the light of your best teachings is finding its way to the darkest corners of the earth, and men are beginning to adopt and practically carry out your benevolent ideas,—will you now, in such a time, utterly dishonor your high example and your long cherished principles? Can you, at the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 92
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
93
bidding of importunity of those negro-driving lords of the lash, Mason7 and Morehead,8 whose wealth is composed of the wages of laborers which they have kept back by fraud and force, take upon you and your children the dreadful responsibility of arresting the arm now outstretched to break the chains of the American slave? Ah! but I know the plea. The North as well as the South has wronged the negro. But must you, because the loyal states have been guilty of complicity with slavery, espouse the cause of these who are still more guilty? Must you, while you reprobate the guilty agent, embrace in the arms of your friendship the still more guilty principal? Will you lash the loyal states for their want of genuine detestation of slavery, and yet in open day form an alliance with a band of conspirators and thieves who have undertaken to destroy the loyal Government of this country, perpetual and universal on this continent? Will you stand in the way of a righteous measure, because supported and urged by wrong and selfish motives? Will you prevent the slave from getting his due, because a sense of necessity and not a sense of moral obligation impels the payment? Oh! again, Great Britain, let me implore you, by all things high and sacred, fling away all false and selfish reasoning, and bear aloft higher than ever that standard of justice and humanity which has justly exalted you to the head of civilized nations. That the loyal states have grieviously wronged the black man—slave and free—is, alas! too true. That these states, even now, for the sake of an empty peace—there can be none other while slavery continues—might be induced to receive the rebels, slavery and all, into the Union, cannot well be disproved. And that their immeasurable blood-guiltiness is drawing down upon them the fierce judgments they now suffer, is a most solemn and instructive truth, for your edification as well as ours. There is no more exemption for nations than for individuals from the just retribution due to flagrant and persistent transgression. For the time being, America is the blazing illustration of this solemn truth. But yesterday she sat as a queen among the nations of the earth, knowing no sorrow and fearing none. She killed some of her prophets, and stoned those who were sent unto her, and who pointed to her great prosperity as a proof of her honesty. But now the evil day is upon her, and she is making one grand effort, through blood and tears, through fire and death, to return to the ways of righteousness and peace. In the name of the slave—whose fate for weal or for woe trembles in the balance—and for the sake of a war-smitten country, now struggling to save itself by doing right, I entreat you, beware what you do concerning us!
Y7870-Douglass.indb 93
9/1/21 4:16 PM
94
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
Can it be doubted that the hope so persistently kept alive by such organs of British public opinion as The London Times,9 and by such eminent statesmen as Mr. Gladstone,10 that recognition of the independence of the Confederate States is only a questions of time,—that this hope is one grand source of the strength of our slaveholding rebellion? Your early concession of belligerent rights to the rebels—the adoption of neutrality as between the loyal and the rebel governments11—the oft-repeated assertion in high places that the rebels can never be subdued—the ill-concealed exultation sometimes witnessed over disasters to our arms—the prompt action of your Government in the Trent affair, now happily settled by a ready and friendly compliance with your demand, although coupled with irritating menace—with much else which it can do no good and might do harm to mention here, have evidently served the bad purpose of keeping life and spirit in this horrible rebellion. I have no hesitation in saying that if you, Great Britain, had, at the outset of this terrible war, sternly frowned upon the conspirators, and had given your earnest and unanimous sympathy and moral support to the loyal cause, to-day might have seen America enjoying peace and security, and you would not have been the sufferer in all your commercial and manufacturing interests you now are. The misfortune is that your rebukes of the North have been construed into sympathy and approval at the South. Your good opinion of the slaveholders has been taken as a renunciation of your former abhorrence of slavery; and you have thus kept these confederate slave-masters in countenance from the beginning. But I will not deal in language of recrimination. There has been far too much of this already on both sides. Nor will I argue the question of difference between us. I can only appeal and entreat. Nevertheless, I will say that the issue between the North and the South is seldom fairly stated in Great Britain by those who take the Southern side. The Federal Government is held to be fighting utterly apart from any connection with the welfare of the four million slaves of the South. Theoretically the statement has a show of truth, but practically it is entirely false. This sophistry found its way where little expected, in the speech of Mr. Gladstone at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, when he argued that the interests of the negro were likely to be better cared for under the Southern Confederacy than in the old Union.12 An intelligent answer to the inquiry, Why did the South rebel against the Federal Government? will exhibit the unsoundness of that pretense. The whole history of the rebellion will show that the slaveholding rebels revolted, not because of any violation of the United States Constitution,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 94
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
95
or of any proposed violation of it, but from pure and simple opposition to the Constitution itself, and because, in their judgment, that Constitution does not sufficiently guard and protect slavery. The first serious objection to the Constitution dates back to 1789, and was raised in the Virginia Convention met to ratify that Constitution.13 Patrick Henry,14 one of the leaders of the struggle for severing the colonies from the British crown, declared himself against the Constitution, on the ground, as he said, that it gave power to the Federal Government to abolish slavery in all states, and that, with a strong anti-slavery sentiment, that power would surely be exercised. The answer to this objection by Mr. Madison15 is significant of the state of public opinion concerning slavery at that time, and shows that the objection of Mr. Henry could not be met by positive refutation; for Mr. Madison simply said, he hoped that no gentleman would vote against the Constitution upon an objection so discreditable to Virginia. The Constitution was too anti-slavery for Mr. Henry. The anti slavery sentiment which he anticipated three-quarters of a century ago, asserted itself in the election of Mr. Lincoln. Near the close of the late inglorious administration, Mr. Buchanan proposed several amendments to the Constitution, giving full and explicit guarantees for the better protection of slavery.16 The proposition as embodied by him—happily for the interests of freedom and humanity— found but little favor North or South; the former evidently opposed to the measure in itself; and the latter, believing it impossible to carry it, proceeded with the rebellion already determined upon. In this simple, brief statement may be clearly discerned the real cause of the rebellion. Wanting a slave-holding constitution, from which all hope of emancipation should be excluded, the Southern states have undertaken to make one, and to establish it upon the ruins of the old one, under which slavery could be discouraged, crippled, and abolished. The war, therefore, to maintain the old against the new Constitution is essentially an anti-slavery war, and ought to command the ardent sympathy and support of good men in all countries. What though our timid Administration at Washington, shrinking from the logical result of their own natural position as the defenders of an anti-slavery constitution against a radical slave-holding one, did at the first refuse to admit the real character of the war, and vainly attempt to conciliate by walking backward and casting a mantle over the revolting origin of the rebellion? What though they instructed their foreign agents to conceal the moral deformity of the rebels? You could not fail to know that
Y7870-Douglass.indb 95
9/1/21 4:16 PM
96
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
the primal causes of this war rested in the selfishness and wickedness of slavery, and a determination on the part of the slaveholders to make their stupendous crime and curse all-controlling and perpetual in America. But I will not weary you by statement or argument. The case is plain. The North is fighting on the side of liberty and civilization, and the South on the side of slavery and barbarism. You are suffering in your commerce and in your manufactures. Industry languishes, and the children of your poor cry for bread.17 God pity them! The calamity is great. But would any interference with us bring relief to those sufferers? You have shared with the American slaveholders the unhallowed gains of the blood-stained products of slave-labor, preferring Carolina slave to India free, making Manchester a party to the slave plantation, and largely in sympathy with the slaveholding spirit of America. What else in the world could have come of all this but participation with us in the common retribution? Must the world stand still, humanity make no progress, and slavery remain for ever, lest your cotton-mills should stop and your poor cry for bread? You are unable to obtain your usual supply of American cotton. Would this be made better by plunging yourselves into the hardships, expenses, horrors, and perils of a war, which would in any event shed no luster on your arms, and only feed the fires of national hate for a century to come—and just in this your time of need greatly diminish your American supply of corn? Can any thinking man doubt for one moment that intervention would be an aggravation rather than a mitigation of the evils under which your laborers mourn? It is insisted that you ought, from considerations of humanity towards both sections, intervene, and put an end to the fratricidal strife. Ah! but there’s the rub! Could you put an end to it? Never did wilder delusions beset a human brain. I say it in no menacing spirit, the United States, though wounded and bleeding, is yet powerful. Heavy as have been her losses, in life and treasure, her weaknesses from these causes offer no temptation to foreign assault, even supposing you could be influenced by such motives. But I have no taste for this view of the subject, and will not dwell upon it. The lesson of our civil war to you is the cultivation of cotton by free labor. It tells you that you should base your industry and prosperity on the natural foundations of justice and liberty. These are permanent. All else, transient—hay, wood, and stubble. A house built upon the sand can as well resist the winds and floods,18 as slavery can resist enlightenment and progress. The moral laws of the universe must be suspended, or slavery will go down. Look, therefore, to India, where your laws have carried
Y7870-Douglass.indb 96
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
97
liberty. Look to the West Indies, where your philanthropy has planted Christianity.19 Your resources are great and ample. You have the islands to the west of you, India to the east of you, and Africa with her perennial cotton-plant to the south of you.20 Intervene there, not with swords and guns and other warlike implements, but by means of peaceful industry. Convert a calamity into prosperity, a curse into a blessing. I fully believe in the general rectitude of the British heart. The poorest of all the sufferers in Lancashire21 would hardly be willing to purchase even life itself by replunging a liberated slave into hopeless slavery. Much less would they do so were another door open for relief. Abraham might have slain his son but for the appearance of a more appropriate sacrifice22—and you have a far better alternative than war with us. I will not weary you. The case is before you. No excuses, however plausible—no distances of time, however, remote—no line of conduct hereafter pursued, however excellent, will erase the deep stain upon your honor and truth, if, at this hour of dreadful trial, you interpose in a manner to defeat or embarrass the emancipation of the slaves of America. If at any time you could have honorably intervened in American affairs, it was when the Federal Government was vainly striving to put down the rebellion without hurting slavery—when our army and generals wore the brass collars of slave dogs, and hunted negroes for their rebel masters.23 That gloomy and disgusting period ended on the 22d Sept, 1862[.] From that day our war has been invested with a sanctity which will smite as with death even the mailed hand of Britain, if outstretched to arrest it. Let the conflict go on! There is no doubt of the final result, and though the war is a dreadful scourge, it will make justice, liberty, and humanity permanently possible in this country. 1. Under direction of Parliament, British colonies in the West Indies became, on 1 August 1834, the first to emancipate their slaves, freeing nearly 800,000. But this quasi emancipation came with stipulations: those slaves six years of age and under were freed, yet the rest remained “apprentices” for six years. In August 1838, the apprenticeship clause of the Emancipation Act of 1834 was eliminated two years earlier than planned, and an estimated 750,000 slaves were freed throughout the British Empire. David Brion Davis, Inhuman Bondage: The Rise and Fall of Slavery in the New World (New York, 2006), 238; EAAH, 1:244. 2. In August 1846, Anna Richardson wrote Hugh Auld, asking him whether Douglass’s freedom had a price. Auld replied in October that he would manumit Douglass for £150 sterling. With her sister-in-law, Ellen Richardson, Anna took steps to raise the purchase money and made arrangements with American abolitionists, particularly Ellis Gray Loring of Boston, to handle the details of the negotiation. On 24 November 1846, Walter Lowrie of New York City, whom Loring had apparently deputed to carry on the negotiations, notified Hugh Auld that the £150 had arrived in New York and directed him to produce proof of legal ownership of Douglass. At about this time, Lowrie
Y7870-Douglass.indb 97
9/1/21 4:16 PM
98
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
also engaged the services of J. Meredith, a prominent Baltimore attorney, to act as an intermediary and ensure that the papers were in order. Less than a week later, Thomas Auld filed a bill of sale in Talbot County, signifying the transfer of Douglass to Hugh Auld; on 5 December 1846, Hugh Auld filed Douglass’s manumission papers in Baltimore County. Exactly one week afterward, the transaction was consummated, and Hugh Auld, via Meredith, gave Lowrie a copy of the bill of sale from Thomas Auld, a deed of manumission for Douglass, and a receipt showing he had received $711.66 for Douglass’s freedom. All these papers were placed in Douglass’s hands shortly thereafter. Douglass to the editor, Belfast Protestant Journal, in Lib., 28 August 1846; Walter Lowrie to Ellis Gray Loring, 15 December 1846, General Correspondence File, reel 1, frame 644, FD Papers, DLC; Talbot County Records, V. 60, 35–36, 30 November 1846, Talbot County, Maryland, Courthouse; Deed of Manumission for “Frederick Bailey, otherwise called Frederick Douglass,” 12 December 1846, Hugh Auld’s Receipt of Payment, 12 December 1846, reel 1, frames 637–43, FD Papers, DLC; NASS, 11 November 1847; NS, 3 December 1847; Glasgow Christian News, 23 December 1847. 3. The Confederate States of America’s first diplomatic commission, consisting of William Lowndes Yancey, Ambrose Dudley Mann, and Pierre A. Rost, failed to convince the major European powers to diplomatically recognize the Confederacy, with both Great Britain and France officially proclaiming neutrality. Realizing that its first envoys were failing in Europe, the Confederacy dispatched James Murray Mason, its chief diplomat to Great Britain, and John Slidell, diplomat to France, aboard the British mail packet Trent. The Union Navy intercepted that ship and forcibly removed the Confederate commissioners, leading to the Trent affair. Several weeks of tension between the United States and Britain followed, and in an effort to avoid war with Great Britain over neutrality rights, President Lincoln released Mason and Slidell, who continued on to Great Britain and France but ultimately failed to obtain political recognition. Hubbard, Burden of Confederate Diplomacy, 29, 55, 61; Owsley, King Cotton Diplomacy, 51. 4. Issued on 1 January 1863 by President Lincoln, the Emancipation Proclamation stated that slaves within areas under Confederate control were freed. Because these areas did not take commands from Lincoln, the proclamation did not immediately emancipate any slaves. Rather, the proclamation acted as a tool of war by altering the Union’s goals from reunion only to include the abolition of slavery, ultimately leading to the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment. EAAH, 1:468. 5. The “whips of scorpions” is in reference to a 1610 poem by Giles Fletcher entitled “Christ’s Triumph over Death,” which is the third of four cantos of the long poem Christ’s Victory and Triumph, in Heaven, in Earth, over and after Death. Stanza 42 describes those souls who go to heaven or hell, the latter “fall into the graue / Where whippes of scorpions, with the stinging scourges, / Feed on the howling ghosts, and firie surges.” Giles Fletcher, “Christ’s Triumph over Death,” Complete Poems of Giles Fletcher, ed. Alexander B. Grosart (London, 1876), 209. 6. From 1807 to 1867, Britain spent an enormous amount of money and naval resources on efforts to end the slave trade on the Atlantic coast of Africa, on average expending 2 percent of the country’s annual income. The Royal Navy, referred to as West Africa Squadrons, patrolled the coast to seize ships attempting to export slaves. It is estimated that Britain spent approximately £12,395 million on suppressing the slave trade—an amount equal to the profits generated by the trade before its 1807 ban. David Eltis, Economic Growth and the Ending of the Transatlantic Slave Trade (New York, 1987), 92–97; Chaim D. Kaufmann and Robert A. Pape, “Explaining Costly International Moral Action: Britain’s Sixty-Year Campaign Against the Atlantic Slave Trade,” International Organization, 53:636 (Autumn 1999). 7. James Murray Mason (1798–1871), grandson of the revolutionary patriot George Mason, served in the Virginia House of Delegates, the state constitutional convention of 1829, and the U.S. House of Representatives (1837–39). In 1847 he was elected to the U.S. Senate, where he remained until Virginia seceded. Mason became a close associate of John C. Calhoun and one of the most articulate and effective defenders of Southern rights. On 3 January 1850, he “gave notice of his intention . . . to introduce a bill to provide for the more effective execution” of the Constitution’s Fugitive
Y7870-Douglass.indb 98
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
99
Slave Clause, an intention that was carried out the following day. After months of debate, Mason’s much-amended bill passed in the Senate on 24 August 1851 and in the House of Representatives on 12 September 1851. Mason supported secession in 1860, and he served briefly in the Confederate Congress before being appointed commissioner to England. On 8 November 1861, while traveling on the British steamer Trent, Mason and John Slidell, the Confederacy’s diplomatic representative to France, were captured by Captain Charles Wilkes of the U.S. Navy and sent to Fort Warren in Boston Harbor. This affair so strained relations between the United States and Great Britain that many feared war would break out. On his release in January 1862, Mason proceeded to England, but his efforts to gain British recognition of the Confederacy and intervention on its behalf were unsuccessful. At the close of the war, he went to Canada, where he stayed until 1868. Emory Thomas, The Confederate Nation (New York, 1979), 173–79; Campbell, Slave Catchers, 15–23; Ezra J. Warner and W. Buck Yearns, Biographical Register of the Confederate Congress (Baton Rouge, 1975), 169–70; NCAB, 2:93; DAB, 12:364–65. 8. Douglass probably refers to Charles Slaughter Morehead (1802–68), the former proConfederate governor of Kentucky, who was then touring Europe. Born near Bardstown, Kentucky, he graduated from Transylvania University and practiced law. Morehead entered politics as a Whig and served in both the Kentucky legislature and the U.S. House of Representatives (1847–51). As the candidate of the American, or “Know-Nothing,” party, Morehead was Kentucky’s governor from 1855 to 1859. He worked for sectional compromise in the secession crisis, but Morehead’s strident criticism of Lincoln led to his arrest and imprisonment at Fort Warren. Released in January 1862, he fled to Canada and then England, where he delivered speeches on behalf of the Confederate cause. Thomas E. Sebrell II, Persuading John Bull: Union and Confederate Propaganda in Britain, 1860– 65 (Lexington, Ky., 2014), 182; R. J. M. Blackett, Divided Hearts: Britain and the American Civil War (Baton Rouge, La., 2000), 64. 9. While sympathetic to the cause of Southern independence, the London Times published alternating opinions on recognition of the Confederacy by the British government and carried out an open debate via special correspondence, letters to the editor, and editorials. The 23 October 1862 issue featured a letter signed “your obedient servant, S.” It discussed the legality of recognizing nationstates, and the reasons for doing so, and concluded, “Let anyone apply these principles to the demand for recognition now made by the Southern Confederacy, and judge for himself with what justice he can refuse it.” London Times, 23 October 1862; Blackett, Divided Hearts, 75, 94. 10. William Ewart Gladstone (1809–98), British prime minister (1868–74, 1880–85, 1886, 1892–94), was the personification of Victorian liberalism. The fourth son of a Liverpool merchant, he was educated at Oxford University. Intensely religious in his early years, Gladstone was elected to Parliament as a Conservative in 1832. In 1859, Gladstone quit the Conservative party and joined Lord Palmerston’s Liberal ministry. In October 1862, Gladstone gave a speech at Newcastle in which he claimed that the Confederacy had “made a nation,” perhaps in an attempt to use his political power to sway the cabinet to officially recognize the Confederacy. As chancellor of the exchequer, a position he held in four terms, Gladstone set out to complete a free-trade program and to reduce taxes and public expenditures. Gladstone placed as much emphasis on the moral basis of politics as he did on the material basis. His drive for the abolition of church rates endeared him to the Nonconformists and helped transform the Liberal party into a powerful political force. Gladstone’s first term as prime minister (1868–74) featured significant reforms of the army, civil service, local government, and courts of law. In foreign affairs, Gladstone was committed to working for world peace and mutual understanding. In an age of resurgent British imperialism, however, Gladstone’s pacifistic outlook toward foreign affairs made him easy fodder for critics. Gladstone retired after Benjamin Disraeli’s Conservative government came to power in 1874, but in 1879 he returned to the political stump to protest Disraeli’s foreign policy. Gladstone’s later ministries of 1880–85, 1886, and 1892–94 were less productive than his first. The Liberal party, distracted by the Irish problem, became less responsive to the changing interests of the working classes, who gave economic and social improvements
Y7870-Douglass.indb 99
9/1/21 4:16 PM
100
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
priority over constitutional and religious questions. John Cannon, ed., The Oxford Companion to British History (New York, 1997), 415–17; Juliet Gardiner and Neil Wenborn, eds., The Columbia Companion to British History (New York, 1997), 340–41; H. C. G. Matthew, Gladstone, 1809–1874 (Oxford, 1986), 133–34, 186; The Dictionary of National Biography, 22 vols. (London, 1921–22), 22:705–54. 11. Following the Union’s blockading of Confederate ports in April 1861, Britain deemed the Confederacy belligerent and declared neutrality the following month. This proclamation recognized a state of war between the North and South, granting the Confederacy wartime belligerent rights. These rights allowed it to openly exchange goods and money with neutral foreign territories in the interest of its war effort. Because of Britain’s neutrality and the belligerent status it granted to the Confederacy, the Union feared the Confederate States were close to gaining diplomatic recognition as a sovereign state. Owsley, King Cotton Diplomacy, 59–61. 12. Gladstone gave a speech at Newcastle upon Tyne on 7 October 1862 in which he proclaimed: “I can understand those who say—and I confess it to be my own opinion—that it is greatly for the general interest of the negro race that they should have to do with their own masters alone, and not, as has hitherto been the case, with their masters backed by the whole power of the Federal Government of the United States. Pray observe that that has been the state of things subsisting heretofore, and which some persons, I think mistakenly, have thought it desirable, in the interest of the negro, to maintain. The laws by which the slaves have been governed have been laws not made by the Federal Government, but by the owners of slaves themselves, while for the enforcement of these laws the slaveowners have, under the Constitution of the United States, had a right to call in aid the whole power of the American Union. I can, therefore, very well understand the arguments of those who think that it is not particularly to be desired in the interests of the negro race, that the American Union should be reconstituted.” London Times, 9 October 1862. 13. The Virginia Federal Convention to ratify the U.S. Constitution began on 4 June 1788 in Richmond at the Richmond Theatre. Among the 168 delegates present, prominent members included the Federalists Edmund Pendleton, James Madison, George Nicholas, and John Marshall supporting ratification; the Anti-Federalists George Mason, Richard Henry Lee, James Monroe, and Patrick Henry opposing; and Judge Edmund Pendleton serving as the convention’s president. The convention ratified the Constitution by a vote of 89 to 79 on June 25. John P. Kaminski, ed., A Necessary Evil? Slavery and the Debate over the Constitution (Madison, Wisc., 1995), 185–96. 14. Patrick Henry (1736–99), a Virginia patriot, lawyer, and Revolutionary statesman, attended the First Continental Congress at Philadelphia and was governor of Virginia from 1776 to 1779. Henry opposed ratification of the U.S. Constitution because he believed that it took too much power from the states and granted too much to the federal government. Claiming, “As much as I deplore slavery, I see that prudence forbids its abolition,” Henry employed several arguments in the debate that questioned the government’s role in the slave trade. In particular, Henry believed that under the proposed Constitution, Congress could and would eventually abolish slavery altogether, possibly through a means such as army conscription. Bernard Bailyn et al., eds., The Debate on the Constitution: Federalist and Antifederalist Speeches, Articles, and Letters during the Struggle over Ratification; Part Two: January to August 1788 (New York, 1993), 673–92; William Wirt, The Life and Character of Patrick Henry, rev. ed. (New York, 1832); DAB, 7:554–59. 15. James Madison (1751–1836) of Virginia, known as the “Father of the Constitution,” was the fourth president of the United States. Madison argued that any attempt on the part of Congress to emancipate slaves would be “an usurpation of power” not expressly bestowed by the document. He also claimed that allowing the international slave trade to continue for twenty years—to which Henry and the other Anti-Federalists were opposed, since large numbers of imported slaves lowered the value of those already in possession—had been the only way to convince states in the South to ratify. He further contended that allowing the trade to continue temporarily under the Constitution was far better than allowing it to continue indefinitely under the Articles of Confederation. Moreover, he pointed out that the Constitution offered a stronger protection of slavery than that which existed
Y7870-Douglass.indb 100
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE SLAVE’S APPEAL TO GREAT BRITAIN
101
through article 4, section 2, clause 3, known as the Fugitive Slave Clause. Kaminski, Slavery and the Constitution, 160; ANB (online). 16. Following the election of Abraham Lincoln, Southern states began withdrawing from the Union. President James Buchanan, in an attempt to mollify the Southern states, endorsed a proposed thirteenth amendment, sponsored by Representative Thomas Corwin of Ohio. Popularly known as the “Corwin Amendment,” it stated, “No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.” The amendment passed the House and was delivered to the Senate two days before Lincoln’s inauguration, where it was successfully blocked. Alexander Tsesis, The Thirteenth Amendment and American Freedom: A Legal History (New York, 2004), 2. 17. The United States was highly integrated into the world commercial economy of the midnineteenth century; therefore, the Civil War produced trade disruptions that reverberated throughout the globe. Great Britain was particularly affected, since the United States was its primary trading partner. Central to the British economy was the mass production of finished goods, especially cotton textiles. This state of affairs made Britain extremely vulnerable when war broke out in 1861, since more than 70 percent of Britain’s cotton supply came from Southern states and over 90 percent of its finished goods exported to the United States were consumed in Northern states. Whether Britain sided with one of the American belligerents or remained neutral, as it actually did, segments of its economy were destined to suffer. Before the war’s first shot was fired, the British were rocked by the passage of the Morrill Tariff by an overwhelmingly Northern Republican Congress on 2 March 1861—an act made possible only by the absence of Democratic congressmen from seceded Southern states. This tariff raised all import duties to an average of 27 percent, but also contained protective duties approaching 50 percent on select goods such as pig iron and cutlery. As a result, British exports to the American North declined by 50 percent during 1861–62, only recovering to prewar levels after the end of hostilities in 1865. Worse yet, by the second year of the war, British imports of American cotton had declined 96 percent because of the combination of an informal Southern cotton embargo, intended to provoke Britain into recognizing the Confederate government, and a Northern blockade of Southern ports. The resulting “cotton famine” created mass unemployment in the British textile industry, which was centered in Lancashire. Although this localized depression reached its nadir in the fall of 1862, the textile industry did not really recover until American cotton imports fully resumed in 1866. Douglass wrote this piece while Britain’s economic distress was at its peak. Douglas R. Egerton, “Rethinking Atlantic Historiography in a Postcolonial Era: The Civil War in a Global Perspective,” Journal of the Civil War Era, 1:71–95 (March 2011); Marc-William Palen, “The Civil War’s Forgotten Transatlantic Tariff Debate and the Confederacy’s Free Trade Diplomacy,” Journal of the Civil War Era, 3:35–61 (March 2013); Niels Eichhorn, “North Atlantic Trade in the Mid-Nineteenth Century: A Case for Peace during the American Civil War,” Civil War History, 61:138–72 (June 2015). 18. Douglass alludes to a parable Jesus told in which a foolish man builds his house upon the sand, and it is destroyed, while a wise man builds his house upon rock, and it weathers the storm. Matt. 24–27, Luke 6:48–49. 19. Parliament’s British Abolition Act of 1833, which freed slaves less than six years old and required other slaves to “apprentice” for up to six years before they secured their freedom, did not immediately apply to slavery in India; however, it paved the way for emancipation there. In 1834, the British Abolition Act was applied to colonies in the Caribbean, which, in turn, heightened pressure to end slavery throughout the empire. Subsequent legislation by Britain made it more difficult for the slave system to continue in occupied portions of India. Officers of the East India Company were forbidden to have any involvement in the purchase or sale of slaves, and British courts refused to enforce property rights involving human chattel. These and other actions encumbering the slave system gradually decreased the practice in India, and in 1860 the Indian Penal Code made enslavement criminal, though slavery would still be practiced in parts of the subcontinent. EAA, 3:126, 370.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 101
9/1/21 4:16 PM
102
A PERTINENT QUESTION
20. The cotton famine induced by the Civil War provoked leaders in the British textile industry to search worldwide for alternative sources of raw cotton. Before 1861, cotton had been grown in India, Egypt, Brazil, and the West Indies, but it was considered far inferior to American cotton, and thus was bought and used only begrudgingly. Nevertheless, the desperation of textile manufacturers and the incentive of rising prices for raw cotton on the world market combined to significantly increase British imports throughout the war. Between 1860 and 1865, the importation of bales of raw cotton from India jumped from 510,000 to 1,212,000, from 110,000 to 510,000 from Egypt, from 43,000 to 138,000 from Brazil, and from 17,000 to 42,000 from the West Indies. Although this boom in non-American cotton collapsed upon the end of hostilities in 1865, the production of cotton in all these locales continued throughout the nineteenth century at levels that significantly exceeded those of the antebellum era. This expansion of global cotton production was yet another legacy of the Civil War. David G. Surdam, Northern Naval Superiority and the Economics of the American Civil War (Columbia, S.C., 2001), 142–46, 152; Egerton, “Rethinking Atlantic Historiography,” 1:82–84. 21. The county of Lancashire, located in northwestern England and containing the cities of Manchester and Liverpool, became a globally significant center of production and trade during Britain’s eighteenth-century Industrial Revolution. The heart of Britain’s textile industry, it was home to hundreds of spinning and weaving mills and their hundreds of thousands of operatives and dependents. The cotton famine caused by the Civil War produced widespread destitution among this population. At the height of the crisis, in December 1862, at least 247,230 operatives were unemployed, and 485,434 people depended on forms of relief for survival. Mary Ellison, Support for Secession: Lancashire and the American Civil War (Chicago, 1972), 15, 222. 22. Gen. 22:9–12. 23. In the early stages of the Civil War, the return of fugitive slaves to their owners from behind Union lines was a common practice. General Robert C. Schenck, in the Department of Northeastern Virginia, instructed his subordinates that his camps “will not be permitted while I have command to be made a harbor for escaping fugitives . . . [they] always will be surrendered when demanded . . . by the lawful owner or his representatives.” It was not uncommon for some slaveholders to travel to Union camps to retrieve their fugitive slaves. These actions adversely affected black enthusiasm for the Union war effort. Attempting to standardize the federal government’s policy, Congress, on 9 July 1861, instructed Union troops that they were not responsible for seizing or returning fugitive slaves. The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, 130 vols. (Washington, D.C., 1880–1901), ser. 2, 1:75–95 (1880); Fred A. Shannon, “The Federal Government and the Negro Soldier, 1861–1865,” JNH, 11:565–67 (October 1926); Quarles, Negro in the Civil War, 65–66.
A PERTINENT QUESTION (1865) Lydia Maria Child, The Freedmen’s Book (Boston, 1865), 93.
Published in late 1865, The Freedmen’s Book, edited by the veteran reformer Lydia Maria Child, was a compilation of short stories, essays, poems, and biographical sketches written by noted abolitionists and former slaves for the purpose of showcasing the accomplishments and courage of African American men and women. The book was intended as a primer for newly liberated
Y7870-Douglass.indb 102
9/1/21 4:16 PM
102
A PERTINENT QUESTION
20. The cotton famine induced by the Civil War provoked leaders in the British textile industry to search worldwide for alternative sources of raw cotton. Before 1861, cotton had been grown in India, Egypt, Brazil, and the West Indies, but it was considered far inferior to American cotton, and thus was bought and used only begrudgingly. Nevertheless, the desperation of textile manufacturers and the incentive of rising prices for raw cotton on the world market combined to significantly increase British imports throughout the war. Between 1860 and 1865, the importation of bales of raw cotton from India jumped from 510,000 to 1,212,000, from 110,000 to 510,000 from Egypt, from 43,000 to 138,000 from Brazil, and from 17,000 to 42,000 from the West Indies. Although this boom in non-American cotton collapsed upon the end of hostilities in 1865, the production of cotton in all these locales continued throughout the nineteenth century at levels that significantly exceeded those of the antebellum era. This expansion of global cotton production was yet another legacy of the Civil War. David G. Surdam, Northern Naval Superiority and the Economics of the American Civil War (Columbia, S.C., 2001), 142–46, 152; Egerton, “Rethinking Atlantic Historiography,” 1:82–84. 21. The county of Lancashire, located in northwestern England and containing the cities of Manchester and Liverpool, became a globally significant center of production and trade during Britain’s eighteenth-century Industrial Revolution. The heart of Britain’s textile industry, it was home to hundreds of spinning and weaving mills and their hundreds of thousands of operatives and dependents. The cotton famine caused by the Civil War produced widespread destitution among this population. At the height of the crisis, in December 1862, at least 247,230 operatives were unemployed, and 485,434 people depended on forms of relief for survival. Mary Ellison, Support for Secession: Lancashire and the American Civil War (Chicago, 1972), 15, 222. 22. Gen. 22:9–12. 23. In the early stages of the Civil War, the return of fugitive slaves to their owners from behind Union lines was a common practice. General Robert C. Schenck, in the Department of Northeastern Virginia, instructed his subordinates that his camps “will not be permitted while I have command to be made a harbor for escaping fugitives . . . [they] always will be surrendered when demanded . . . by the lawful owner or his representatives.” It was not uncommon for some slaveholders to travel to Union camps to retrieve their fugitive slaves. These actions adversely affected black enthusiasm for the Union war effort. Attempting to standardize the federal government’s policy, Congress, on 9 July 1861, instructed Union troops that they were not responsible for seizing or returning fugitive slaves. The War of the Rebellion: A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, 130 vols. (Washington, D.C., 1880–1901), ser. 2, 1:75–95 (1880); Fred A. Shannon, “The Federal Government and the Negro Soldier, 1861–1865,” JNH, 11:565–67 (October 1926); Quarles, Negro in the Civil War, 65–66.
A PERTINENT QUESTION (1865) Lydia Maria Child, The Freedmen’s Book (Boston, 1865), 93.
Published in late 1865, The Freedmen’s Book, edited by the veteran reformer Lydia Maria Child, was a compilation of short stories, essays, poems, and biographical sketches written by noted abolitionists and former slaves for the purpose of showcasing the accomplishments and courage of African American men and women. The book was intended as a primer for newly liberated
Y7870-Douglass.indb 102
9/1/21 4:16 PM
A PERTINENT QUESTION
103
slaves of all ages who were attending Southern schools set up by freedmen’s aid societies and the newly created federal Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, better remembered as the Freedmen’s Bureau. Modern scholars have observed that much of the book was “firmly grounded in the well-meaning tenets of Romantic education,” yet fault it for “at times infantilizing African-American adults.” Child penned a twenty-page sketch of Douglass’s life, focusing mainly on his slave youth and initial reaction to becoming free. She wrote Douglass for permission to include the sketch in her volume, which he readily granted, stating, “I have always read with grateful pleasure what you have from time to time written on the question of slavery.” Child also published in her primer a short statement of unknown derivation by Douglass, reprinted below, that touted the accomplishments of African Americans while complaining that few whites seem prepared to acknowledge them. Douglass to Lydia Maria Child, 30 July 1865, Douglass Papers, ser. 3, 2:491–93; Jessica Enoch, Refiguring Rhetorical Education: Women Teaching African American, Native American, and Chicano/a Students, 1865–1911 (Carbondale, Ill., 2008), 52; Lesley Ginzberg, “Race and Romantic Pedagogies in the Works of Lydia Maria Child,” in Romantic Education in Nineteenth-Century American Literature: National and Transatlantic Contexts, edited by Monika M. Elbert and Lesley Ginzberg (New York, 2014), 139, 148–49.
Is it not astonishing, that while we are ploughing, planting, and reaping, using all kinds of mechanical tools, erecting houses and constructing bridges, building ships, working in metals of brass, iron, and copper, silver and gold; that while we are reading, writing, ciphering, acting as clerks, merchants, and secretaries, having among us lawyers, doctors, ministers, poets, authors, editors, orators, and teachers; that while we are engaged in all manner of enterprises common to other men, digging gold in California, capturing the whale in the Pacific,1 breeding sheep and cattle on the hillside; living, moving, acting, thinking, planning; living in families as husbands, wives, and children; and, above all, confessing and worshipping the Christian’s God, and looking hopefully for immortal life beyond the grave;—is it not astonishing, I say, that we are called upon to prove that we are men?
Y7870-Douglass.indb 103
9/1/21 4:16 PM
104
RECONSTRUCTION
1. From its start in the seventeenth century, the American whaling industry had sent out ships manned by ethnically diverse crews. African Americans, as well as black crew members from the Caribbean, the Cape Verde Islands, and even mainland Africa, served on whaling vessels. There are records of all-black whaling crews and of ships sailing under African American captains in that lucrative industry. Allison L. Sharp, “Sailors and Merchant Mariners,” in Encyclopedia of African American Business, ed. Jessie Carney Smith, 2 vols. (Westport, Conn., 2006), 1:716–17.
RECONSTRUCTION (1866) Atlantic Monthly, 18:761–65 (December 1866).
In 1857, the Atlantic Monthly was founded in Boston, Massachusetts, by Francis Underwood and a group of New England writers, including Ralph Waldo Emerson, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Harriett Beecher Stowe, John Greenleaf Whittier, and Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. Purchased by the publishing house Ticknor and Fields in 1859, the magazine featured articles regarding literature, culture, politics, economics, and social issues. Although the Atlantic first set out to have no political affiliation, it published articles in support of the Republican party during Reconstruction. Douglass submitted such a lengthy manuscript to Ticknor and Fields that he dubbed it an “elephant.” The Atlantic editor James Thomas Fields apparently decided to divide it into two articles that would run in successive months. Douglass’s contribution to the December 1866 issue condemned President Andrew Johnson’s Reconstruction policies, which were seen as severely lenient toward the Southern states. In the 1866 congressional elections, Republicans had gained significant strength in both houses, despite the fact that the party in power usually loses seats in offyear elections. In the next Congress, Republicans would hold more than a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress over Democrats and Johnson’s few remaining conservative Republican allies, allowing them to easily override a presidential veto. With these elections, the power to shape Reconstruction policy shifted from the president to the Republican Congress. Douglass used his Atlantic Monthly piece to try to influence the new direction of Reconstruction. Ticknor and Fields to Douglass, 11 November 1866, General Correspondence File, reel 2, frame 224R, FD Papers, DLC; Heather Cox Richardson, West from Appomattox:
Y7870-Douglass.indb 104
9/1/21 4:16 PM
104
RECONSTRUCTION
1. From its start in the seventeenth century, the American whaling industry had sent out ships manned by ethnically diverse crews. African Americans, as well as black crew members from the Caribbean, the Cape Verde Islands, and even mainland Africa, served on whaling vessels. There are records of all-black whaling crews and of ships sailing under African American captains in that lucrative industry. Allison L. Sharp, “Sailors and Merchant Mariners,” in Encyclopedia of African American Business, ed. Jessie Carney Smith, 2 vols. (Westport, Conn., 2006), 1:716–17.
RECONSTRUCTION (1866) Atlantic Monthly, 18:761–65 (December 1866).
In 1857, the Atlantic Monthly was founded in Boston, Massachusetts, by Francis Underwood and a group of New England writers, including Ralph Waldo Emerson, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Harriett Beecher Stowe, John Greenleaf Whittier, and Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. Purchased by the publishing house Ticknor and Fields in 1859, the magazine featured articles regarding literature, culture, politics, economics, and social issues. Although the Atlantic first set out to have no political affiliation, it published articles in support of the Republican party during Reconstruction. Douglass submitted such a lengthy manuscript to Ticknor and Fields that he dubbed it an “elephant.” The Atlantic editor James Thomas Fields apparently decided to divide it into two articles that would run in successive months. Douglass’s contribution to the December 1866 issue condemned President Andrew Johnson’s Reconstruction policies, which were seen as severely lenient toward the Southern states. In the 1866 congressional elections, Republicans had gained significant strength in both houses, despite the fact that the party in power usually loses seats in offyear elections. In the next Congress, Republicans would hold more than a two-thirds majority in both houses of Congress over Democrats and Johnson’s few remaining conservative Republican allies, allowing them to easily override a presidential veto. With these elections, the power to shape Reconstruction policy shifted from the president to the Republican Congress. Douglass used his Atlantic Monthly piece to try to influence the new direction of Reconstruction. Ticknor and Fields to Douglass, 11 November 1866, General Correspondence File, reel 2, frame 224R, FD Papers, DLC; Heather Cox Richardson, West from Appomattox:
Y7870-Douglass.indb 104
9/1/21 4:16 PM
RECONSTRUCTION
105
The Reconstruction of America after the Civil War (New Haven, Conn., 2007), 57–58; Rodney P. Carlisle, Civil War and Reconstruction (New York, 2008), 284; Ellery Sedgwick, A History of the Atlantic Monthly, 1857–1909: Yankee Humanism at High Tide and Ebb (Amherst, Mass., 1994), 3, 104; Eric Foner, Reconstruction: America’s Unfinished Revolution, 1863–1877 (New York, 1988), 267. THE assembling of the Second Session of the Thirty-ninth Congress1 may very properly be made the occasion of a few earnest words on the already much-worn topic of reconstruction. Seldom has any legislative body been the subject of a solicitude more intense, or of aspirations more sincere and ardent. There are the best of reasons for this profound interest. Questions of vast moment, left undecided by the last session of Congress, must be manfully grappled with by this. No political skirmishing will avail. The occasion demands statesmanship. Whether the tremendous war so heroically fought and so victoriously ended shall pass into history a miserable failure, barren of permanent results,—a scandalous and shocking waste of blood and treasure,—a strife for empire, as Earl Russell2 characterized it, of no value to liberty or civilization,—an attempt to re-establish a Union by force, which must be the merest mockery of a Union,—an effort to bring under Federal authority States into which no loyal man from the North may safely enter, and to bring men into the national councils who deliberate with daggers and vote with revolvers, and who do not even conceal their deadly hate of the country that conquered them; or whether, on the other hand, we shall, as the rightful reward of victory over treason, have a solid nation, entirely delivered from all contradictions and social antagonisms, based upon loyalty, liberty, and equality, must be determined one way or the other by the present session of Congress.3 The last session really did nothing which can be considered final as to these questions. The Civil Rights Bill4 and the Freedmen’s Bureau Bill5 and the proposed constitutional amendments,6 with the amendment already adopted and recognized as the law of the land,7 do not reach the difficulty, and cannot, unless the whole structure of the government is changed from a government by States to something like a despotic central government, with power to control even the municipal regulations of States, and to make them conform to its own despotic will. While there remains such an idea as the right of each State to control its
Y7870-Douglass.indb 105
9/1/21 4:16 PM
106
RECONSTRUCTION
own local affairs,—an idea, by the way, more deeply rooted in the minds of men of all sections of the country than perhaps any one other political idea,—no general assertion of human rights can be of any practical value. To change the character of the government at this point is neither possible nor desirable. All that is necessary to be done is to make the government consistent with itself, and render the rights of the States compatible with the sacred rights of human nature. The arm of the Federal government is long, but it is far too short to protect the rights of individuals in the interior of distant States. They must have the power to protect themselves, or they will go unprotected, spite of all the laws the Federal government can put upon the national statute-book. Slavery, like all other great systems of wrong, founded in the depths of human selfishness, and existing for ages, has not neglected its own conservation. It has steadily exerted an influence upon all around it favorable to its own continuance. And to-day it is so strong that it could exist, not only without law, but even against law. Custom, manners, morals, religion, are all on its side everywhere in the South; and when you add the ignorance and servility of the ex-slave to the intelligence and accustomed authority of the master, you have the conditions, not out of which slavery will again grow, but under which it is impossible for the Federal government to wholly destroy it, unless the Federal government be armed with despotic power, to blot out State authority, and to station a Federal officer at every cross-road. This, of course, cannot be done, and ought not even if it could. The true way and the easiest way is to make our government entirely consistent with itself, and give to every loyal citizen the elective franchise,—a right and power which will be ever present, and will form a wall of fire for his protection. One of the invaluable compensations of the late Rebellion is the highly instructive disclosure it made of the true source of danger to republican government. Whatever may be tolerated in monarchical and despotic governments, no republic is safe that tolerates a privileged class, or denies to any of its citizens equal rights and equal means to maintain them. What was theory before the war has been made fact by the war. There is cause to be thankful even for rebellion. It is an impressive teacher, though a stern and terrible one. In both characters it has come to us, and it was perhaps needed in both. It is an instructor never a day before its time, for it comes only when all other means of progress and enlightenment have failed. Whether the oppressed and despairing bondman, no longer able to repress his deep yearnings for manhood, or the tyrant, in his
Y7870-Douglass.indb 106
9/1/21 4:16 PM
RECONSTRUCTION
107
pride and impatience, takes the initiative, and strikes the blow for a firmer hold and a longer lease of oppression, the result is the same,—society is instructed, or may be. Such are the limitations of the common mind, and so thoroughly engrossing are the cares of common life, that only the few among men can discern through the glitter and dazzle of present prosperity the dark outlines of approaching disasters, even though they may have come up to our very gates, and are already within striking distance. The yawning seam and corroded bolt conceal their defects from the mariner until the storm calls all hands to the pumps. Prophets, indeed, were abundant before the war; but who cares for prophets while their predictions remain unfulfilled, and the calamities of which they tell are masked behind a blinding blaze of national prosperity? It is asked, said Henry Clay, on a memorable occasion, Will slavery never come to an end? That question, said he, was asked fifty years ago, and it has been answered by fifty years of unprecedented prosperity. Spite of the eloquence of the earnest Abolitionists,—poured out against slavery during thirty years,—even they must confess, that, in all the probabilities of the case, that system of barbarism would have continued its horrors far beyond the limits of the nineteenth century but for the Rebellion, and perhaps only have disappeared at last in a fiery conflict, even more fierce and bloody than that which has now been suppressed. It is no disparagement to truth, that it can only prevail where reason prevails. War begins where reason ends. The thing worse than rebellion is the thing that causes rebellion. What that thing is, we have been taught to our cost. It remains now to be seen whether we have the needed courage to have that cause entirely removed from the Republic. At any rate, to this grand work of national regeneration and entire purification Congress must now address itself, with full purpose that the work shall this time be thoroughly done. The deadly upas,8 root and branch, leaf and fibre, body and sap, must be utterly destroyed. The country is evidently not in a condition to listen patiently to pleas for postponement, however plausible, nor will it permit the responsibility to be shifted to other shoulders. Authority and power are here commensurate with the duty imposed. There are no cloudflung shadows to obscure the way. Truth shines with brighter light and intenser heat at every moment, and a country torn and rent and bleeding implores relief from its distress and agony. If time was at first needed, Congress has now had time. All the requisite materials from which to form an intelligent judgment are now before it. Whether its members look at the origin, the progress, the termination
Y7870-Douglass.indb 107
9/1/21 4:16 PM
108
RECONSTRUCTION
of the war, or at the mockery of a peace now existing, they will find only one unbroken chain of argument in favor of a radical policy of reconstruction. For the omissions of the last session, some excuses may be allowed. A treacherous President9 stood in the way; and it can be easily seen how reluctant good men might be to admit an apostasy which involved so much of baseness and ingratitude. It was natural that they should seek to save him by bending to him even when he leaned to the side of error. But all is changed now. Congress knows now that it must go on without his aid, and even against his machinations. The advantage of the present session over the last is immense. Where that investigated, this has the facts. Where that walked by faith, this may walk by sight. Where that halted, this must go forward, and where that failed, this must succeed, giving the country whole measures where that gave us half-measures, merely as a means of saving the elections in a few doubtful districts. That Congress saw what was right, but distrusted the enlightenment of the loyal masses; but what was forborne in distrust of the people must now be done with a full knowledge that the people expect and require it. The members go to Washington fresh from the inspiring presence of the people. In every considerable public meeting, and in almost every conceivable way, whether at court-house, school-house, or cross-roads, in doors and out, the subject has been discussed, and the people have emphatically pronounced in favor of a radical policy. Listening to the doctrines of expediency and compromise with pity, impatience, and disgust, they have everywhere broken into demonstrations of the wildest enthusiasm when a brave word has been spoken in favor of equal rights and impartial suffrage. Radicalism, so far from being odious, is now the popular passport to power. The men most bitterly charged with it go to Congress with the largest majorities, while the timid and doubtful are sent by lean majorities, or else left at home. The strange controversy between the President and Congress, at one time so threatening, is disposed of by the people. The high reconstructive powers which he so confidently, ostentatiously, and haughtily claimed, have been disallowed, denounced, and utterly repudiated; while those claimed by Congress have been confirmed. Of the spirit and magnitude of the canvass nothing need be said. The appeal was to the people, and the verdict was worthy of the tribunal. Upon an occasion of his own selection, with the advice and approval of his astute Secretary,10 soon after the members of Congress had returned to their constituents, the President quitted the executive mansion, sandwiched himself between two recognized heroes,—men whom the whole country
Y7870-Douglass.indb 108
9/1/21 4:16 PM
RECONSTRUCTION
109
delighted to honor,—and, with all the advantage which such company could give him, stumped the country from the Atlantic to the Mississippi, advocating everywhere his policy as against that of Congress.11 It was a strange sight, and perhaps the most disgraceful exhibition ever made by any President; but, as no evil is entirely unmixed, good has come of this, as from many others. Ambitious, unscrupulous, enegetic, indefatigable, voluble, and plausible,—a political gladiator, ready for a “set-to”12 in any crowd,—he is beaten in his own chosen field, and stands to-day before the country as a convicted usurper, a political criminal, guilty of a bold and persistent attempt to possess himself of the legislative powers solemnly secured to Congress by the Constitution. No vindication could be more complete, no condemnation could be more absolute and humiliating. Unless reopened by the sword, as recklessly threatened in some circles, this question is now closed for all time. Without attempting to settle here the metaphysical and somewhat theological question (about which so much has already been said and written), whether once in the Union means always in the Union,—agreeably to the formula, Once in grace always in grace,13—it is obvious to common sense that the rebellious States stand to-day, in point of law, precisely where they stood when, exhausted, beaten, conquered, they fell powerless at the feet of Federal authority. Their State governments were overthrown, and the lives and property of the leaders of the Rebellion were forfeited. In reconstructing the institutions of these shattered and overthrown States, Congress should begin with a clean slate, and make clean work of it. Let there by no hesitation. It would be a cowardly deference to a defeated and treacherous President, if any account were made of the illegitimate, one-sided, sham governments hurried into existence for a malign purpose in the absence of Congress.14 These pretended governments, which were never submitted to the people, and from participation in which four millions of the loyal people were excluded by Presidential order, should now be treated according to their true character, as shams and impositions, and supplanted by true and legitimate governments, in the formation of which loyal men, black and white, shall participate. It is not, however, within the scope of this paper to point out the precise steps to be taken, and the means to be employed. The people are less concerned about these than the grand end to be attained. They demand such a reconstruction as shall put an end to the present anarchical state of things in the late rebellious States,—where frightful murders and wholesale massacres are perpetrated in the very presence of Federal soldiers.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 109
9/1/21 4:16 PM
110
RECONSTRUCTION
This horrible business they require shall cease. They want a reconstruction such as will protect loyal men, black and white, in their persons and property; such a one as will cause Northern industry, Northern capital, and Northern civilization to flow into the South, and make a man from New England as much at home in Carolina as elsewhere in the Republic. No Chinese wall15 can now be tolerated. The South must be opened to the light of law and liberty, and this session of Congress is relied upon to accomplish this important work. The plain, common-sense way of doing this work, as intimated at the beginning, is simply to establish in the South one law, one government, one administration of justice, one condition to the exercise of the elective franchise, for men of all races and colors alike. This great measure is sought as earnestly by loyal white men as by loyal blacks, and is needed alike by both. Let sound political prescience but take the place of an unreasoning prejudice, and this will be done. Men denounce the negro for his prominence in this discussion; but it is no fault of his that in peace as in war, that in conquering Rebel armies as in reconstructing the rebellious States, the right of the negro is the true solution of our national troubles. The stern logic of events, which goes directly to the point, disdaining all concern for the color or features of men, has determined the interests of the country as identical with and inseparable from those of the negro. The policy that emancipated and armed the negro—now seen to have been wise and proper by the dullest—was not certainly more sternly demanded than is now the policy of enfranchisement. If with the negro was success in war, and without him failure, so in peace it will be found that the nation must fall or flourish with the negro. Fortunately, the Constitution of the United States knows no distinction between citizens on account of color. Neither does it know any difference between a citizen of a State and a citizen of the United States. Citizenship evidently includes all the rights of citizens, whether State or national. If the Constitution knows none, it is clearly no part of the duty of a Republican Congress now to institute one. The mistake of the last session was the attempt to do this very thing, by a renunciation of its power to secure political rights to any class of citizens, with the obvious purpose to allow the rebellious States to disfranchise, if they should see fit, their colored citizens. This unfortunate blunder must now be retrieved, and the emasculated citizenship given to the negro supplanted by that contemplated in the Constitution of the United States, which declares that the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 110
9/1/21 4:16 PM
RECONSTRUCTION
111
citizens of each State shall enjoy all the rights and immunities of citizens of the several States,—so that a legal voter in any State shall be a legal voter in all the States. 1. After a four-month break, during which supporters of President Andrew Johnson’s Reconstruction policies were heavily rebuffed at the polls, the Thirty-ninth U.S. Congress convened in its second session in Washington on 3 December 1866. Foner, Reconstruction, 270–71. 2. Lord John Russell (1792–1878), first Earl Russell, was a Whig-Liberal statesman. A champion of political and social reforms during his lengthy career, he served as British prime minister from 1846 to 1852 and from 1865 to 1866. He also held office as home secretary (1835–39), colonial secretary (1839–41, 1855), and foreign secretary (1852–53, 1859–65). Cannon, Oxford Companion to British History, 828–29; DNB, 17:454–65. 3. The British press characterized Lord Russell’s arguments for his nation’s neutrality in the Civil War as based on his view that the conflict was “a struggle in which the North is striving for empire, and the South for independence.” London Review of Politics, Society, Literature, Art, and Science, 7:350 (3 October 1863); (London) Index, 4:271 (5 May 1864). 4. Douglass refers to the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which the Senate passed on 2 February and the House of Representatives passed on 13 March. Negating Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s opinion in the Dred Scott case (1857) that blacks could not hold federal citizenship, the act declared that “all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed,” were citizens of the United States and that their civil rights were to be protected regardless of race, color, or “previous condition of slavery.” Enforcement of the act’s provisions was given exclusively to the federal courts. Vetoed by President Johnson on 27 March, the act was passed over his veto on 9 April. The Statutes at Large, Treaties, and Proclamations of the United States of America, December 1865, to March, 1867 (Boston, 1868), 14:27; Patrick W. Riddleberger, 1866: The Critical Year Revisited (Carbondale, Ill., 1979), 86–104. 5. Senator Lyman Trumbull of Illinois proposed the Freedmen’s Bureau Bill in early February 1866. Congress had created the bureau in March 1865 as a temporary agency, designed to expire one year after the end of the Civil War. Trumbull’s measure would have extended the bureau’s life and provided further direct funding. Additionally, the bill authorized bureau agents to take control of cases involving blacks as well as to punish government officials who denied blacks the same civil rights as whites. Congress easily passed the bill in February, and Republicans assumed that Johnson would endorse the proposed legislation. But the president vetoed the bill, which drew intense criticism from both moderate and radical Republicans. Johnson rejected the idea that the federal government should provide educational and financial support to the freedmen, believing that the states should decide such issues. The veto, which was sustained by a two-vote margin in the Senate, was Johnson’s last successful veto. In July 1866, Congress overrode another presidential veto and passed an almost identical Freedmen’s Bureau Act. Foner, Reconstruction, 243, 245–49; Paul H. Bergeron, Andrew Johnson’s Civil War and Reconstruction (Knoxville, Tenn., 2011), 107–08; Edgar J. McManus and Tara Helfman, Liberty and Union: A Constitutional History of the United States, Concise Edition (New York, 2014), 225–26. 6. In January 1866, congressional Republicans introduced some seventy constitutional amendments, not only as part of the Reconstruction process but also as a means of establishing the parameters of victory in the Civil War. In April, the Joint Committee on Reconstruction proposed an amendment with five sections: the first clause proclaimed a national citizenship and stated that no state could abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens or deny them life, liberty, or property without due process before the law; the second provided for the appropriation of representatives in proportion to the number of male citizens denied suffrage; the third prohibited anyone who aided the Confederacy from voting in national elections until 1870; the fourth prohibited the payment of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 111
9/1/21 4:16 PM
112
RECONSTRUCTION
Confederate debt; and the fifth gave Congress the power to enforce all of these clauses. Following congressional debate, the third section, prohibiting former rebels from voting, was eliminated and replaced with a clause that banned from national and state office those who aided the Confederacy. In June 1866, Congress adopted the Fourteenth Amendment, and it was sent to the states for ratification. Ratifying the amendment was a condition for admittance to the Union; however, all Southern states except Tennessee refused to comply. It was not until July 1868 that the Fourteenth Amendment was officially ratified by all states and adopted. Avery Craven, Reconstruction: The Ending of the Civil War (New York, 1969), 172–73, 177–78; Foner, Reconstruction, 251–54; Tsesis, Thirteenth Amendment and American Freedom, 57–58. 7. Douglass is referencing the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which abolished slavery and prohibited involuntary servitude in the United States and its territories. Ohio representative James M. Ashley first proposed an amendment to abolish slavery in December 1863. The following year, the Senate managed to approve this amendment, but Republicans in the House were unable to secure the necessary two-thirds majority. Finally, on 31 January 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment passed in the House by a margin of 119 to 56 and was sent to the states for ratification. Foner, Reconstruction, 66; Tsesis, Thirteenth Amendment and American Freedom, 38–40. 8. The upas, Antiaris toxicara, is native to Africa, China, Java, and other Indonesian islands. The sap of some varieties is said to be extremely poisonous and has been used to treat the tips of poisonous darts, spears, and arrows. Paul C. Freer, ed., The Philippine Journal of Science, 6 vols. (Manila, 1908), 3:41–42. 9. Andrew Johnson (1808–75) assumed the presidency on 15 April 1865, following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. Born in Raleigh, North Carolina, the self-educated Johnson served in the Tennessee legislature (1834–37, 1839–43) before being elected a Democratic congressman (1843–53), governor (1853–57), and U.S. senator (1857–62). In 1862, Lincoln appointed Johnson, a Unionist, military governor of Tennessee, and two years later Johnson was elected as Lincoln’s vice president. Radical Republicans opposed Johnson’s Reconstruction policies, and in 1867, after the president had attempted to oust Secretary of War Edwin M. Stanton in defiance of the Tenure of Office Act, succeeded in impeaching him. At the Senate trial in 1868, conviction failed by one vote. After his presidential term, Johnson returned to Tennessee, where he was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1874. Robert W. Winston, Andrew Johnson: Plebeian and Patriot (New York, 1928); James E. Sefton, Andrew Johnson and the Uses of Constitutional Power (Boston, 1980). 10. William Henry Seward (1801–72) was a New York state senator (1830–32) and governor (1839–43) before serving as a U.S. senator (1849–61). He originally belonged to the Anti-Mason party, but became a leader of the Whig party during the 1830s and 1840s. By 1855, Seward had shifted his allegiance to the Republican party. During the Compromise of 1850, he first invoked the concept of “a higher law than the Constitution” to support abolition. As the decade progressed, Seward became more outspoken against slavery, characterizing the struggle as an “irrepressible conflict” between opposing forces. In 1856 and 1860, he unsuccessfully sought the Republican presidential nomination. Instead, he became Abraham Lincoln’s secretary of state in 1861. Seward’s influence prevented European recognition of the Confederacy during the Civil War. In 1867, he negotiated the U.S. purchase of the Alaska territory, known as “Seward’s Folly.” Frederic Bancroft, The Life of William H. Seward, 2 vols. (1899–1900; Gloucester, Mass., 1967); ACAB, 5:470–73; DAB, 16:615–21. 11. Ostensibly traveling to Chicago to participate in the dedication of a memorial to Stephen A. Douglas, Andrew Johnson undertook an extended speaking tour of the North from 28 August to 15 September 1866. Accompanied by several members of his cabinet and by such Civil War heroes as General Ulysses S. Grant and Admiral David G. Farragut, Johnson was politely received at his first stops, in Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York City, and Albany. Heckling during his speech at Cleveland on 3 September, however, provoked Johnson into several undignified exchanges. Similar incidents occurred during speeches in St. Louis and Pittsburgh on the return trip from Chicago, and the Republican press accused Johnson of public drunkenness. His political opponents also ridiculed
Y7870-Douglass.indb 112
9/1/21 4:16 PM
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
113
the repetitiveness of Johnson’s addresses, especially the intemperate declaration that having fought the traitors in the South he was “swinging around the circle” to fight the traitors, such as Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens, who lived in the North. Riddleberger, 1866, 217–23; Albert Castel, The Presidency of Andrew Johnson (Lawrence, Kans., 1979), 89–95; Eric L. McKittrick, Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction (Chicago, 1960), 428–29. 12. To give a challenge to. 13. Douglass paraphrases the “once saved always saved” doctrine, which was proposed by St. Augustine and popularized by Calvinists. Rom. 8:30; St. Augustine, On the Free Choice of the Will, On Grace and Free Choice, and Other Writings, ed. Peter King (Cambridge, 2010), 197–205. 14. In the summer of 1865, President Andrew Johnson began efforts toward the readmission of former Confederate states into the Union. At first, the president seemed to adopt Lincoln’s attitudes toward Reconstruction and implement strict, yet fair, conditions for readmission. But Johnson’s plans soon developed into a more lenient Reconstruction policy for the South. Along with granting amnesty to all Confederates who took an oath of allegiance to the United States—excluding high-ranking officers and those who owned more than $20,000 in taxable property—Johnson stipulated three requirements for Southern provisional governments: repeal secession ordinances, repudiate their war debts, and abolish slavery along with ratifying the Thirteenth Amendment. In the fall, Southerners convened at constitutional conventions to reorganize their states, electing legislators, governors, and members of Congress. It soon became clear that the South had no intention of establishing a new political order to replace the old “slaveocracy.” Several former Confederate officials were elected to office; voters in Georgia went so far as to elect Confederate vice president Alexander H. Stevens to the U.S. Senate. Furthermore, Texas and Mississippi rejected the Thirteenth Amendment, and some Southern states refused to repudiate secession or their war debts. Johnson’s lenient attitude meant that the South’s prewar society and political leadership were virtually restored, much to the dismay of abolitionists and Radical Republicans. Foner, Reconstruction, 187–91, 194, 196; Richardson, West from Appomattox, 42, 46–47; Bergeron, Andrew Johnson’s Civil War, 75–76, 82. 15. The Great Wall comprises a series of walls built across northern and western China to protect the Chinese Empire from invasion. Emperor Qin Shi Huangdi (259–210 B.C.E.), who unified China under the Qin dynasty, is believed to have constructed the first connected wall. Four long walls were either rebuilt or extended during the Western Han (206 B.C.E.–9 C.E.), Sui (581–618), Jin (1115–1234), and Ming (1368–1644) dynasties. Michael Dillon, ed. China: A Historical and Cultural Dictionary (Surrey, Eng., 1998), 122–23; Dorothy Perkins, Encyclopedia of China: The Essential Reference to China, Its History and Culture (New York, 1999), 190–91.
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE (1867) Atlantic Monthly, 19:112–17 (January 1867).
As editor of the Atlantic from 1861 to 1871, James Thomas Fields paid generously for exclusive contributions to the magazine. Douglass received one hundred dollars for the following article condemning leniency toward, and the political service of, exConfederates. In December 1865, Congress established the Joint Committee on Reconstruction in an effort to investigate the conditions of the former Confederate states and to decide whether
Y7870-Douglass.indb 113
9/1/21 4:16 PM
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
113
the repetitiveness of Johnson’s addresses, especially the intemperate declaration that having fought the traitors in the South he was “swinging around the circle” to fight the traitors, such as Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens, who lived in the North. Riddleberger, 1866, 217–23; Albert Castel, The Presidency of Andrew Johnson (Lawrence, Kans., 1979), 89–95; Eric L. McKittrick, Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction (Chicago, 1960), 428–29. 12. To give a challenge to. 13. Douglass paraphrases the “once saved always saved” doctrine, which was proposed by St. Augustine and popularized by Calvinists. Rom. 8:30; St. Augustine, On the Free Choice of the Will, On Grace and Free Choice, and Other Writings, ed. Peter King (Cambridge, 2010), 197–205. 14. In the summer of 1865, President Andrew Johnson began efforts toward the readmission of former Confederate states into the Union. At first, the president seemed to adopt Lincoln’s attitudes toward Reconstruction and implement strict, yet fair, conditions for readmission. But Johnson’s plans soon developed into a more lenient Reconstruction policy for the South. Along with granting amnesty to all Confederates who took an oath of allegiance to the United States—excluding high-ranking officers and those who owned more than $20,000 in taxable property—Johnson stipulated three requirements for Southern provisional governments: repeal secession ordinances, repudiate their war debts, and abolish slavery along with ratifying the Thirteenth Amendment. In the fall, Southerners convened at constitutional conventions to reorganize their states, electing legislators, governors, and members of Congress. It soon became clear that the South had no intention of establishing a new political order to replace the old “slaveocracy.” Several former Confederate officials were elected to office; voters in Georgia went so far as to elect Confederate vice president Alexander H. Stevens to the U.S. Senate. Furthermore, Texas and Mississippi rejected the Thirteenth Amendment, and some Southern states refused to repudiate secession or their war debts. Johnson’s lenient attitude meant that the South’s prewar society and political leadership were virtually restored, much to the dismay of abolitionists and Radical Republicans. Foner, Reconstruction, 187–91, 194, 196; Richardson, West from Appomattox, 42, 46–47; Bergeron, Andrew Johnson’s Civil War, 75–76, 82. 15. The Great Wall comprises a series of walls built across northern and western China to protect the Chinese Empire from invasion. Emperor Qin Shi Huangdi (259–210 B.C.E.), who unified China under the Qin dynasty, is believed to have constructed the first connected wall. Four long walls were either rebuilt or extended during the Western Han (206 B.C.E.–9 C.E.), Sui (581–618), Jin (1115–1234), and Ming (1368–1644) dynasties. Michael Dillon, ed. China: A Historical and Cultural Dictionary (Surrey, Eng., 1998), 122–23; Dorothy Perkins, Encyclopedia of China: The Essential Reference to China, Its History and Culture (New York, 1999), 190–91.
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE (1867) Atlantic Monthly, 19:112–17 (January 1867).
As editor of the Atlantic from 1861 to 1871, James Thomas Fields paid generously for exclusive contributions to the magazine. Douglass received one hundred dollars for the following article condemning leniency toward, and the political service of, exConfederates. In December 1865, Congress established the Joint Committee on Reconstruction in an effort to investigate the conditions of the former Confederate states and to decide whether
Y7870-Douglass.indb 113
9/1/21 4:16 PM
114
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
any were entitled to representation at the national level. While Andrew Johnson issued presidential pardons and granted amnesty to a majority of former Confederates, desiring the immediate restoration of “the unrepresented states,” Congress remained wary of seating former rebels. Radicals worried that if the pardoned secessionists were readmitted to Congress, they would unite with northern Democrats and take control of the federal government. Throughout 1866, Congress continued to reject Southern representatives. Many members argued that while a presidential pardon could remove criminal status and prevent punishment, it could not restore political status. While the battle continued between Johnson and Congress over this issue, Southern states ultimately regained representation in Congress by ratifying the Fourteenth Amendment in 1867. Speaking directly to the newly elected Congress, Douglass contended that to deny African American men the right to vote was an attempt by the South to create a “degraded caste” with no political rights. The Fifteenth Amendment, which passed on 3 February 1870, granted voting rights to all men, regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Ticknor and Fields to Douglass, 11 November 1866, General Correspondence File, reel 2, frame 224, FD Papers, DLC; Salmon P. Chase, The Salmon P. Chase Papers: Correspondence, 1865–1873, ed. John Niven, 5 vols. (Kent, Ohio, 1998), 5:98; Jonathan Truman Dorris, Pardon and Amnesty under Lincoln and Johnson: The Restoration of the Confederates to Their Rights and Privileges, 1861–1898 (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1953), 318–23, 330; Foner, Reconstruction, 239–40, 259, 271; Sedgwick, History of the Atlantic Monthly, 75.
A VERY limited statement of the argument for impartial suffrage, and for including the negro in the body politic, would require more space than can be reasonably asked here. It is supported by reasons as broad as the nature of man, and as numerous as the wants of society. Man is the only government-making animal in the world. His right to a participation in the production and operation of government is an inference from his nature, as direct and self-evident as is his right to acquire property or education. It is no less a crime against the manhood of a man, to declare that he shall not share in the making and directing of the government
Y7870-Douglass.indb 114
9/1/21 4:16 PM
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
115
under which he lives, than to say that he shall not acquire property and education. The fundamental and unanswerable argument in favor of the enfranchisement of the negro is found in the undisputed fact of his manhood. He is a man, and by every fact and argument by which any man can sustain his right to vote, the negro can sustain his right equally. It is plain that, if the right belongs to any, it belongs to all. The doctrine that some men have no rights that others are bound to respect, is a doctrine which we must banish, as we have banished slavery, from which it emanated. If black men have no rights in the eyes of white men,1 of course the whites can have none in the eyes of the blacks. The result is a war of races, and the annihilation of all proper human relations. But suffrage for the negro, while easily sustained upon abstract principles, demands consideration upon what are recognized as the urgent necessities of the case. It is a measure of relief,—a shield to break the force of a blow already descending with violence, and render it harmless. The work of destruction has already been set in motion all over the South. Peace to the country has literally meant war to the loyal men of the South, white and black; and negro suffrage is the measure to arrest and put an end to that dreadful strife. Something then, not by way of argument, (for that has been done by Charles Sumner,2 Thaddeus Stevens,3 Wendell Phillips,4 Gerrit Smith,5 and other able men,) but rather of statement and appeal. For better or for worse, (as in some of the old marriage ceremonies,)6 the negroes are evidently a permanent part of the American population. They are too numerous and useful to be colonized, and too enduring and self-perpetuating to disappear by natural causes. Here they are, four millions of them,7 and, for weal or for woe, here they must remain. Their history is parallel to that of the country; but while the history of the latter has been cheerful and bright with blessings, theirs has been heavy and dark with agonies and curses. What O’Connell8 said of the history of Ireland may with greater truth be said of the negro’s. It may be “traced like a wounded man through a crowd, by the blood.” Yet the negroes have marvelously survived all the exterminating forces of slavery, and have emerged at the end of two hundred and fifty years of bondage, not morose, misanthropic, and revengeful, but cheerful, hopeful, and forgiving. They now stand before Congress and the country, not complaining of the past, but simply asking for a better future. The spectacle of these dusky millions thus imploring, not demanding, is touching; and if American statesmen could be moved by a simple appeal to the nobler elements of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 115
9/1/21 4:16 PM
116
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
human nature, if they had not fallen, seemingly, into the incurable habit of weighing and measuring every proposition of reform by some standard of profit and loss, doing wrong from choice, and right only from necessity or some urgent demand of human selfishness, it would be enough to plead for the negroes on the score of past services and sufferings. But no such appeal shall be relied on here. Hardships, services, sufferings, and sacrifices are all waived. It is true that they came to the relief of the country at the hour of its extremest need. It is true that, in many of the rebellious States, they were almost the only reliable friends the nation had throughout the whole tremendous war. It is true that, notwithstanding their alleged ignorance, they were wiser than their masters, and knew enough to be loyal, while those masters only knew enough to be rebels and traitors. It is true that they fought side by side in the loyal cause with our gallant and patriotic white soldiers, and that, but for their help,—divided as the loyal States were,—the Rebels might have succeeded in breaking up the Union, thereby entailing border wars and troubles of unknown duration and incalculable calamity. All this and more is true of these loyal negroes. Many daring exploits will be told to their credit. Impartial history will paint them as men who deserved well of their country. It will tell how they forded and swam rivers, with what consummate address they evaded the sharp-eyed Rebel pickets, how they toiled in the darkness of night through the tangled marshes of briers and thorns, barefooted and weary, running the risk of losing their lives, to warn our generals of Rebel schemes to surprise and destroy our loyal army. It will tell how these poor people, whose rights we still despised, behaved to our wounded soldiers, when found cold, hungry, and bleeding on the deserted battle-field; how they assisted our escaping prisoners from Andersonville, Belle Isle, Castle Thunder,9 and elsewhere, sharing with them their wretched crusts, and otherwise affording them aid and comfort; how they promptly responded to the trumpet call for their services, fighting against a foe that denied them the rights of civilized warfare, and for a government which was without the courage to assert those rights and avenge their violation in their behalf; with what gallantry they flung themselves upon Rebel fortifications, meeting death as fearlessly as any other troops in the service. But upon none of these things is reliance placed. These facts speak to the better dispositions of the human heart; but they seem of little weight with the opponents of impartial suffrage. It is true that a strong plea for equal suffrage might be addressed to the national sense of honor. Something, too, might be said of national
Y7870-Douglass.indb 116
9/1/21 4:16 PM
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
117
gratitude. A nation might well hesitate before the temptation to betray its allies. There is something immeasurably mean, to say nothing of the cruelty, in placing the loyal negroes of the South under the political power of their Rebel masters. To make peace with our enemies is all well enough; but to prefer our enemies and sacrifice our friends,—to exalt our enemies and cast down our friends,—to clothe our enemies, who sought the destruction of the government, with all political power, and leave our friends powerless in their hands,—is an act which need not be characterized here. We asked the negroes to espouse our cause, to be our friends, to fight for us and against their masters; and now, after they have done all that we asked them to do,—helped us to conquer their masters, and thereby directed toward themselves the furious hate of the vanquished,—it is proposed in some quarters to turn them over to the political control of the common enemy of the government and of the negro. But of this let nothing be said in this place. Waiving humanity, national honor, the claims of gratitude, the precious satisfaction arising from deeds of charity and justice to the weak and defenseless,—the appeal for impartial suffrage addresses itself with great pertinency to the darkest, coldest, and flintiest side of the human heart, and would wring righteousness from the unfeeling calculations of human selfishness. For in respect to this grand measure it is the good fortune of the negro that enlightened selfishness, not less than justice, fights on his side. National interest and national duty, if elsewhere separated, are firmly united here. The American people can, perhaps, afford to brave the censure of surrounding nations for the manifest injustice and meanness of excluding its faithful black soldiers from the ballot-box, but it cannot afford to allow the moral and mental energies of rapidly increasing millions to be consigned to hopeless degradation. Strong as we are, we need the energy that slumbers in the black man’s arm to make us stronger. We want no longer any heavy-footed, melancholy service from the negro. We want the cheerful activity of the quickened manhood of these sable millions. Nor can we afford to endure the moral blight which the existence of a degraded and hated class must necessarily inflict upon any people among whom such a class may exist. Exclude the negroes as a class from political rights,—teach them that the high and manly privilege of suffrage is to be enjoyed by white citizens only,—that they may bear the burdens of the state, but that they are to have no part in its direction or its honors,—and you at once deprive them of one of the main incentives to manly character and patriotic devotion to
Y7870-Douglass.indb 117
9/1/21 4:16 PM
118
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
the interests of the government; in a word, you stamp them as a degraded caste,—you teach them to despise themselves, and all others to despise them. (Men are so constituted that they largely derive their ideas of their abilities and their possibilities from the settled judgments of their fellowmen, and especially from such as they read in the institutions under which they live. If these bless them, they are blessed indeed; but if these blast them, they are blasted indeed.) Give the negro the elective franchise, and you give him at once a powerful motive for all noble exertion, and make him a man among men. A character is demanded of him, and here as elsewhere demand favors supply. It is nothing against this reasoning that all men who vote are not good men or good citizens. It is enough that the possession and exercise of the elective franchise is in itself an appeal to the nobler elements of manhood, and imposes education as essential to the safety of society. To appreciate the full force of this argument, it must be observed, that disfranchisement in a republican government based upon the idea of human equality and universal suffrage, is a very different thing from disfranchisement in governments based upon the idea of the divine right of kings,10 or the entire subjugation of the masses. Masses of men can take care of themselves. Besides, the disabilities imposed upon all are necessarily without that bitter and stinging element of invidiousness which attaches to disfranchisement in a republic. What is common to all works no special sense of degradation to any. But in a country like ours, where men of all nations, kindred, and tongues are freely enfranchised, and allowed to vote, to say to the negro, You shall not vote, is to deal his manhood a staggering blow, and to burn into his soul a bitter and goading sense of wrong, or else work in him a stupid indifference to all the elements of a manly character. As a nation, we cannot afford to have amongst us either this indifference and stupidity, or that burning sense of wrong. These sable millions are too powerful to be allowed to remain either indifferent or discontented. Enfranchise them, and they become self-respecting and country-loving citizens. Disfranchise them, and the mark of Cain11 is set upon them less mercifully than upon the first murderer, for no man was to hurt him. But this mark of inferiority—all the more palpable because of a difference of color—not only dooms the negro to be a vagabond, but makes him the prey of insult and outrage everywhere. While nothing may be urged here as to the past services of the negro, it is quite within the line of this appeal to remind the nation of the possibility that a time may come when the services of the negro may be a second time required. His-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 118
9/1/21 4:16 PM
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
119
tory is said to repeat itself,12 and, if so, having wanted the negro once, we may want him again. Can that statesmanship be wise which would leave the negro good ground to hesitate, when the exigencies of the country required his prompt assistance? Can that be sound statesmanship which leaves millions of men in gloomy discontent, and possibly in a state of alienation in the day of national trouble? Was not the nation stronger when two hundred thousand sable soldiers13 were hurled against the Rebel fortifications, than it would have been without them? Arming the negro was an urgent military necessity three years ago,—are we sure that another quite as pressing may not await us? Casting aside all thought of justice and magnanimity, is it wise to impose upon the negro all the burdens involved in sustaining government against foes within and foes without, to make him equal sharer in all sacrifices for the public good, to tax him in peace and conscript him in war, and then coldly exclude him from the ballot-box? Look across the sea. Is Ireland, in her present condition, fretful, discontented, compelled to support an establishment in which she does not believe, and which the vast majority of her people abhor, a source of power or of weakness to Great Britain?14 Is not Austria wise in removing all ground of complaint against her on the part of Hungary?15 And does not the Emperor of Russia act wisely, as well as generously, when he not only breaks up the bondage of the serf, but extends him all the advantages of Russian citizenship?16 Is the present movement in England in favor of manhood suffrage—for the purpose of bringing four millions of British subjects into full sympathy and co-operation with the British government—a wise and humane movement, or otherwise?17 Is the existence of a rebellious element in our borders—which New Orleans, Memphis, and Texas show to be only disarmed, but at heart as malignant as ever, only waiting for an opportunity to reassert itself with fire and sword—a reason for leaving four millions of the nation’s truest friends with just cause of complaint against the Federal government?18 If the doctrine that taxation should go hand in hand with representation19 can be appealed to in behalf of recent traitors and rebels, may it not properly be asserted in behalf of a people who have ever been loyal and faithful to the government? The answers to these questions are too obvious to require statement. Disguise it as we may, we are still a divided nation. The Rebel States have still an antinational policy. Massachusetts and South Carolina may draw tears from the eyes of our tender-hearted President by walking arm in arm into his Philadelphia Convention,20 but a citizen of Massachusetts is still an alien in the Palmetto State.21 There is that, all over the South, which frightens
Y7870-Douglass.indb 119
9/1/21 4:16 PM
120
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
Yankee industry, capital, and skill from its borders. We have crushed the Rebellion, but not its hopes or its malign purposes. The South fought for perfect and permanent control over the Southern laborer. It was a war of the rich against the poor. They who waged it had no objection to the government, while they could use it as a means of confirming their power over the laborer. They fought the government, not because they hated the government as such, but because they found it, as they thought, in the way between them and their one grand purpose of rendering permanent and indestructible their authority and power over the Southern laborer. Though the battle is for the present lost, the hope of gaining this object still exists, and pervades the whole South with a feverish excitement. We have thus far only gained a Union without unity, marriage without love, victory without peace. The hope of gaining by politics what they lost by the sword, is the secret of all this Southern unrest; and that hope must be extinguished before national ideas and objects can take full possession of the Southern mind. There is but one safe and constitutional way to banish that mischievous hope from the South, and that is by lifting the laborer beyond the unfriendly political designs of his former master. Give the negro the elective franchise, and you at once destroy the purely sectional policy, and wheel the Southern States into line with national interests and national objects. The last and shrewdest turn of Southern politics is a recognition of the necessity of getting into Congress immediately, and at any price. The South will comply with any conditions but suffrage for the negro. It will swallow all the unconstitutional test oaths, repeal all the ordinances of Secession, repudiate the Rebel debt, promise to pay the debt incurred in conquering its people, pass all the constitutional amendments, if only it can have the negro left under its political control. The proposition is as modest as that made on the mountain: “All these things will I give unto thee if thou wilt fall down and worship me.”22 But why are the Southerners so willing to make these sacrifices? The answer plainly is, they see in this policy the only hope of saving something of their old sectional peculiarities and power. Once firmly seated in Congress, their alliance with Northern Democrats re-established, their States restored to their former position inside the Union, they can easily find means of keeping the Federal government entirely too busy with other important matters to pay much attention to the local affairs of the Southern States. Under the potent shield of State Rights, the game would be in their own hands. Does any sane man doubt for a moment that the men who followed Jefferson Davis through the late terrible Rebellion, of-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 120
9/1/21 4:16 PM
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
121
ten marching barefooted and hungry, naked and penniless, and who now only profess an enforced loyalty, would plunge this country into a foreign war to-day, if they could thereby gain their coveted independence, and their still more coveted mastery over the negroes? Plainly enough, the peace not less than the prosperity of this country is involved in the great measure of impartial suffrage. King Cotton is deposed, but only deposed, and is ready to-day to reassert all his ancient pretensions upon the first favorable opportunity. Foreign countries abound with his agents. They are able, vigilant, devoted. The young men of the South burn with the desire to regain what they call the lost cause;23 the women are noisily malignant towards the Federal government. In fact, all the elements of treason and rebellion are there under the thinnest disguise which necessity can impose. What, then, is the work before Congress? It is to save the people of the South from themselves, and the nation from detriment on their account. Congress must supplant the evident sectional tendencies of the South by national dispositions and tendencies. It must cause national ideas and objects to take the lead and control the politics of those States. It must cease to recognize the old slave-masters as the only competent persons to rule the South. In a word, it must enfranchise the negro, and by means of the loyal negroes and the loyal white men of the South build up a national party there, and in time bridge the chasm between North and South, so that our country may have a common liberty and a common civilization. The new wine must be put into new bottles.24 The lamb may not be trusted with the wolf.25 Loyalty is hardly safe with traitors. Statesmen of America! beware what you do. The ploughshare of rebellion has gone through the land beam-deep. The soil is in readiness, and the seed-time has come. Nations, not less than individuals, reap as they sow. The dreadful calamities of the past few years came not by accident, nor unbidden, from the ground. You shudder to-day at the harvest of blood sown in the spring-time of the Republic by your patriot fathers. The principle of slavery, which they tolerated under the erroneous impression that it would soon die out, became at last the dominant principle and power at the South. It early mastered the Constitution, became superior to the Union, and enthroned itself above the law. Freedom of speech and of the press it slowly but successfully banished from the South, dictated its own code of honor and manners to the nation, brandished the bludgeon and the bowie-knife over Congressional debate, sapped the foundations of loyalty, dried up the springs of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 121
9/1/21 4:16 PM
122
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
patriotism, blotted out the testimonies of the fathers against oppression, padlocked the pulpit, expelled liberty from its literature, invented nonsensical theories about master-races and slave-races of men, and in due season produced a Rebellion fierce, foul, and bloody. This evil principle again seeks admission into our body politic. It comes now in shape of a denial of political rights to four million loyal colored people. The South does not now ask for slavery. It only asks for a large degraded caste, which shall have no political rights. This ends the case. Statesmen, beware what you do. The destiny of unborn and unnumbered generations is in your hands. Will you repeat the mistake of your fathers, who sinned ignorantly? or will you profit by the blood-bought wisdom all round you, and forever expel every vestige of the old abomination from our national borders? As you members of the Thirty-ninth Congress decide, will the country be peaceful, united, and happy, or troubled, divided, and miserable. 1. A paraphrase of Chief Justice Roger B. Taney’s majority opinion in the Dred Scott decision. Dred Scott v. John F. A. Sandford, 19 Howard 393 (1857), 407. 2. Charles Sumner (1811–74), U.S. senator and outspoken advocate of pacifism, antislavery, and racial justice, attended Harvard College (1826–30) and Harvard Law School (1831–33), where he became a friend and protégé of Justice Joseph Story. During the mid-1830s, Sumner practiced law in Boston, engaged in legal scholarship, and taught at Harvard before embarking on an extended tour of Europe from 1838 to 1840. His oratorical talents became evident at Boston’s 1843 Independence Day celebration, where he delivered a ringing antiwar address. A vocal critic of the Mexican War, Sumner was initially aligned with Massachusetts’s “Conscience Whigs” before joining the Free Soil movement in 1848. Sumner was ambivalent about social equality between whites and blacks, but steadfast in opposing legal discrimination based on race. In 1849, he served as pro bono legal counsel in the Sarah Roberts case, challenging the legality of racial segregation in Boston public schools. Two years later, a Democratic–Free Soil coalition elected him to the U.S. Senate, where he spent the remainder of his public career. Through such polished Senate orations as his 1852 “Freedom National” speech attacking the Fugitive Slave Law, Sumner became a leading figure in the antislavery cause. In 1856, his address “The Crime against Kansas” provoked a physical attack from the South Carolina congressman Preston S. Brooks, who beat Sumner into a state of semiconsciousness on the floor of the Senate. During his three-year convalescence, Sumner was elevated to martyrdom. Instrumental in organizing the Massachusetts Republican party, he served as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee during the 1860s and was among the first national politicians to urge emancipation as a war measure. Sumner, who was intent on securing suffrage rights, land, and education for the freedmen, became a leading architect of Radical Reconstruction and later led the drive to impeach and remove President Andrew Johnson. After breaking with President Ulysses S. Grant over the issue of U.S. acquisition of Santo Domingo, Sumner supported Liberal Republican candidate Horace Greeley in 1872. Congressional Globe, 32d Cong., 2d sess., 39–43; Lib., 21 January 1853; David Donald, Charles Sumner and the Coming of the Civil War (New York, 1960), 180–81, 240–41; DAB, 18:208–14. 3. The son of a Vermont shoemaker, Thaddeus Stevens (1792–1868) graduated from Dartmouth College and moved to southeastern Pennsylvania to practice law. From 1833 to 1841, Stevens, an Anti-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 122
9/1/21 4:16 PM
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
123
Mason, served in the Pennsylvania legislature, where he championed the establishment of a free public school system. From 1849 to 1853, he was one of the most outspoken antislavery Whigs in the U.S. House of Representatives. Stevens helped organize the Republican party in his state and again served in Congress from 1859 to his death. As chairman of the Ways and Means Committee during the Civil War, he actively worked for emancipation, high tariffs, and a transcontinental railroad. As the leading House member of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction, Stevens helped push the Fourteenth Amendment, the Freedmen’s Bureau Bill, and the Civil Rights Act of 1866 through Congress, despite the opposition of President Andrew Johnson and the hesitancy of conservative Republicans. Although in failing health, he served as one of the House managers in the unsuccessful impeachment trial of President Johnson. Fawn M. Brodie, Thaddeus Stevens: Scourge of the South (New York, 1959); Leonard P. Curry, Blueprint for Modern America: Non-military Legislation of the First Civil War Congress (Nashville, 1968), 26–27, 64, 98, 173; Michael Les Benedict, A Compromise of Principle: Congressional Republicans and Reconstruction, 1863–1869 (New York, 1974), 34–35, 137, 149–50, 190–91, 224–25, 251; Beverly Wilson Palmer and Holly Byers Ochoa, eds., The Selected Papers of Thaddeus Stevens, 2 vols. (Pittsburgh,1997–98), 1:232–33n; NCAB, 4:30–31; DAB, 17:620–25. 4. Born and raised in Boston and educated at Harvard, Wendell Phillips (1811–84) was one of the most prominent advocates of reform in the nineteenth century. In 1837, the young Phillips distinguished himself by denouncing the murder of the abolitionist editor Elijah Lovejoy. Active in the American Anti-Slavery Society, Phillips tended to support, but did not completely adhere to, William Lloyd Garrison’s brand of apolitical, disunionist abolitionism; as a delegate to the World’s Anti-Slavery Convention of 1840, Phillips agreed with Garrison that female delegates should be seated, but disagreed with him on nonresistance to slavery. Following the Civil War, Phillips became devoted to a number of reforms, including prohibition, penal reform, concessions to Native Americans, woman suffrage, and the labor movement. James Brewer Stewart, Wendell Phillips: Liberty’s Hero (Baton Rouge, 1986); Irving H. Bartlett, Wendell Phillips: Brahmin Radical (Boston, 1961); DAB, 14:546–47. 5. Gerrit Smith (1797–1874), a New York businessman and land speculator, became best known for his philanthropic work in such reforms as temperance and abolition. Between 1828 and 1835, he donated large sums of money to the American Colonization Society, but abandoned that movement in 1835, when his sympathies shifted to the immediate abolitionists. In the 1840s, he gave approximately 140,000 acres of land in upstate New York to three thousand black settlers, thus enabling them to qualify to vote. Smith was a founder and frequent candidate of the Liberty party, running for governor of New York on that ticket in 1840 and winning a seat in Congress in 1852. When the Free Soil merger with moderate antislavery Democrats and Whigs lured away many Liberty party supporters, Smith helped bankroll the organization until 1860. Smith befriended Douglass when the latter moved to Rochester, and frequently assisted in financing Frederick Douglass’ Paper. Like Douglass, Smith supported John Brown, but psychological stress caused by the failure at Harpers Ferry brought on the first of a series of bipolar episodes that greatly reduced his subsequent reform activities. Harlow, Gerrit Smith; Sorin, New York Abolitionists, 269–87; Perry, Radical Abolitionism, 170–80; McKivigan and Leveille, “The ‘Black Dream’ of Gerrit Smith,” 20:61–76; NCAB, 2:322–23; DAB, 17:270–71. 6. Paraphrased from “for better, for worse” in Anglican marriage vows, the phrase can be originally found in the Anglican Church’s Book of Common Prayer (1549), based on earlier Latin texts. The Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and Other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church According to the Use of the Church of England and Ireland; Together with the Psalter or Psalms of David, Pointed as They are to be Sung or Said in Churches; and the Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons (London, 1549), pt. viii. 7. U.S. Census data for 1870 show an African American population of 4,618,349. 1870 U.S. Census, Ohio, Franklin County, 55. 8. Daniel O’Connell (1775–1847), an Irish lawyer and a member of Parliament, played a major role in both the British and American antislavery movements. After hearing the English abolitionist
Y7870-Douglass.indb 123
9/1/21 4:16 PM
124
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
James Cropper in 1824, O’Connell converted to abolitionism and balanced commitments to black freedom and Irish independence throughout the rest of his career. O’Connell served as a leader of the movement to repeal the Act of Union between England and Ireland, and he participated in the related campaign to remove the civil restrictions imposed on Catholics. In 1829, with strong support from antislavery politicians, O’Connell saw the bill for Catholic emancipation pass Parliament. Four years later, he marshaled crucial Irish votes needed for passage of the Emancipation Act of 1833, inaugurating gradual abolition in the British West Indies. Five years later, he narrowly averted having to fight a duel with U.S. ambassador Andrew Stevenson, whom he accused of being a slave breeder. Identified with William Lloyd Garrison throughout the 1830s, O’Connell supported the seating of female delegates at the World’s Anti-Slavery Convention of 1840 and made numerous attempts to rally abolitionist sentiment among Irish Americans in the following years. O’Connell often suffered high political costs as a result of such activities, particularly in light of diminished U.S. support for the Irish repeal movement. Although some Garrisonians criticized O’Connell for vacillation and political expediency, American reformers of all persuasions lavished praise on the “Irish Liberator” during the post–Civil War era. Oliver MacDonagh, The Emancipationist: Daniel O’Connell, 1830–47 (New York, 1989); Gilbert Osofsky, “Abolitionists, Irish Immigrants, and the Dilemmas of Romantic Nationalism,” AHR, 80:889–912 (October 1975); Douglas C. Riach, “Daniel O’Connell and American Anti-Slavery,” Irish Historical Studies, 20:3–25 (March 1976); Howard Temperley, “The O’Connell-Stevenson Contretemps: A Reflection of the Anglo-American Slavery Issue,” JNH, 47:217–33 (October 1962); Henry Boylan, A Dictionary of Irish Biography, 3d ed. (Niwot, Col., 1998), 306–08; DNB, 14:816–34. 9. Andersonville, Georgia—one of the most notorious Southern stockades built to house Union war prisoners—held more than 45,000 inmates during the Civil War. After the end of hostilities, the camp’s commandant, Henry Wirz, was tried and executed for the deaths of nearly 13,000 of those prisoners. Shortly after the First Battle of Bull Run, the Confederacy established a prison camp for captured Union enlisted men on Belle Isle, a 100-acre inland in the James River at Richmond. During the winter of 1863–64, as many as 10,000 prisoners were confined on Belle Isle. Two Confederate prison camps were popularly known as “Castle Thunder.” The one in Petersburg, Virginia, was a converted tobacco warehouse that received its nickname after artillery reports reverberated through its corridors during the Union siege of the city in 1864–65. The Richmond Castle Thunder was also a converted warehouse, but it housed mostly political prisoners and accused spies rather than captured Union soldiers. Mark M. Boatner III, The Civil War Dictionary (New York, 1959), 10, 57, 131. 10. The divine right of kings refers to the theory that a monarch derives his right to rule directly from God and therefore is not subject to the will of the people or any other earthly authority. Designed to justify monarchical absolutism, the doctrine lost its credibility mainly in the aftermath of the American and French revolutions. Douglass refers to this theory in comparing the disenfranchisement of blacks in a republican government with that of all subjects living under an absolute monarchy. Whereas the American republican government denied the vote to blacks amidst the promise of equality and universal suffrage, the monarch justified his absolute authority by citing the divine right of kings, which allowed him or her to freely disregard the will of the people. David Robertson, The Routledge Dictionary of Politics (2002; London, 2004), 152–53; Robert Jackson, Sovereignty: The Evolution of an Idea (Cambridge, 2007), 56–57; Brian Duignan, ed., The Britannica Guide to Ethics: Thinkers and Theories in Ethics (New York, 2011), 75–76. 11. For killing his brother, Abel, Cain was cursed and fated to wander “the face of the earth.” When Cain protested that others would kill him, God placed a mark on Cain so that whoever found him would not slay him. The Bible reports that Cain later “dwelled in the land of Nod east of Eden.” Gen. 4:11–13, 15–16. 12. Douglass quotes a proverb that can be attributed to Plutarch. Plutarch, “The Life of Sertorius,” in The Parallel Lives, trans. Bernadotte Perrin, 11 vols. (Cambridge, 1923), 8:313.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 124
9/1/21 4:16 PM
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
125
13. Estimates vary, but there seem to have been around 180,000 African American soldiers serving in the Civil War. EAAH, 2:365. 14. Although the 1800 Act of Union merged Ireland with Great Britain under the United Kingdom, the relationship between the two countries remained strained throughout the nineteenth century. To many Irish, the union was one of subordination, and these nationalists continued to rebel against English rule. Most of the English, however, viewed themselves as benefactors helping the oppressed Irish peasantry free themselves from the corrupt Irish ruling class. It was instilled in many of the British that the Irish were inferior, violent, barbarous, and therefore incapable of efficiently ruling their own country. Thus, Ireland was ruled much like a colony, with the English taking control of local leadership and running the government to support English, not Irish, interests. The Irish resented this type of colonial rule as well as the common English belief in Irish inferiority. Patrick O’Farrell, England and Ireland since 1800 (New York, 1975), 2–6, 21, 31, 35–36, 49–51, 155; Carla King, “Michael Davit, Irish Nationalism and the British Empire in the Late Nineteenth Century,” in Victoria’s Ireland? Irishness and Britishness, 1837–1901, ed. Peter Gray (Dublin, Ire., 2004), 118; Virginia Crossman, “Local Government in Nineteenth-Century Ireland,” in Was Ireland a Colony? Economics, Politics and Culture in Nineteenth-Century Ireland, ed. Terrence McDonough (Dublin, 2005), 103. 15. During the 1848 Hungarian Revolution, Emperor Ferdinand I accepted what were known as the April Laws, which granted Hungary autonomy in many aspects of government. But after Austria put down the revolution the following year, it denied the validity of the April Laws, which caused unrest among the Hungarians. During the 1860s, Hungarians grew more resentful of Austria’s political dominance, and the threat of revolution became apparent. In May 1867, an Austro-Hungarian compromise was written into law, and in June, the Austrian emperor Francis Joseph was crowned King of Hungary. While the compromise granted Hungary a certain level of independence from Vienna, it was clear the country was still part of the Hapsburg Empire. Under the compromise, the two countries would have the same monarch, a single currency, common foreign and defense policies, joint armed forces, and unified diplomatic representation. For a while, the compromise satisfied the Hungarians’ desire for political independence from Austria. C. A. Macartney, The Habsburg Empire, 1790–1918 (New York, 1969), 341, 394, 413, 500, 506–10, 551–53; John W. Mason, The Dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, 1867–1918 (1985; New York, 1997), 6; Robert Bideleux and Ian Jeffries, A History of Eastern Europe: Crisis and Change (New York, 1998), 341–42. 16. On 19 February 1861, Tsar Alexander II signed legislation that abolished serfdom in Russia. Public announcement of this legislation, however, was not made until 5 March, the beginning of Lent. Alexander and his regime hoped that during this religious holiday season, the peasants would be in a more compliant and grateful mood and would thus be less susceptible to uprisings and discontent. Serfdom was not abolished by a single decree but by a number of measures leading to gradual emancipation. This process was divided into three stages: a two-year transitional period; an undetermined period of “temporary obligation” during which serfs were given permanent rights to allotments of land in return for fixed obligations; and a redemption operation in which peasants paid for their allotments in installments over a period of forty-nine years. Immediately following the February legislation, all serfs became legally free and were no longer wholly dependent on their estate owners. Additionally, they could be neither bought nor sold, nor punished by estate owners. They received the same legal status as free rural citizens, which allowed them to marry, buy and sell property, and enter into legally binding contracts. While many peasants were somewhat disillusioned by this legislation—particularly by the complex nature of the statues as well as the longevity of its implementation—others celebrated the beginning of the end of Russian serfdom. Daniel Field, The End of Serfdom: Nobility and Bureaucracy in Russia, 1855–1861 (Cambridge, Mass., 1976), 356–61; David Moon, The Abolition of Serfdom in Russia, 1762–1907 (London, 2001), 70–82. 17. With the Representation of the People Act of 1867 (commonly known as the Second Reform Act), the British Crown restructured property qualifications for enfranchisement in such a fashion
Y7870-Douglass.indb 125
9/1/21 4:16 PM
126
AN APPEAL TO CONGRESS FOR IMPARTIAL SUFFRAGE
as to double the eligible voting population. F. W. Maitland, The Constitutional History of England (Cambridge, 1955), 360. 18. During 1866, there was an increase in white violence against blacks in the South, especially in Memphis, New Orleans, and parts of Texas. On 1 May 1866, two teams of horses, one driven by a black man and the other driven by a white man, collided on a street in Memphis. After angry words were exchanged, the argument became violent. Nearby policemen rushed to the scene and were met by a group of discharged black veterans, who intervened. During the three days of racial violence following this incident, white mobs assaulted blacks on the streets and invaded a nearby shantytown that housed the families of black soldiers stationed at Fort Pickering. When the violence ended, at least forty-eight people were dead. Only two of the victims were white, and several hundred black houses, churches, and schools had been destroyed. Following the Memphis race riots, violence erupted in New Orleans in June 1866, arising mainly from Reconstruction politics. Former Confederates had risen to power in the city, and Governor James M. Wells constructed a plan to reconvene the Constitutional Convention of 1864, not only to enfranchise blacks but also to prohibit former rebels from voting. On 30 June, a group of two hundred blacks gathered in the streets to support the convention. Fighting soon broke out, and policemen, instead of attempting to curb the violence, joined their fellow whites in the attack. As a result, thirty-four blacks and three white Radicals were killed. In Texas, blacks were routinely beaten and murdered throughout 1866. Whites, many of them Ku Klux Klan members, were unrestrained by the government or military, and the Freedmen’s Bureau in the state was unable to establish any sense of order. Craven, Reconstruction, 185–87; Foner, Reconstruction, 119, 261–63; George C. Rable, But There Was No Peace: The Role of Violence in the Politics of Reconstruction (1984; Athens, Ga., 2007), 39, 43–44, 51–52; Christopher Bean, “The Post of Greatest Peril? The Freedmen’s Bureau Subassistant Commissioners and Reconstruction Violence in Texas, 1865–1869,” in Still the Arena of Civil War: Violence and Turmoil in Reconstruction Texas, 1865–1874, ed. Kenneth W. Howell (Denton, Tex., 2012), 39–40. 19. Although commonly attributed to the Revolutionary War patriot James Otis of Massachusetts, variations of the phrase had been in circulation for several decades in disputes between the American colonies and British Parliament. William Tudor, The Life of James Otis of Massachusetts (1823; New York, 1970), 90. 20. Douglass is referring to President Andrew Johnson’s reaction to the proceedings of the National Union Convention held in Philadelphia, 14–16 August 1866. During the convention, delegates from South Carolina and Massachusetts entered the hall arm in arm in a display of reconciliatory spirit. While Johnson did not attend the convention, a committee led by Maryland senator Reverdy Johnson met with the president at the White House on 18 August to deliver the convention’s official proceedings. President Johnson praised the delegates from South Carolina and Massachusetts for coming together, united once again on the preservation of the Union. He continued by claiming that “when the dispatch informed me that in that vast body of men, distinguished for intellect and wisdom, every eye was suffused with tears on beholding the scene, I could not finish reading the dispatch to an associate with me in the office, for my own feelings overcame me.” Several newspapers printed these presidential remarks. Cleveland Daily Herald, 20 August 1866; Salt Lake City Daily Telegraph, 21 August 1866; Bergeron, Andrew Johnson’s Civil War, 124–25. 21. South Carolina is nicknamed the Palmetto State after its state tree, the sabal palmetto. Shankle, State Names, Flags, Seals, 145. 22. Matt. 4:9. 23. Soon after the South’s defeat in the Civil War, an ideology termed the “Lost Cause philosophy” surfaced, effectively rewriting the war’s purpose and outcome. According to this revisionist view, the South’s intent became a noble struggle for states’ rights rather than the maintenance of slavery, and Southerners argued that they had not been defeated in the war but simply outnumbered. Heartily endorsed in the South, this view of history became increasingly accepted, though inaccurate, well into the twentieth century, even influencing Northern states’ interpretation of the Civil
Y7870-Douglass.indb 126
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SALMON P. CHASE
127
War. In Lost Cause accounts, the war was romanticized and glorified, while the cruelty of slavery was completely ignored. Grady McWhiney, Braxton Bragg and Confederate Defeat (New York, 1969), vii-xi; David W. Blight, Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory (Cambridge, Mass., 2001), 37–38, 258–60, 452–53; Dwight T. Pitcaithley, “The American Civil War and the Preservation of Memory,” Cultural Resource Management, 25:5–9 (2002). 24. Douglass refers to a parable that Jesus told. It is foolish to put new wine into old bottles because the old bottles will break, consequently ruining the bottle and the wine. Matt. 9:16–17 or Mark 2:21–22 25. Possibly an allusion to Isa. 11:6 or 65:25.
SALMON P. CHASE (1868) National Anti-Slavery Standard, 18 July 1868. Other texts in Louisville Courier-Journal, 22 July 1868; Burlington (Vt.) Free Press, 25 July 1868; Hillsboro (Ohio) Highland Weekly News, 6 August 1868; San Francisco Elevator, 11 September 1868.
Salmon Portland Chase (1808–73) served as a U.S. senator, cabinet officer, and chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He taught school briefly in Washington, D.C., before settling in Cincinnati, where he began a legal career and defended a number of fugitive slaves as well as the abolitionist editor James G. Birney. Initially a Whig, Chase joined the Liberty party in 1840, and in 1848 he presided at the Buffalo Convention of the Free Soil party. The next year, a coalition of Free Soilers and Democrats in the Ohio legislature sent Chase to the U.S. Senate, where he remained until 1854. In the wake of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Chase joined the Republican party, and from 1855 to 1859 he served as governor of Ohio. In 1861, he became Lincoln’s secretary of the treasury and quickly aligned himself with Radical Republicans, ultimately becoming the focus of opposition to Lincoln within the party. In July 1864, after an abortive movement to nominate him for the presidency, Chase resigned from the cabinet, only to be appointed chief justice of the Supreme Court in October. Before and after his appointment to the Court, Chase was a strong spokesman for black suffrage and the Radical program of Reconstruction. A persistent aspirant to the Republican presidential nomination, Chase also sought the Democratic nomination in 1868. Democratic leaders insisted that he denounce the Reconstruction Acts and abandon the principle of universal suffrage in order to receive
Y7870-Douglass.indb 127
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SALMON P. CHASE
127
War. In Lost Cause accounts, the war was romanticized and glorified, while the cruelty of slavery was completely ignored. Grady McWhiney, Braxton Bragg and Confederate Defeat (New York, 1969), vii-xi; David W. Blight, Race and Reunion: The Civil War in American Memory (Cambridge, Mass., 2001), 37–38, 258–60, 452–53; Dwight T. Pitcaithley, “The American Civil War and the Preservation of Memory,” Cultural Resource Management, 25:5–9 (2002). 24. Douglass refers to a parable that Jesus told. It is foolish to put new wine into old bottles because the old bottles will break, consequently ruining the bottle and the wine. Matt. 9:16–17 or Mark 2:21–22 25. Possibly an allusion to Isa. 11:6 or 65:25.
SALMON P. CHASE (1868) National Anti-Slavery Standard, 18 July 1868. Other texts in Louisville Courier-Journal, 22 July 1868; Burlington (Vt.) Free Press, 25 July 1868; Hillsboro (Ohio) Highland Weekly News, 6 August 1868; San Francisco Elevator, 11 September 1868.
Salmon Portland Chase (1808–73) served as a U.S. senator, cabinet officer, and chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. He taught school briefly in Washington, D.C., before settling in Cincinnati, where he began a legal career and defended a number of fugitive slaves as well as the abolitionist editor James G. Birney. Initially a Whig, Chase joined the Liberty party in 1840, and in 1848 he presided at the Buffalo Convention of the Free Soil party. The next year, a coalition of Free Soilers and Democrats in the Ohio legislature sent Chase to the U.S. Senate, where he remained until 1854. In the wake of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Chase joined the Republican party, and from 1855 to 1859 he served as governor of Ohio. In 1861, he became Lincoln’s secretary of the treasury and quickly aligned himself with Radical Republicans, ultimately becoming the focus of opposition to Lincoln within the party. In July 1864, after an abortive movement to nominate him for the presidency, Chase resigned from the cabinet, only to be appointed chief justice of the Supreme Court in October. Before and after his appointment to the Court, Chase was a strong spokesman for black suffrage and the Radical program of Reconstruction. A persistent aspirant to the Republican presidential nomination, Chase also sought the Democratic nomination in 1868. Democratic leaders insisted that he denounce the Reconstruction Acts and abandon the principle of universal suffrage in order to receive
Y7870-Douglass.indb 127
9/1/21 4:16 PM
128
SALMON P. CHASE
the party’s nomination. While Chase did water down his position on these issues and received some initial support, the Democrats adopted a platform at their convention that he could not accept. Once again, he fell short of the presidential nomination, but this time Chase’s reputation suffered. He allowed his desire for office to overshadow his political principles, and to many he was simply considered an “opportunist of remorseless ambition.” In his article for the National Anti-Slavery Standard, Douglass offered a scathing critique of Chase and his reversal of political alliance. It was reprinted extensively in newspapers across the nation. Frederick J. Blue, Salmon P. Chase: A Life in Politics (Kent, Ohio, 1987); James Brewer Stewart, Joshua R. Giddings and the Tactics of Radical Politics (Cleveland, 1970), 116–18, 153–54; John Niven, Salmon P. Chase: A Biography (New York, 1995), 426–32; Sewell, Ballots for Freedom, 90; Reinhard H. Luthin, “Salmon P. Chase’s Political Career before the Civil War,” Mississippi Valley Historical Review, 29:517–40 (March 1943); DAB, 4:27–34; John W. Blassingame, ed., Antislavery Newspapers and Periodicals, 5 vols. (Boston, 1980–84), 4:7–8.
The career of this distinguished man having now reached a termination hardly less instructive than melancholy, it becomes those who have felt the deepest interest in his life and character, to recognize the fact of his apostacy and protect themselves as far as possible from its damaging consequences, by holding his example up to moral indignation, and earnest reprobation. The position of Mr. Chase before the late Democratic Convention1—viewed in connection, with his early history and the sources from which he has mainly derived popular consideration—is certainly one of the saddest spectacles which can afflict the eyes of men. An Abolitionist of thirty years standing—a Liberty Party man of the olden time,2 when that party could only count seven thousand votes in the whole country—an Anti-Slavery lawyer, trusted most by the trembling fugitive from slavery3—an Abolition politician and statesman, indebted for his distinction, his high position among his countrymen mainly to his supposed unselfish and inflexible devotion to human liberty and especially to that of the much hated negro; is found at last, in the gutter before Tammany Hall—piteously imploring the Democratic party to nominate him as their candidate for the Presidency,4 urging as his chief recommendation
Y7870-Douglass.indb 128
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SALMON P. CHASE
129
his ability to demoralize a sufficient number of his old Anti-Slavery associates to put the government into the hands of the Democratic party the next four years. “What a falling off was there my countrymen!”5 Here is treachery compared with which that of Webster,6 Seward,7 Charles Francis Adams8 and Andrew Johnson, whitens into innocence. The fall of Mr. Chase is more scandalous and shocking than that of any other of which American history affords an example. His descent is from a point higher—he has fallen further—and he reaches a depth of infamy deeper, and hotter than that of any of his predecessors in treachery. It is only a few months ago that he was seeking to win to himself the votes of the colored men of the South on the ground that he more than any other prominent man best represented their interests and their rights, and now he is for a party whose chief claim to popular regard is based upon its hostility to the negro and its purpose to place him in a condition only less wretched than the slavery from which the war for the Union had rescued him. It is not many weeks since that good man GERRET SMITH was vigorously pressing the name of Mr. Chase for the Presidency.9 He was evidently surprised if not grieved, that I was not equally earnest in the same work. He could not understand why I should favor the nomination and election of Gen. Grant in preference to Chief Justice Chase. Mr. Smith will have no difficulty in understanding my preference now. The fact is I have for many years been troubled with doubts of this man’s Anti-Slavery trust-worthiness. Before Mr. Chase had betrayed that heroic woman, Margaret Garner,10 into the hands of Kentucky slave-hunters; before he deserted Mr. Lincoln, and sought to supplant him in 1864; before he accepted the Chief Justiceship, as the price of his support of the second election of Mr. Lincoln;11 before he manifested his inordinate desire for the Presidency by leaving the treasury (where his services were most needed by the country) in order to put himself in training for the Presidential nomination; before he framed excuses for his failure to try Jefferson Davis;12 before he brought the whole influence of his position and learning to shield Andrew Johnson from deserved impeachment, and before his present identification of himself, with all the vile abominations of the Democratic platform, I had uncomfortable impressions of the man of which I could not (though I often desired to) divest myself. A portrait of the character of Mr. Chase given me by Hon. Samuel Lewis, of Cincinnati when that good man and faithful Abolitionist was
Y7870-Douglass.indb 129
9/1/21 4:16 PM
130
SALMON P. CHASE
on his dying bed, has (despite of all efforts to shake it off and forget it) followed me for a dozen years and more, and has become more and more vivid as time and events have developed the true status of the man. The judgment of Mr. Lewis was that Mr. Chase was not to be trusted in any emergency—that he was coldly selfish and intensely ambitious—and that in furtherance of his ambition he would sacrifice the Abolition cause or any other. I was shocked by this portrait of Mr. Chase and disputed its accuracy at the time, but its ugly features have confronted me ever since. Hence, gross and unexpected as was the defection of Mr. Chase to many of his friends, it was not wholly unlooked for by me. He has confirmed the bad opinion of him in every particular. Greedy for the Presidency, he has not hesitated to renounce all ties of ancient friendship, to repudiate all obligations of gratitude, to disregard the sentiment of reserve which befits his present high office, to intrigue and scramble for a nomination at the hands of a party conspicuous for the bitterest hostility to the professed principles of his whole life, and whose triumph in the coming election would be the direst calamity. The signal defeat, rebuke and humiliation of the inordinate ambition of Chief Justice Chase, in some measure atones for the democratic baseness, which accomplished his seduction. He has soiled his judicial ermine in vain. He is, like Wolsey, left naked to his enemies.13 The two or three votes he got, instead of conferring honor, only render his isolation and destitution the more conspicuous. The Democrats “loved the treason,” but as usual, despised the traitor. His success, in the circumstances, would have been a sad disaster to the political morals of the country. As the case now stands, Mr. Chase is a warning to all after comers. He has parted with his principles, sold himself to the enemy and lost his price. A defense of Mr. Chase is already whispered. He merely meant to purify the Democratic party! He did not mean to descend to its level, but lift the party to his. He simply went into it to reform it. On this theory, folly is added to knavery. He attempts to deceive the Democratic party to purify it of deception! To defraud the party to make it more honest! To the democrats he says I am with you, I stand on your platform. To his old friends he says, I do no such thing, but stand where I have stood through life. I am willing that the democratic party shall come to me, but I have no purpose to go to it. This defense is now worse than the crime—and is only less hurtful because its lying hypocrisy is open and manifest to all. Hereafter, let us hear no more of Mr. Chase as the negro’s candidate or the negro’s friend. He is a deserter from our ranks, in face of the en-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 130
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SALMON P. CHASE
131
emy, and is simply not in the enemies ranks because—they despised and spurned him. His degradation is complete and he will have to live longer than Chief Justice Taney, if he outlives the memory of this flagrant transgression. In sorrow more than anger we part with him. His crime though great has met an equal punishment. Let us hope it will prove salutary if not to him, at least to others who may be tempted in like manner to betray their principles. FREDERICK DOUGLASS. 1. When the Democratic National Convention assembled in New York City in early July 1868, Chase was hopeful that he might secure that party’s presidential nomination. While he had made certain concessions to Democrats in an effort to appease party leaders, the platform adopted at the convention discouraged Chase. It intensely denounced Reconstruction and rejected the idea that the federal government could impose conditions for voting. In contrast, Chase was a longtime advocate of universal suffrage. Although he had differences with Congress over Reconstruction, the Democratic platform was more radical in its opposition. Chase was further disappointed when his longtime adversary, Francis P. Blair, Jr., was nominated as the vice presidential candidate. Blue, Salmon P. Chase, 292–95; Niven, Salmon P. Chase, 431–32. 2. By 1840, Salmon P. Chase had become disillusioned with the Whig party and its inaction on slavery. In the fall of 1841, he joined the Liberty party, but not without some misgivings regarding a party narrowly dedicated to abolition. Almost immediately after joining the party’s ranks, he began efforts to combine it with antislavery Whigs and Democrats. In the next few years, Chase participated in organizing conventions and letter-writing campaigns to entice antislavery men to join the party. By 1847, he realized the limitations of the Liberty party and began moving toward the creation of the broader-based Free Soil party, which opposed the westward spread of slavery. Niven, Salmon P. Chase, 62, 67, 69; Michael F. Holt, The Rise and Fall of the American Whig Party: Jacksonian Politics and the Onset of the Civil War (New York, 1999), 333; Luthin, “Salmon P. Chase’s Political Career,” 29:517–19. 3. During his career as a lawyer in Cincinnati, Ohio, Chase came to be known as the “Attorney General for Runaway Negroes.” While the title was mainly used by his opponents, Chase took pride in his newly established reputation. In 1837, he defended Matilda, a maid of the abolitionist James Birney, who had recently been seized as a fugitive. Although he lost the case, he gained prominence by making an eloquent defense of natural rights while simultaneously questioning the boundaries between federal and state relations. In 1841, Chase defended Mary Towns, a former slave who had been living as a free woman in Cincinnati for ten years but was seized to be returned to Kentucky into slavery. Chase claimed that the slave owner’s affidavit did not declare Towns a fugitive, and so, on the basis of his positive law argument, she was freed. In 1845, a slave named Samuel Watson was taken voluntarily to Cincinnati by a steamboat with his owner, Henry Hoppess. When Watson disappeared, Hoppess found him standing on the landing and forced him back to the boat. When the incident was reported to Chase, he quickly sought a writ of habeas corpus to defend Watson and prove he was free. As in the Matilda case, Watson was ordered back to slavery, despite the attempt made by Chase. From these fugitive slave cases, Chase gained national recognition as a defender of antislavery principles. Blue, Salmon P. Chase, 31–33, 36–40; Niven, Salmon P. Chase, 50–56, 62–63, 76–78, 81–85. 4. The Democrats held their 1868 national convention in the newly constructed Tammany Hall. The building, located on Fourteenth Street in New York City, served as the home of the Tammany Society. The society, commonly referred to as simply “Tammany,” was established in 1789, and had previously met in a building located on the corner of Nassau and Frankfort. The dedication of the new Tammany Hall was held on 4 July 1868, the first day of the Democratic National Convention.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 131
9/1/21 4:16 PM
132
SALMON P. CHASE
Euphemia Vale Blake, History of the Tammany Society, or Columbian Order, from Its Organization to the Present Time (New York, 1901), 11; Gustavus Myers, The History of Tammany Hall (1901; New York, 1917), 215–16; Niven, Salmon P. Chase, 430. 5. A paraphrase of Julius Caesar, sc. 9, line 1574. 6. A lawyer, politician, and brilliant orator, Daniel Webster (1782–1852) was born in New Hampshire and educated at Dartmouth College. His career as a successful lawyer led him into politics, and he served in numerous elected and appointed positions throughout his life. His service in the U.S. Senate was especially noteworthy for his speeches on Federalist issues, and he is considered by some one of the best senators in U.S. history. Always a nationalist, Webster clashed with congressional states’-rights advocates such as John C. Calhoun. Usually, however, he was able to compromise and avoid talk of secession. Although he was an outspoken opponent of slavery and its spread into the territories, Webster provoked criticism from abolitionists over his involvement in the Compromise of 1850. In an effort to save the Union and thwart secession, Webster delivered a speech in the Senate on 7 March 1850 in support of the proposed compromise measures. His strategy was to deemphasize the moral aspect of slavery and separate abolitionists from the rest of the North in order to diminish their influence, saying that Northerners had a constitutional obligation to return fugitive slaves to their owners. Abolitionists publicly attacked the senator for his speech. Douglass claimed that Webster had the opportunity to display his power and influence as an orator “in a manner which would have done essential service to the cause of human freedom,” but instead he “occupied his time to no good purpose.” NS, 15 March 1850; Robert V. Remini, Daniel Webster: The Man and His Time (New York, 1997); Craig R. Smith, Daniel Webster and the Oratory of Civil Religion (Columbia, Mo., 2005), 227–28; ANB (online). 7. After the Civil War, William H. Seward continued serving as secretary of state under Andrew Johnson and clashed with congressional Radical Republicans, endorsing more moderate Reconstruction policies. On 28 August 1866, he joined Johnson on his speaking tour; Seward urged audiences to support the president, called for a speedy restoration of the Union, and favored the admission of Southern congressional representatives without further delay. The tour, known as the “swing around the circle,” was extremely unpopular, and Seward’s involvement in the event and his loyalty to Johnson prompted criticism from Republicans. Daily Cleveland Herald, 31 August 1866; Bancroft, Life of William H. Seward; ACAB, 5:470–73; DAB, 16:615–21. 8. Charles Francis Adams (1807–86), the third son of John Quincy and Louisa Catherine Adams, was born in Boston, Massachusetts, but he spent much of his childhood in St. Petersburg, Russia, where his father was the U.S. ambassador. After returning to the United States, Adams studied law in the office of Daniel Webster and graduated from Harvard College. Entering state politics, he served in the Massachusetts House from 1841 to 1843 and in the state senate from 1844 to 1845. In 1845, Adams assumed the editorship of the Boston Whig; three years later, he received the Free Soil party’s nomination as Martin Van Buren’s vice presidential running mate. Adams served a term in Congress (1859–61) as a Republican before accepting appointment from President Abraham Lincoln to become U.S. ambassador to the Court of St. James. He remained ambassador under the Johnson administration and incited criticism from Radical Republicans during Reconstruction for opposing the employment of the military to remake Southern governments. While he acknowledged Johnson’s personal weaknesses, Adams supported his attempt to maintain executive power and viewed his impeachment as a disgrace. He also opposed black suffrage as long as there remained substantial opposition among white Southerners. Upon returning to Boston in 1868, Adams was practically ostracized by the Radical Republicans, many of whom believed that he was shifting to the Democratic party. Vowing to remain in political retirement unless otherwise compelled by duty, he left public life to edit the papers of his father and grandfather. Martin Duberman, Charles Francis Adams, 1807–1886 (Boston, 1961); NCAB, 8:351–53; DAB, 1:48–52. 9. On 12 June 1868, Gerrit Smith published a circular entitled Destroy Not Man’s Faith in Man! Accept the Right Man, Whichever Party Nominates Him! Smith gave a contingent endorsement to
Y7870-Douglass.indb 132
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SALMON P. CHASE
133
Ulysses S. Grant and Schuyler Colfax, the hopeful Republican candidates for president and vice president. But he went on to write that he would rejoice to see Salmon P. Chase nominated for president, declaring, “If contrary to my expectations, the Democrats shall have the wisdom to nominate the Chief Justice,” along with an acceptable vice presidential candidate, “I shall prefer to vote for the Democratic Candidates.” Printed Ephemera Collection, portfolio 127, folder 31, DLC; Chase, Salmon P. Chase Papers, 5:232–33n. 10. Margaret Garner was a young slave woman who had spent her life in Kentucky on a small plantation called Maplewood, eighteen miles from Cincinnati. In January 1856, Garner, who was thought to have been around twenty-two, escaped into Ohio with her husband, Simon, their four children, and Simon’s father. Soon after crossing the border, the family was found by a group of slave catchers. Margaret became hysterical, declared that she would rather see her family dead before she would return to slavery, and proceeded to slit her two-year-old daughter’s throat with a butcher knife. She was apprehended before she could harm her other children or herself. The family was initially placed into federal custody, but the probate judge of Hamilton County issued a writ of habeas corpus in order to charge Garner with murder. A debate ensued over whether the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 violated habeas corpus and Ohio’s police power. After a trial that lasted two weeks, Garner and her family were sent back to slavery in Kentucky under the federal law. Chase, serving as Ohio’s governor at the time, let the courts decide the case without his involvement. After the trial concluded, he implored Governor Morehead of Kentucky to send the family back to Ohio. But by the time the papers were received, Garner’s owner had sold the family in New Orleans. Levi Coffin, Reminiscences of Levi Coffi n, the Reputed President of the Underground Railroad; Being a Brief History of the Labors of a Lifetime in Behalf of the Slave, with the Stories of Numerous Fugitives, Who Gained Their Freedom Through His Instrumentality, and Many Other Incidents (Cincinnati, 1876), 559–62; Niven, Salmon P. Chase, 183–84; Sarah Mitchell, “Mother, Murderess, or Martyr? Press Coverage of the Margaret Garner Story,” in Seeking a Voice: Images of Race and Gender in the 19th Century Press, ed. David B Sachsman, S. Kittrell Rushing, and Roy Morris, Jr. (West Lafayette, Ind., 2009), 13, 19, 23; Julius Yanuck, “The Garner Fugitive Slave Case,” MVHR, 40:47–66 (June 1953). 11. Although Chase lost the Republican presidential nomination to Lincoln in 1860, he found that some Radicals preferred him to Lincoln as the party’s 1864 candidate. Radical Republicans, frustrated with Lincoln and his proposed plans for Reconstruction, were eager to replace him with someone more in line with their ideas. In early 1864, Senator Samuel Pomeroy of Kansas organized a committee that supported Chase and wrote a circular nominating him as a presidential candidate. Although the circular was marked confidential, newspapers began printing it in February 1864. It criticized Lincoln and warned that his reelection would bring more compromises and the continuation of the war, and it praised Chase for having “more of the qualities needed in a President during the next four years than are combined in any other available candidate.” Ultimately, Pomeroy’s circular backfired, causing Republicans to pledge their loyalty to Lincoln while placing Chase in a difficult position in the president’s cabinet. Although Chase admitted to allowing the committee to use his name, he claimed to have had no knowledge of the circular and offered his resignation as secretary of treasury. Lincoln did not accept the offer. By March, Chase had withdrawn his name from consideration. After Lincoln was renominated in June, he accepted a new offer of resignation from Chase. New York Tribune, 23 February 1864; Blue, Salmon P. Chase, 215–16, 221–23, 226; Niven, Salmon P. Chase, 357, 360–61, 365–66, 369. 12. Captured by Union soldiers soon after the collapse of the Confederate military resistance, Jefferson Davis languished in prison at Fortress Monroe in Virginia as federal authorities argued over whether to try him for treason. While also serving as presiding judge of the federal circuit court in Virginia, Chief Justice Chase delayed Davis’s trial while exploring jurisdictional issues. Privately, Chase favored leniency toward Davis and did not want to allow him a day in court to argue the legality of Southern secession. Chase also argued that Davis had already been punished for his offense by the newly enacted Fourteenth Amendment, which barred former high-ranking Confederate officials
Y7870-Douglass.indb 133
9/1/21 4:16 PM
134
THE WORK BEFORE US
from again holding public office. Therefore, Chase contended, a treason trial of Davis would violate the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition against double jeopardy. The other judge on the Virginia circuit court disagreed with Chase, however, and Davis was instead freed by a full pardon from outgoing president Andrew Johnson that granted all Confederates clemency for the “offence of treason.” William Blair, Why Didn’t the North Hang Some Rebels? The Postwar Debate over Punishment for Treason (Milwaukee, Wisc., 2004), 15; C. Ellen Connally, “The Use of the Fourteenth Amendment by Salmon P. Chase in the Trial of Jefferson Davis,” Akron Law Review, 42:1165–1200 (2009). 13. Cardinal Wolsey made the speech containing the phrase “naked to mine enemies” as he left the court in disgrace in Shakespeare’s King Henry VIII, sc. 10, lines 1949–51. Wolsey was held responsible for the failure to secure a papal annulment of the marriage of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon so that the king could marry Anne Boleyn.
THE WORK BEFORE US (1868) New York Independent, 27 August 1868.
After receiving an invitation from Theodore Tilton, editor of the Independent, Douglass wrote the following article and responded, “If you deem [it] good enough for the place and the time, you may insert it in the columns of your grand Independent.” The article endorsed the Republicans Ulysses S. Grant and Schuyler Colfax for the presidential election of 1868 over the Democratic party ticket of Horatio Seymour and Frank P. Blair. Douglass to Theodore Tilton, 6 August 1868, Gratz Collection, case 8, box 8, Historical Society of Pennsylvania; W. Dean Burnham, Presidential Ballots, 1836–1892 (Baltimore, 1955), 98–108.
It is eminently creditable to the sagacity, if not to the honesty, of the Democratic leaders that they prefer to limit discussion of the merits of their party, in the present canvass, strictly to the platform adopted in New York by their Fourth of July National Convention.1 For very obvious reasons, they are “dead” against dead issues. There is as much shrewdness as apparent resignation in their willingness to let “bygones be bygones.”2 In this prompt, business-like course there would be much to commend if one did [illegible] it is a very ugly fact which it is designed to conceal. In the effort to withdraw the war record of the Democratic party there is either a sense of its criminality or a conviction of its present odiousness. Their policy evidently is to attack, not to defend; and in this they are wise. They are smart men, and largely gifted with powers of utterance; but the task
Y7870-Douglass.indb 134
9/1/21 4:16 PM
134
THE WORK BEFORE US
from again holding public office. Therefore, Chase contended, a treason trial of Davis would violate the Fifth Amendment’s prohibition against double jeopardy. The other judge on the Virginia circuit court disagreed with Chase, however, and Davis was instead freed by a full pardon from outgoing president Andrew Johnson that granted all Confederates clemency for the “offence of treason.” William Blair, Why Didn’t the North Hang Some Rebels? The Postwar Debate over Punishment for Treason (Milwaukee, Wisc., 2004), 15; C. Ellen Connally, “The Use of the Fourteenth Amendment by Salmon P. Chase in the Trial of Jefferson Davis,” Akron Law Review, 42:1165–1200 (2009). 13. Cardinal Wolsey made the speech containing the phrase “naked to mine enemies” as he left the court in disgrace in Shakespeare’s King Henry VIII, sc. 10, lines 1949–51. Wolsey was held responsible for the failure to secure a papal annulment of the marriage of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon so that the king could marry Anne Boleyn.
THE WORK BEFORE US (1868) New York Independent, 27 August 1868.
After receiving an invitation from Theodore Tilton, editor of the Independent, Douglass wrote the following article and responded, “If you deem [it] good enough for the place and the time, you may insert it in the columns of your grand Independent.” The article endorsed the Republicans Ulysses S. Grant and Schuyler Colfax for the presidential election of 1868 over the Democratic party ticket of Horatio Seymour and Frank P. Blair. Douglass to Theodore Tilton, 6 August 1868, Gratz Collection, case 8, box 8, Historical Society of Pennsylvania; W. Dean Burnham, Presidential Ballots, 1836–1892 (Baltimore, 1955), 98–108.
It is eminently creditable to the sagacity, if not to the honesty, of the Democratic leaders that they prefer to limit discussion of the merits of their party, in the present canvass, strictly to the platform adopted in New York by their Fourth of July National Convention.1 For very obvious reasons, they are “dead” against dead issues. There is as much shrewdness as apparent resignation in their willingness to let “bygones be bygones.”2 In this prompt, business-like course there would be much to commend if one did [illegible] it is a very ugly fact which it is designed to conceal. In the effort to withdraw the war record of the Democratic party there is either a sense of its criminality or a conviction of its present odiousness. Their policy evidently is to attack, not to defend; and in this they are wise. They are smart men, and largely gifted with powers of utterance; but the task
Y7870-Douglass.indb 134
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE WORK BEFORE US
135
of defending the policy of their party during the war would leave time for little else, were they once to enter upon it. They therefore cast it aside altogether. They know that, like Lord Granby’s character, there are some things which can only pass without censure, as they pass without observation.3 No men more readily than they perceive the effect which time and events have wrought in the minds of men. Deeds which were once done with impunity, and even gloried in at the time of their perpetration, by a slight change in the varying current of events, assume an aspect too revolting for defense. It is now much easier to assail the Republican party for its awkward management of public affairs than to defend the efforts of Governor Seymour and his friends to resist the drafts and other necessary measures for the preservation of the Union.4 So far as the endeavor to divert attention from the position occupied by the Democratic party during the war may be taken as a confession, it is at least valuable to outsiders. It is always a decided gain to the cause of justice to have even an implied admission of guilt on the part of the culprit. Excellent, however, as confession is, it does very little good to anybody unless coupled with an honest purpose to forsake the evil way, and an earnest effort to reform. Of course, nothing of this sort is a part of the purpose of the Democratic leaders. No men know better than themselves that their party cannot afford to repent. A party without voters is among the most worthless of all worthless things. What the Democratic party now most of all wants is voters—members. These are to be had mainly from those classes of the American people who are proud of their contempt for humanity—who scout benevolence and brotherly kindness as the weakest nonsense. The party can only thrive where pride of race and narrow selfishness would appropriate to a class the rights which belong to the whole human family. To renounce this meanness would be to renounce its existence. Its mission is to keep alive all the malice which the negro’s loyalty and his limited freedom have kindled against him. This is the necessity of the party. The country is divided; and, when it is impossible for a party to receive support from one part, it must seek it in another. Abuse of the negro is not, therefore, always to be taken as a matter of choice on the part of Democratic editors and speakers; but rather as a necessity of the party to which they belong. How much the Democratic party might gain were it, merely with a view to its own strength, to endeavor to lead a new life is a speculation upon which I need not enter. The little effort made in that direction with Mr. Chase5 is thought to have done the party more harm than good. The
Y7870-Douglass.indb 135
9/1/21 4:16 PM
136
THE WORK BEFORE US
party is strongest with those who stand no nonsense of this decent sort. They want no smooth-faced concessions to virtue. They want the genuine pungent article of the negro, with two “gg’s.” Besides, nobody could well believe in it were the party to declare a change of heart and purpose. With a confessed trickster and falsifier as its standard-bearer (a man who, if the reports of his associates can be relief upon, secured his nomination by a course of cunning, duplicity, lying, treachery, and bribery unparalleled in the history of party politics), people would be slow to accept the professions of such a party. But let us not be deceived or diverted from the real work we have in hand. The contest to which all good and true men are summoned in the present canvass is no new one. It is, in fact, but a continuation of the mighty struggle of a great nation to shake off an old and worn-out system of barbarism, with all its natural concomitants of evil. It is a part of our thirty years’ effort to place the country in harmony with the age, and to make her what she ought to be—a leader, and not a mere follower, in the pathway of civilization. Rebellion has been subdued, slavery abolished, and peace proclaimed; and yet our work is not done. The Democratic party has changed the whole face of affairs. The foe is the same, though we are to meet him on a different field and under different leaders. In the ranks of Seymour and Blair6 is the rebel army, without its arms. Let not the connection of the present with the past be ignored nor forgotten. We are face to face with the same old enemy of liberty and progress that has planted agony at a million hearthstones in our land. There has been no change in the character or in the general purpose of the Democratic party. It is for peace or for war, or against either, precisely as it can be made to serve the great privileged class at the South, to which it belongs. The party that annexed Texas;7 that began and prosecuted the inglorious war against a neighboring Republic,8 thus setting the bad example subsequently followed by France and Austria—the strong against the weak;9 that hunted down the humane Seminoles with bloodhounds, because they gave shelter to slaves running away from Georgia;10 that avowed its purpose to suppress freedom of speech and of the press in time of peace in the interest of slavery; that repealed the Missouri Compromise, and opened the blackened tide of bondage upon the virgin soil of Kansas;11 that, from the beginning to the end of the late war against slavery in arms, uniformly sided with the rebels and against the loyal North—is the same party from footsole to crown, unchanged and unchangeable. Its character is not better
Y7870-Douglass.indb 136
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE WORK BEFORE US
137
known to loyal men than to the defeated rebels. It is neither strange nor surprising that the latter flock to it as the last resort of their Lost Cause. We have had many issues with the slave power during the past thirty years, but we have never had but one cause; and the same is true of the slave power. Indeed, the same is always true in all countries and in all times. The world has always been in some way divided essentially as parties are now divided in our country. Men change; principles are eternal. Holland—whether pleading her ancient charters; asking the removal of oppressive, dissolute, mercenary Spanish troops from her borders; opposing the establishment of new bishoprics; humbly appealing for the removal of the gifted but cruel and treacherous Cardinal Granville;12 or boldly resisting [illegible] horrors, the Inquisition—was all the while serving only one cause. The sacred liberty of conscience; the right of a man to form his own opinions upon all matters of religion—this was the cause of freedom then. While popery, on the other side, whether dealing in fair words or fierce blows, whether entangling its victims in cunningly-devised sophistries or torturing them with cord and steel, rack and fire, had but the same old cause—religious slavery. Think as we command, or die! As in our day men claim the right to dispose of the bodies of men, so they of Mother Church claimed the right to dispose of both soul and body. As stood the sturdy old Hollanders three centuries ago, so we stand to-day. Times change and new issues arise; men appear and disappear; but evermore the same old principles of good and evil, right and wrong, liberty and slavery, summon their respective votaries to the contest. The slaveholding rebels, struck down by Gen. Grant13 as by a thunderbolt, scarcely recover from the terrific shock before they stagger off to the Democratic party. There they go—stricken generals of the rebel army—Henry A. Wise14 and Wade Hampton,15 Toombs16 and Cobb,17 Forrest18 and Beauregard.19 The evil spirits cast out of the man among the tombs take refuge in the herd of swine. We shall see with what consequences to the poor animals in November, and to themselves. The policy, but not the purpose, of the rebels is changed. Names are nothing. It matters little to them by what name the thing for which they strive is called; and equally indifferent are they as to the means they employ. Success is the main consideration. Secession and rebellion were undertaken for one purpose, and one purpose alone—and that was to secure to the slaveholding class permanent control over the black laborers of the South. It was to give to white
Y7870-Douglass.indb 137
9/1/21 4:16 PM
138
THE WORK BEFORE US
capital a firmer hold and a tighter grip upon the throat of the negro. They believed in the Divine appointment of slavery. What they believed then they believe now; what they meant then they mean now. Here and there in the rebel states there may be found a man who has honestly renounced his ancient faith, and accepted the true doctrine of liberty and the great principle of Equal Rights; but the mass of Southern white men and women are in heart and purpose the same as when they confronted the free North on the battle-field. You may send General Lee20 a million of dollars for his rebel college; but, while Arlington Heights is the resting-place of our loyal dead,21 you will get no sign of a hearty renunciation of the malign purpose for which he drew his rebel sword. The South to-day is a field of blood. Murder runs riot in Texas, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Louisiana. Assassination has taken the place of insurrection. Armed bands of rebels stalk abroad at midnight with blackened faces, and thus disguised go forth to shoot, stab, and murder their loyal neighbors. It is impossible to exaggerate the solemn character of the crisis. While Andrew Johnson remains in the presidential chair, and the Democratic party, with Seymour and Blair, are in the field, feeding the rebel imagination with a prospect of regaining through politics what they lost by the sword, the South must continue the scene of war she is. The work to which every loyal man and woman in the country is now called is to employ every possible honorable means, between now and November, to defeat and scatter the Democratic party. Our one work now is to elect Grant and Colfax22—and that by a vote so pronounced and overwhelming as to extinguish every ray of hope to the rebel cause. 1. Douglass probably alludes to the preface of the 1868 Democratic National Party Platform, which stated, “Recognizing the questions of slavery and secession as having been settled for all time to come by the war, or the voluntary action of the Southern States in Constitutional Conventions assembled, and never to be renewed or reagitated.” Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, “Democratic Party Platforms: Democratic Party Platform of 1868,” The American Presidency Project, 4 July 1868 (online). 2. A variation of this phrase “that bygones betwixt my Lord and me may be bygones” is first found in Samuel Rutherford to Lady Culross, 30 July 1636, Letters of Samuel Rutherford (London, 1891), 139. 3. John Manners, Marquis of Granby (1721–70), lieutenant general and colonel of the Royal Horse Guards (blues), commanded British forces in Germany during the Seven Years’ War and was appointed commander in chief of British forces in 1766. The pamphleteer “Junius” publicly attacked Granby in 1769, and the quotation to which Douglass refers comes from Junius’s public letter of 3 March 1769 to Sir William Draper, who had rushed to Granby’s defense. The Political Contest; Containing a Series of Letters Between Junius and Sir William Draper, 3d ed. (London, 1769), 29; DNB, 17:937–39.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 138
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE WORK BEFORE US
139
4. Horatio Seymour (1810–86) began his career as a New York Democrat in the 1840s. He was elected to the state legislature in 1841, became mayor of Utica in 1842, and returned to the legislature in 1844, where he was a strong advocate for improving the Erie Canal. Seymour was a member of the Hunker faction of the New York Democratic party, opposed to Martin Van Buren. Along with the other Hunkers, Seymour supported James K. Polk’s policy to extend slavery. When the Hunkers gained control of the Democratic party after 1848, Seymour was their candidate for governor. His opposition to nativism and his veto of the antiliquor Maine Law caused him to lose a bid for reelection. In 1862, after a decade of retirement, Seymour was again elected governor of New York, and once in office, he worked to delay and limit the implementation of the Civil War draft. During the July 1864 draft riot in New York City, Seymour attempt to quell the disturbance in a speech that Republicans accused of being sympathetic toward the rioters’ cause. Seymour was defeated in the 1864 gubernatorial election, but remained politically active. In 1868, he served as the reluctant and unsuccessful Democratic presidential nominee. Steward Mitchell, Horatio Seymour of New York (Cambridge, Mass., 1938); ACAB, 5:470–73; DAB, 16:615–21; ANB (online). 5. Salmon P. Chase. 6. Francis Preston Blair, Jr. (1821–75), also known as Frank, was a statesman and Union army officer born in Lexington, Kentucky, to Francis Preston Blair and Eliza Violet Gist. An undisciplined scholar, he was expelled from several colleges, including Yale and the University of North Carolina. He eventually finished his schooling at Princeton University in 1841, although the faculty refused to issue his diploma because of his behavior; he was granted his degree the following year after the intervention of a professor. He finished law school at Transylvania University in 1842 and was admitted to the bar in Lexington. He then moved to St. Louis to share a practice with his brother Montgomery, who would later serve in President Lincoln’s cabinet. Blair became active in Democratic party politics and served in the army during the war with Mexico. He married Appoline Alexander in 1847, and together they had eight children. Despite owning slaves, he opposed slavery’s westward expansion and supported the Compromise of 1850. In 1856, he was elected to the U.S. House as not only the single Free Soiler from a slave state, but also as a Democrat who supported the Republican presidential candidate, John C. Frémont. Blair supported Lincoln in 1860 and worked tirelessly to secure his presidential nomination at the Chicago Republican Convention. A supporter of the Union during the Civil War, he left Congress in 1862 and was appointed a brigadier general in the Union Army. After the war, he opposed the Radical Republicans and supported President Johnson’s lenient Reconstruction policies. As a result of his loyalty to Johnson and his efforts to reorganize the Democratic party in Missouri, he was chosen to serve as Horatio Seymour’s running mate in the 1868 presidential election. Blair was then elected to the U.S. Senate in 1871, serving until 1873. He moved back to Missouri and served as the state superintendent of insurance until he died in 1875, the result of head injuries suffered during a fall. Elbert B. Smith, Francis Preston Blair (New York, 1980), 95–96, 189–91, 235, 262–63, 307–09, 317–18, 392, 412–13, 421; William E. Parrish, Frank Blair: Lincoln’s Conservative (Columbia, Mo., 1998); ANB (online). 7. In early 1845, Congress voted to annex Texas by a simple majority vote. Texas became the twenty-eighth state in December of that year and was given the option of splitting into five states at any point in the future. Texas, originally part of Mexico, was populated with slaveholding Americans who had settled with the permission of the Mexican government, provided they relinquished their slaves. The reluctance of the American settlers to assimilate to Mexican social and political life, in large part because of their support of slave labor, resulted in revolution and the creation of the Republic of Texas in 1836. From the beginning of the republic, Texans had always intended to annex themselves to the United States, but concern over the extension of slavery and application of the gag rule in Congress delayed the request for a number of years. In 1844, annexation became a central issue in the presidential election. Following James K. Polk’s election, President John Tyler tried to push Texas annexation through Congress by simple majorities. The Democratic-controlled House complied, but it took a combination of Democratic and Southern Whig votes to pass the Senate. Randolph Campbell, An Empire for Slavery: The Peculiar Institution in Texas, 1821–1865 (Baton
Y7870-Douglass.indb 139
9/1/21 4:16 PM
140
THE WORK BEFORE US
Rouge, La., 1989), 12–53; Thomas R. Hietala, Manifest Design: Anxious Aggrandizement in Late Jacksonian America (Ithaca, N.Y., 1985), 217–20; Paul R. Bergeron, The Presidency of James K. Polk (Lawrence, Kans., 1987), 51–60. 8. The Mexican War (1846–48) occurred as the result of a border dispute between the United States and Mexico, but was rooted in the issue of slavery. Texas was annexed in 1845, and tensions with Mexico blossomed when the United States declared the boundary of the new state to extend to the Rio Grande—much farther south than the Nueces River border recognized by the Mexican government. President James K. Polk, who had ambitions to annex California and New Mexico, pursued a policy aimed at provoking Mexico into war. An American army led by General Zachary Taylor set out to enforce Polk’s boundary proclamation, resulting in skirmishes with Mexican troops. In May 1846, Congress declared war on Mexico. After a series of successful campaigns by American troops, Mexico surrendered in February 1848. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo formally ended the war and gave the United States not only the disputed territory in Texas but also land extending to the Pacific Ocean. The discussion over the existence of slavery in this massive territory formed the crux of national political debate during the following decade. Many abolitionists condemned the Mexican War as nothing more than an attempt by Southern politicians to acquire more area for the expansion of slavery. K. Jack Bauer, The Mexican War, 1846–1848 (New York, 1974); Campbell, Empire for Slavery, 35–36, 48–49. 9. Following the War of Reform (1858–61) in Mexico, European powers intervened to help settle Mexico’s internal problems caused by the conflict. While Britain and Spain were mostly interested in seeking payments for debts and compensation for property damaged during the war, France looked to overthrow President Benito Juárez’s government and establish a Catholic monarchy in Mexico. France’s leader, Napoleon III, believed that because the United States was distracted with its civil war, it would not enforce the Monroe Doctrine, which prohibited new European colonial efforts in the Western Hemisphere. The Austrian archduke Maximilian arrived in Mexico in May 1864 to serve as the new emperor and faced no real opposition from the United States. He initially ruled the country in relative security, though President Lincoln, and later Johnson, permitted arms and ammunition from the United States to reach Juárez’s forces in Mexico. Upon the conclusion of the Civil War in the spring of 1865, the U.S. government pressured the French to abandon their efforts in Mexico, and approximately 3,000 American veterans enlisted in Juárez’s military. Soon after, Napoleon III pulled out French forces, essentially abandoning Maximilian. The Austrian emperor attempted to retain control of Mexico with a small loyalist army, but he was defeated and executed on 19 June 1867, thus ending the Second Mexican Empire. Percy Falcke Martin, Maximilian in Mexico: The Story of the French Intervention, 1861–1867 (New York, 1914), 413–14, 429–30; Michele Cunningham, Mexico and the Foreign Policy of Napoleon III (New York, 2001), 24, 197–98; J. Burton Kirkwood, The History of Mexico, 2d ed. (Santa Barbara, Calif., 2010), 105–08; M. M. McAllen, Maximilian and Carlota: Europe’s Last Empire in Mexico (San Antonio, Tex., 2014), xi, 38, 51. 10. The United States engaged in a series of three military conflicts (1816–19, 1835–42, and 1855–58) in an effort to subdue the Seminoles of the Florida Territory. These wars were motivated by a desire for Indian removal and an end to the refuge that Seminoles offered runaway slaves. The second of these conflicts, fought mainly during the Democratic administrations of Andrew Jackson and Martin Van Buren, was by far the bloodiest, with massacres, large-scale battles, and prolonged guerrilla skirmishing that caused the majority of Seminoles to be killed or deported westward. John K. Mahon, History of the Second Seminole War (Gainesville, Fla., 1967); EAA, 2:611–12. 11. The much-amended bill to organize the territories of Kansas and Nebraska was originally introduced into Congress by Senator Stephen A. Douglas of Illinois. This measure allowed residents of those territories to decide whether they would permit slavery on the “popular sovereignty” principle. In the final version, passed on 30 May 1854, the Kansas-Nebraska Act voided the provision of the Missouri Compromise of 1820 that forbade slavery in the old Louisiana Purchase (north of 36°30´) and established the doctrine of congressional nonintervention with slavery in the territo-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 140
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE WORK BEFORE US
141
ries. P. Orman Ray, The Repeal of the Missouri Compromise: Its Origin and Authorship (Cleveland, 1909), 16, 182–87; David M. Potter, The Impending Crisis, 1848–1861 (New York, 1976), 55, 160–77; Michael F. Holt, The Fate of Their Country: Politicians, Slavery Extension, and the Coming of the Civil War (New York, 2004), 103–05. 12. In 1566, Phillip II of Spain, who also ruled the Netherlands as the Duke of Burgundy, attempted to impose Spanish political practices and Catholic orthodoxy on the Low Countries. His actions were met with rioting and protests, which escalated into a full-scale uprising in 1576. Antoine Perrenot de Granvelle (1517–86), comte de La Baume Saint Amour, was a Burgundian nobleman elevated to the religious office of cardinal in 1561. He served his Habsburg monarch in a number of diplomatic missions and briefly directed efforts to repress the Dutch revolt. After decades of fighting the Spanish, the Dutch effectively won their independence in 1609. Geoffrey Parker, The Dutch Revolt (Ithaca, N.Y., 1977), 68–78, 118–23, 172–73, 189–98; Pieter Geyl, The Revolt of the Netherlands, 1555–1609 (1932; London, 1966), 71–72, 78, 108–14, 145–48, 254. 13. Ulysses Simpson Grant (1822–85), eighteenth president of the United States (1869–77) and general in chief of all Union armies in the final year of the Civil War, personally directed the Union forces in Virginia in 1864–65. William S. McFeely, Grant: A Biography (1981; New York, 1982); ACAB, 2:709–25; DAB, 7:492–501. 14. Henry Alexander Wise (1806–76), governor of Virginia from 1856 to 1860, graduated from Washington College in Pennsylvania, studied law under the famed jurist Henry St. George Tucker, and briefly practiced law in Nashville, Tennessee, before entering Virginia politics as a Jacksonian Democrat and opponent of nullification. Serving in Congress from 1833 to 1844, he attracted considerable notoriety for his impassioned defense of slavery and Southern rights. Wise switched allegiances for a time to the Whig party, supporting the Harrison-Tyler presidential ticket of 1840, and served as the ambassador to Brazil under the Tyler administration. During the 1850s, Wise, again a Democrat, successfully opposed Know-Nothingism in Virginia, arguing in part that the new party harbored antislavery sentiments. As governor, Wise reacted zealously to John Brown’s raid on Harpers Ferry and desired particularly to implicate Douglass. He requested that President Buchanan hire two Virginia detectives as special federal agents to capture Douglass and deliver him to Virginia authorities. Even after Douglass had left the United States, Wise employed a detective “to find out the whereabouts of the Negro Frederick Douglass and keep an eye on his movements and associates.” The Northern press reported that a group of prominent Southerners, including Wise, had offered $50,000 for Douglass’s capture. After his term as governor, Wise served as a delegate to the Washington Peace Convention of 1861 and as a general in the Confederate Army. Wise did not resume his political career after the war, but two of his sons served in the U.S. House of Representatives as Republicans. Douglass to the editor of the Rochester Democrat [and America], 31 October 1859, reprinted in DM, 2:162–63 (November 1859); FDP, 5 January 1860; Barton H. Wise, The Life of Henry A. Wise of Virginia, 1806–1876 (New York, 1899); Quarles, Frederick Douglass, 180–85; ACAB, 6:579–80; DAB, 20:423–25. 15. Wade Hampton (1818–1902) was born in Columbia, South Carolina, and spent most of his early years on his father’s plantations. In 1836, he graduated from the University of South Carolina and began to study law, although he never practiced. During the antebellum years, Hampton principally devoted himself to the management of his father’s Mississippi plantations, which he both improved and expanded. From 1852 to 1856, he served in the South Carolina House of Representatives, and in 1856 he moved to the state senate, where he remained until his resignation in 1861. Opposing the movement to reopen the African slave trade and finding secession constitutionally defensible but inexpedient, he never gained political popularity in his state. During the Civil War, however, he fully supported the South and won fame as a cavalry commander. With the defeat of the South, Hampton defended the section’s motives but accepted defeat with all its consequences. These conciliatory policies were unpopular during Reconstruction, and Hampton returned to private life in an unsuccessful effort to revive his cotton-planting enterprises. In 1876, however, the Democrats nominated Hampton
Y7870-Douglass.indb 141
9/1/21 4:16 PM
142
THE WORK BEFORE US
for governor of South Carolina. With the support of a well-organized campaign in which quasimilitary “red shirt” clubs terrorized potential Republican voters, Hampton won the gubernatorial election, although the incumbent Republican governor, Daniel H. Chamberlain, also claimed victory. When President Rutherford B. Hayes withdrew federal troops from the South Carolina statehouse, Hampton’s forces were able to seize complete control of the state government. Hampton remained as governor until 1878, when the state elected him U.S. senator. Thwarted in his bid for a third Senate term in 1890, Hampton went into semiretirement until President Grover Cleveland appointed him commissioner of the Pacific Railway in 1893. After President William McKinley’s dismissal of him from that office in 1897, Hampton withdrew from public life. Edward L. Wells, Hampton and Reconstruction (Columbia, S.C., 1907); William Gillette, Retreat from Reconstruction, 1869–1879 (Baton Rouge, La., 1979), 343–44; Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., ed., History of American Presidential Elections, 1789–1968, 4 vols. (New York, 1971), 2:1558; Joel Williamson, After Slavery: The Negro in South Carolina during Reconstruction, 1861–1877 (New York, 1975), 406–12; ACAB, 3:70; NCAB, 12:177–78; DAB, 8:213–15. 16. Douglas probably refers to Robert Toombs (1810–85), a native Georgian who attended Union College in Schenectady, New York, before returning to his home state to practice law and manage extensive landholdings. Toombs rose through the political ranks from the Georgia state legislature to the U.S. House of Representatives, finally reaching the U.S. Senate. He remained a Whig until that party’s demise, after which he reluctantly became a Democrat. Following Georgia’s secession, Toombs withdrew from the Senate and served the Confederacy, first as secretary of state and later as brigadier general. He declined a pardon from Andrew Johnson and refrained from most postwar political activity to focus on his legal career. Robert Toombs, A Lecture Delivered in the Tremont Temple, Boston, Massachusetts, on the 26th January 1856 (Washington, D.C., 1856), 10; Ulrich B. Phillips, The Life of Robert Toombs (New York, 1913); William Y. Thompson, Robert Toombs of Georgia (Baton Rouge, 1966). 17. Howell Cobb (1815–68), born into a wealthy Georgia planter family, graduated from the University of Georgia and briefly practiced law. A Democrat from a largely non-slaveholding district, Cobb won election to Congress in 1842 and served sporadically until his appointment as secretary of the treasury by Buchanan in 1857. Cobb was a supporter of the Compromise of 1850, and he was briefly a member of the Constitutional Union party while serving as Georgia’s governor in the early 1850s. Chastened by defeat in an 1854 senatorial election, Cobb subsequently moved toward a secessionist stance. During the Civil War, Cobb fought in the Sixteenth Georgia Regiment, rising to the rank of major general. He resumed his law practice after the war, and following a pardon by Andrew Johnson became a vehement critic of Reconstruction. Horace Montgomery, Howell Cobb’s Confederate Career (Tuscaloosa, Ala., 1959); Robert P. Brooks, “Howell Cobb and the Crisis of 1850,” MVHR, 4:279–98 (December 1917); Warner and Yearns, Biographical Register of the Confederate Congress, 56–57; DAB, 4:241–44. 18. Nathan Bedford Forrest (1821–77) was born in Bedford County, Tennessee. Denied a formal education, Forrest taught himself writing, speaking, and mathematics. The family moved to Mississippi in 1834, where Forrest’s father died three years later. As the eldest son, Forrest worked first as a livestock trader and then as a slave trader to support the large family. He was soon wealthy enough to purchase two plantations, one in Mississippi and one in Arkansas. Forrest married Mary Ann Montgomery in 1845, and four years later the couple moved to Memphis, where he became active in local politics and city affairs. During the Civil War, Forrest enlisted in the Confederate Army, in which he was able to buy the title of lieutenant colonel by raising and equipping his own cavalry battalion. Forrest’s many successes and skillful strategizing resulted in his being commissioned as major general in 1863 and lieutenant general in 1865. The most controversial incident of his military career involved his role in the massacre of hundreds of black Union soldiers and white Southern Unionist prisoners at Fort Pillow in April 1864. The spring raid of Union general James H. Wilson led to Forrest’s surrender near Selma, Alabama, in May 1865. After the war, Forrest returned to Memphis, where he acted as president of the Marion & Memphis Railroad until it went bankrupt in the early 1870s. Forrest played an important role in the early activities of the Ku Klux Klan and was named the first
Y7870-Douglass.indb 142
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE WORK BEFORE US
143
Grand Wizard in 1867; however, he did not remain active with the group once it began using more violent tactics. He later reversed his anti-black-suffrage views and even became the first white man to speak to the Independent Order of Pole-Bearers Association, a forerunner of the NAACP, in 1875. Jack Hurst, Nathan Bedford Forrest: A Biography (New York, 1993); John D. Wright, The Routledge Encyclopedia of Civil War Era Biographies (New York, 2013), 199–200; DAB, 6:532–33. 19. Pierre Gustave Toutant (P. G. T.) Beauregard (1818–93) was the third of seven children in a prominent Creole sugar-planting family. Against his family’s wishes, Beauregard enrolled in the U.S. Military Academy at West Point (1834–38) and finished second out of forty-five classmates. During the Mexican War, Beauregard earned the rank of brevet major and helped plan the Battle of Chapultepec. In January 1861, Beauregard was appointed superintendent of West Point but was dismissed less than a week later, presumably for his Southern political leanings. Beauregard resigned from the U.S. Army following Louisiana’s secession and enlisted as the Confederacy’s first brigadier general. As commander of the defenses of Charleston, South Carolina, Beauregard ordered the first shots of the Civil War during the bombardment of Fort Sumter. He also participated in the First Battle of Bull Run and the Peninsular Campaign. The most controversial incident in Beauregard’s military career occurred during the 1862 Battle of Shiloh. Upon the death of General Albert Sidney Johnston, Beauregard assumed command of the Confederate forces and halted the battle for that evening. The Union Army then had enough time to bring in reinforcements and launch a counterattack that routed Beauregard’s troops. President Jefferson Davis blamed Beauregard for the loss of Shiloh, which caused Beauregard to see only limited combat action for the remainder of the war. Beauregard returned to Louisiana, where he served as superintendent of the New Orleans, Jackson and Great Northern Railroad; president of the New Orleans and Carrollton Street Railway; supervisor of the Louisiana Lottery from 1877 until his death in 1893; adjutant general of the Louisiana state militia starting in 1879; and New Orleans’s elected commissioner of public works in 1888. He also worked for political reform through the founding of the Reform party in Louisiana in 1872, a coalition of moderate Democrats who supported civil rights and suffrage for African Americans, and the Unification party in 1873, which sought to lower taxes with the support of the black vote. T. Harry Williams, P.G.T. Beauregard: Napoleon in Gray (Baton Rouge, La., 1955); ACAB, 1:210–11; NCAB, 4:178–79; DAB, 2:111–12. 20. Robert Edward Lee (1807–70) was the son of the Revolutionary War hero Henry “LightHorse Harry” Lee and scion of one of Virginia’s most distinguished families. He graduated from West Point in 1829, and throughout his military career he attracted the praise of superiors, particularly for his service under Winfield Scott in the Mexican War. In 1859, he supervised the capture of John Brown following the failed raid on the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia. When Virginia seceded, he followed his beloved state into the Confederacy. Despite a lackluster performance early in the war, Lee was given command of the main Confederate force in the Virginia theater in June 1862. From then on, Lee campaigned brilliantly, defeating Union forces twice the size of his own and staving off Confederate defeat in the East for nearly three years. After his surrender, he returned to Richmond as a paroled prisoner of war. In September 1865, he became president of Washington College (now Washington and Lee University) in Lexington, Virginia. Lee scrupulously avoided involvement in the political controversies of Reconstruction. Besides broadening and modernizing the college’s curriculum, Lee tripled the size of its endowment, attracting many small donations from former Confederate veterans as well as a $10,000 donation from reaper inventor Cyrus McCormick. Emory M. Thomas, Robert E. Lee: A Biography (New York, 1995); Douglas Southall Freeman, R. E. Lee: A Biography, 4 vols. (New York, 1934–35); Charles Bracelen Flood, Lee: The Last Years (Boston, 1981); Burke Davis, To Appomattox: Nine April Days, 1865 (New York, 1959), 96–101, 379–87; E. B. Long and Barbara Long, The Civil War Day by Day: An Almanac, 1861–1865 (Garden City, N.Y., 1971), 663–64, 670–71; DAB, 11:120–29. 21. Confederate general Robert E. Lee and his wife, Mary Ann Randolph Custis Lee, owned a large estate on Arlington Heights in Virginia, opposite the national capital, at the beginning of the Civil War, which quickly became a headquarters for the Union Army. Fortifications were constructed on its high ground, and Forts Whipple and McPherson were the first military garrisons established
Y7870-Douglass.indb 143
9/1/21 4:16 PM
144
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
on the Arlington land. Following the establishment of the National Cemetery System on 17 July 1862, burial grounds were constructed in Alexandria, Virginia, and at the Old Soldiers’ Home in Washington, D.C. Once burial space became scarce at these locations, the U.S. government forcibly purchased the Arlington estate on 11 January 1864, under the Act for the Collection of Direct Taxes in the Insurrectionary Districts within the United States, for $26,800. The first burial at Arlington took place on 13 May 1864, and on 15 June 1864, Secretary of War Edwin Stanton formally designated Arlington House and the surrounding 200 acres a military cemetery. Karl Decker and Angus McSween, Historic Arlington: A History of the National Cemetery from Its Establishment to the Present Time, with Sketches of the Historic Persons Who Occupied the Estate Previous to its Seizure by the National Government—Parke Custis and His Times—the Career of Lee, with Descriptions of Life in Virginia During the Early Part of the Century (Washington, D.C., 1892), 14, 44, 60–61, 68–69, 72, 78–79; Dean W. Holt, American Military Cemeteries, 2d ed. (Jefferson, N.C., 2010), 334–35. 22. Schuyler Colfax (1823–85), a congressman and vice president of the United States, was born in New York City. In 1834, his mother was remarried to George W. Matthews, and the family moved to New Carlisle, Indiana, where Colfax worked as a clerk in his stepfather’s store. When Matthews was elected county auditor on the Whig ticket, Colfax moved with him to South Bend and served as his deputy until 1849. Colfax read law, but his passion was politics. In 1844, he married Evelyn Clark, and shortly thereafter he bought a half interest in a local paper, which he renamed the St. Joseph Valley Register. For nearly two decades, he served as its editor, and the paper became a major Whig—and later Republican—newspaper in Indiana. In 1854, he opposed the passage of the KansasNebraska Act while supporting temperance and nativism, which led him to join the Know-Nothing party in Indiana. He then successfully ran for Congress as a representative of the “People’s party,” an early Indiana version of the Republican party. He served in Congress from 1855 to 1869 and was elected Speaker of the House in 1863, serving until his departure from Congress in 1869. Although not an early supporter of Lincoln, he championed the Republican party and advised the president on Indiana politics throughout the war. Regarded as conservative, competent, and loyal, he was nominated by the Republicans to run with Ulysses S. Grant in the 1868 election. During his time in office, however, Colfax was plagued by scandal; he accepted contributions from a government contractor, often requested railroad passes, and became involved in the Crédit Mobilier scandal. In the 1872 election, the Republicans did not retain Colfax as the vice presidential candidate, and in March 1873 he left politics. Despite these ethical issues, many of his supporters argued that he had been treated unfairly, and he remained popular. He became a successful orator and traveled throughout the country, speaking on temperance, Lincoln, and the American West. He collapsed on one of his lecture tours and died in Mankato, Minnesota, in 1885. Edward Winslow Martin, The Life and Public Services of Schuyler Colfax: Together with His Most Important Speeches (New York, 1868), 12–14, 19–20, 153–56, 237–244; ANB (online).
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY (1871) “Frederick Douglass’s Diary (Santo Domingo 1871),” Frederick Douglass National Historical Site, FDDO 2090.
One of the most controversial diplomatic initiatives of the Reconstruction era was the Grant administration’s attempt to annex the Dominican Republic. In 1869, Grant’s personal representative, General Orville Babcock, had negotiated a treaty of annexation with Dominican president Buenaventura Báez. The Senate twice
Y7870-Douglass.indb 144
9/1/21 4:16 PM
144
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
on the Arlington land. Following the establishment of the National Cemetery System on 17 July 1862, burial grounds were constructed in Alexandria, Virginia, and at the Old Soldiers’ Home in Washington, D.C. Once burial space became scarce at these locations, the U.S. government forcibly purchased the Arlington estate on 11 January 1864, under the Act for the Collection of Direct Taxes in the Insurrectionary Districts within the United States, for $26,800. The first burial at Arlington took place on 13 May 1864, and on 15 June 1864, Secretary of War Edwin Stanton formally designated Arlington House and the surrounding 200 acres a military cemetery. Karl Decker and Angus McSween, Historic Arlington: A History of the National Cemetery from Its Establishment to the Present Time, with Sketches of the Historic Persons Who Occupied the Estate Previous to its Seizure by the National Government—Parke Custis and His Times—the Career of Lee, with Descriptions of Life in Virginia During the Early Part of the Century (Washington, D.C., 1892), 14, 44, 60–61, 68–69, 72, 78–79; Dean W. Holt, American Military Cemeteries, 2d ed. (Jefferson, N.C., 2010), 334–35. 22. Schuyler Colfax (1823–85), a congressman and vice president of the United States, was born in New York City. In 1834, his mother was remarried to George W. Matthews, and the family moved to New Carlisle, Indiana, where Colfax worked as a clerk in his stepfather’s store. When Matthews was elected county auditor on the Whig ticket, Colfax moved with him to South Bend and served as his deputy until 1849. Colfax read law, but his passion was politics. In 1844, he married Evelyn Clark, and shortly thereafter he bought a half interest in a local paper, which he renamed the St. Joseph Valley Register. For nearly two decades, he served as its editor, and the paper became a major Whig—and later Republican—newspaper in Indiana. In 1854, he opposed the passage of the KansasNebraska Act while supporting temperance and nativism, which led him to join the Know-Nothing party in Indiana. He then successfully ran for Congress as a representative of the “People’s party,” an early Indiana version of the Republican party. He served in Congress from 1855 to 1869 and was elected Speaker of the House in 1863, serving until his departure from Congress in 1869. Although not an early supporter of Lincoln, he championed the Republican party and advised the president on Indiana politics throughout the war. Regarded as conservative, competent, and loyal, he was nominated by the Republicans to run with Ulysses S. Grant in the 1868 election. During his time in office, however, Colfax was plagued by scandal; he accepted contributions from a government contractor, often requested railroad passes, and became involved in the Crédit Mobilier scandal. In the 1872 election, the Republicans did not retain Colfax as the vice presidential candidate, and in March 1873 he left politics. Despite these ethical issues, many of his supporters argued that he had been treated unfairly, and he remained popular. He became a successful orator and traveled throughout the country, speaking on temperance, Lincoln, and the American West. He collapsed on one of his lecture tours and died in Mankato, Minnesota, in 1885. Edward Winslow Martin, The Life and Public Services of Schuyler Colfax: Together with His Most Important Speeches (New York, 1868), 12–14, 19–20, 153–56, 237–244; ANB (online).
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY (1871) “Frederick Douglass’s Diary (Santo Domingo 1871),” Frederick Douglass National Historical Site, FDDO 2090.
One of the most controversial diplomatic initiatives of the Reconstruction era was the Grant administration’s attempt to annex the Dominican Republic. In 1869, Grant’s personal representative, General Orville Babcock, had negotiated a treaty of annexation with Dominican president Buenaventura Báez. The Senate twice
Y7870-Douglass.indb 144
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
145
defeated Grant’s attempt to get this treaty approved, largely because of vociferous opposition by a faction of the president’s own Republican party led by Charles Sumner. To rally public support for his policy, Grant persuaded Congress to authorize him to send a commission to the Dominican Republic to investigate political and economic conditions there and to ascertain popular sentiment toward American annexation. Although he regarded the position as “inconsiderable and unimportant,” Douglass accepted appointment as assistant secretary to the Santo Domingo commission. The commissioners, their staff, and numerous reporters left New York City on 17 January 1871 and arrived at Samaná Bay seven days later. Douglass participated in the commission’s interviews with Dominican governmental officials and civic leaders and was also charged with contacting English-speaking blacks who had migrated from the United States to the Samaná area during the Civil War. Douglass purchased a pocket planner and used it as a travel diary, recording the names of new acquaintances, his schedule of daily activities, and random observations about the Dominican Republic. The commission arrived back in Washington, D.C., on 26 March 1871 and soon thereafter published a report strongly favorable to annexation. Opponents of annexation remained obdurate, however, and the treaty was never approved. The diary was found among Douglass’s possessions at Cedar Hill, his Washington, D.C., home. Douglass to Hamilton Fish, 3 April 1871, General Correspondence File, reel 2, frame 589, FD Papers, DLC; NNE, 19 January, 23 February, 6 April 1871; Washington National Republican, 24 February 1871; Washington Evening Star, 28 March 1871; Charles Callan Tansill, The United States and Santo Domingo, 1798–1873: A Chapter in Caribbean Diplomacy (1938; Gloucester, Mass., 1967), 428–40; Merline Pitre, “Frederick Douglass and the Annexation of Santo Domingo,” JNH, 62:390–400 (October 1977). January 4 Wednesday. Col. Enrique Abreu1 / Samana.—2 / Lewis Horan3 / Samana / J.L. Marciacq4 / Welcher Buck / Mrs Savery. January 5 Thursday. Children / Rev Theopolis James.5 / Gen. James— 6 / Cha[r]ges all the / present Troubles / upon Hayti / Alexander Jackson / Henry Allen.7 / Port au Prince8
Y7870-Douglass.indb 145
9/1/21 4:16 PM
146
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
January 6 Friday. The Georgiana January 16 Monday. Astor House.9 / Prof Ward.10 / Sheppard of N. / Repub—11 / Gen Boynton12 Gaz— / Phillips Herald—13 Marvin / World14 Fulton ~ B / Am:15 Ramsdell T.16 January 17 Tuesday. U.S. Steamship Tenn: 17/ Capt Wm G. Temple[.]18 / The Com: Sworn in—19 / Set sail for San Domingo / at Two O. clk— Weather / Cool, clear pleasant— January 18 Wednesday. Hon. B. F. Wade20 made / Pres[iden]t of the Com. / The Com: decides their / number to be 21. They / vote that no bills shall / be contracted for wines / liquors or segars— That Reporters pay [the] / their own expenses. / Charles made messenger.21 Com. Inquiry. January 19 Thursday. Wind high. Ship rolling. / In the Gulf—Charley / sick. Few able to keep / Dinner— I, one of the / few. We [illegible] hard work / to keep plates on table. January 20 Friday. Calm, warm, sunny— / summerlike. A Bark / on star[board] quarter. / Address22 Baez—23 / I make suggestions / as to its words—They are accepted January 22 Sunday. Three Hund Ms24 / from Sam. High / hopes of reach / Sam. Tom— or day / after—Reporters / eager for news— January 23 Monday. Barran only see s / hip, sky and wind / and very little of the latter. / Silvana Costa January 24 Tuesday. Arrived at Samana / at two O.C.25 Received / kindly by the peo. / by Col. Enrique / Abreu. Talked freely of America. / The most beautiful / Bay—The Fort / The people January 25 Wednesday & 26 Thursday. Why did Domina26 so speedily / through off Spain— after / seeking alli[ance]. They did not / seek it. It was Santana27 / Hamilton .28 Sp[an] ill treatm[en]t. / Won’t allow colored. Catholic, C. / The poor did care one way or other / Cabral.29 Gentleman—Baez has majority / freedom of religion— “Letter___”? How many / 600 or 700. 1824. Increase large family—10. Pray do in manner / school. with Baptist school. / no school by the state in
Y7870-Douglass.indb 146
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
147
Samana.30 / Two days in 20 yrs. [Came] yellow by [illegible] / the Earthquake. 1842. Had Earthquake / three weeks ago.31 Land private property / ? What interest. Court Justice of Peace / Leased his place. Ten years ago— / leased land. It can’t be worse off / than they are. Taxed by Spain $100 / Complains of tax. Stopped the method— / “Luperon” “Treachery”—32 Baez Pres. by / force of Arms. “Wins and stick to them.” / ages 19. Silvana Costa.33 Abreu. January 29 Sunday. Spent on the strand of Samana / Bay—or Clara Bay with Mr. / Dichmain an old settler / here of 60 years. He knew / Toussaint34 Cristophe35 / to and told me much of the / struggle for freedom by these / heroes and of the atrocities / perpetrated by the French / under the first Nap.36 January 30 Monday. Set sail for Santo Mingo City—37 / The coast grand The sea / rough. Many seasick— / and sick of the sea.— Past / Puerto Rico at night and / did not see it. Flying fish. / Dolphin. January 31 Tuesday. Arrived in the Rhodestead38 / of Santo Domingo— but too / late to land. The Rhodestead / is exceedingly rough and our / ship rolls at anchor as in / the open sea. All are eager to / land and see the ancient city / founded by Columbus.39 The surf. February 1 Wednesday. On Shore: old colored man at / the wharf. lived here 48 years / speaks English, from Balto. / Com: rent an empty house. Refuse / the Palace put at their service / by Pres[iden]t Baez. A city of churches / The Bells interminable jingle— / People well dressed polite / and orderly. February 2 Thursday. Com: paid respects to / res[iden]t Baez at Palace.40 / Mr Wade read address / White41 tr[an]s[la]ted in French / Pres[iden]t Baez replied / in Spanish. Would / give Com all the aid / in his power, wanted / them to be thorough / see opposed as well as February 3 Friday. Wrote letters all day for / home. It is intensely hot / but not too hot for / me. Com. doing noth / A little hitch about / meals. Old prejudice / Aristocracy on a small / scale. February 4 Saturday. Was in company with Gen[era]l / Segel42 shown through the old / castle at Santo Domingo / where Christopher Columbus /
Y7870-Douglass.indb 147
9/1/21 4:16 PM
148
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
was confined and died— 43 This / was the event of the day to / us—There are it is said, / many prisoners still in the / castle and some of them are / sentenced death February 5 Sunday. While bathing in the surf / among the rocks—was handled / very roughly by a heavy / wave from the sea—much / bruised and came near / being swept of[f] to the / sharks. Spoke to the / Methodists from the U.S.44 February 6 Monday. Suffering from my bruises and / feel little like work. Charley / is copying the Casneau / Contracts45 and is winning / golden opinions for his / penmanship. February 7 Tuesday. Took a long walk by the river. House / of Columbus—Oldest in Am:46 The / place where the first slaves were / landed.47 Dogwood and Mahogany— / [Market] outside the wall. Canoes / Ferry scow. School. 11 children— / David R. Brooks,48 Gross,49 Hamilton,50 / examined. A deputation of 12. rep— / [3] societies. All in favor of Annex / was called in: made an address / to them. They said they were not [sent]. February 8 Wednesday. A walk along the coast peculiar / character of the rocks, black & / craggy— Put in acct. $23.00 February 9 Thursday. First ride on a Santo Domingo / horse. The air this day is / cool and bracing, but still / summerlike / Elvira Garcia. Isabel. Emelia Mary, the mother. February 10 Friday. The T[r]ibu[ne] arrived Am. papers— / Grand reading day—Funny acct / from the world. The fall of / Paris,51 our French cook in / tears—Yo abla espanio? / El abla espanio. February 11 Saturday. Dull. There seems but little / more to learn here as / to the disposition of the / people every body seems for / annexation. February 12 Sunday. Walked two miles this morn. / Bath on the beach. Made / a call upon David Brooks / The ruins of the old church / of San Francisco. Bee Hives / Dogs. Cockfight Sunday / Governor of the city. / Col Abreu dined with com: / Evident breach of good / manners. What it was
Y7870-Douglass.indb 148
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
149
February 13 Monday. A ride to the Beach—Invited / to Dine with Col. / Abreu. but failed through / misunderstanding. Worked / hard on Spanish / Mr. Sheppard52 called / to say goodbye. February 14 Tuesday. The commission is no[w] closing / their labors here preparing / to start out for other / points—in the country— / Every thing is kept secret / that can be—but that / is very little. February 15 Wednesday. Dr Howe53 started on his / ex. in country— / Wheelwright54 & / other accom him— / Reports reach us that / the people are every where / raising the American flag / in the interior. Thus giving / a direct contradiction to / the idea that the country / is opposed to annexion. February 16 Thursday. A glorious bath on the / beach—a mile and half / west of Santo Mingo— / Furiously studying Spanish— February 18 Saturday. Visited the Senate in com / with the commis— Much / evidence taken as / to the debt—small / but not ascertained / exactly. A ride with / Judge Burton55 to Mr. / Shoemakers.56 February 19 Sunday. Mr Gross states that when / Boyer57 came here 1821 / freed the slaves but failed / to educate and this / explains the present / difference between the / blacks and the lighter / colored people of the / Island. February 20 Monday Elijah Gross— / Santo Domingo February 21 Tuesday. Sailed fr[om] S. do. for Asua.58 / Presid. Baiz on board. / He seems pleased with atten / paid him February 22 Wednesday. Asua. Three miles inland from the shore / has been burnt down 3 times. Is / now an assemblage of inferior / houses of the country. A small / stream of pure water passes / through it. Rain rarely falls here / and the river is lost to the / sand before it reaches the / sea. There much catus [illegible] [illegible] & some lignumvita.59
Y7870-Douglass.indb 149
9/1/21 4:16 PM
150
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
February 23 Thursday. Senator Wade is a shore / taking testimony— which / he finds all one way. / Every body is for annex. / Baez has two thousand men / [illegible] wait on attack by Cabral.60 February 24 Friday. There is about (Marchena’s)61 / Three miles from Asua a fine / sugar plantation of 800 acres / This planta shows what can / be done with the climate / and soil of Santo Domingo. / There a mountain of [illegible] / in lights from Asua. / The popu about nine / hundred. February 26 Sunday. Spent this day on shore / in company with Drs / Newcomb,62 Parry63 / and Mr Bromell.64 We / are all ordered aboard for / Monday night—with a / view to sailing for Port Au / prince. February 27 Monday. Should’ve sailed to day for Por P / but was detained by Dr Howes / washing. It would have been / cheaper to have fitted him / out with a new suit. Too much of this sort of thing / during our mission February 28 Tuesday. Doctor Howe is now on board, / and we shall soon be off to sea / for P. Au Prince. The day is a / [illegible] tropical day— beauty / ful and warm. The view of the / mountains of Santo Domingo / from the sea is surpassingly / grand. All are on deck / enjoying the scene. March 1 Wednesday. Got a glimse of Alto Villa65 at / 8 clock last night. March 2 Thursday. Arrived at Port Au P. / Splendid bay bounded / by lofty mountains. The / distant views of the / city cheerful. The heat / somewhat oppressive. / It is too late to go on / shore— Steamer Hor / net66 and Spanish / Man of War Brig. March 3 Friday. Port Au P. upon a nearer / view—sadder, / Houses inferior, / streets dirty, people / depressed in spirit / general lack of / cheerfulness and full / of suspicion. Minister Bassett67 & wife— 68 March 4 Saturday. Minister and Consul / visit our ship— / What did and what / did not happen / Remained in P. Au P. March 7 Tuesday. Left P. Au P. morning for Kingston
Y7870-Douglass.indb 150
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
151
March 10 Friday. left P. Au P. for / Kingston Jam— 69 / Consul Pearl / Constantine Burke70 March 16 Thursday. Left Kingston for / Key West71 March 18 Saturday. The first breathe / of reviving N. / air. With at table / Wade and Howe March 19 Sunday. Off the southeron / Coast of Cuba. / Voyaging to Key / West—Cool Norther / blowing. Sighted / Cuba, Cape Cape / Antonia72 March 20 Monday. Still in sight the / Island Cuba— / Only fifty miles / last night, shall / not reach Key / West till tomorrow. March 21 Tuesday. Light house in sight / Key West 12 miles / beyond. Pilot James / Cain—colored. March 23 Thursday. Left Key West to day— / at twelve o clk— / bound to Charles / ton—73 1. The report from the Santo Domingo Commission includes an interview with Colonel Enrique Abreu conducted on 28 January 1871. He described his official position as commandant of Santa Bárbara de Samaná and special agent of José Silvano Acosta, governor of the province of Samaná. Immediately after signing the provisional annexation treaty with the United States, the Dominican government appointed Abreu as a special agent charged with preventing the concession or granting of government lands around Samaná to the U.S. government or its citizens. His primary mission was to deny Americans the government-owned Levantados, the islands in the Bay of Samaná. The committee directly asked Abreu if he knew of concessions or grants given to William L. Cazneau or Joseph W. Fabens, and he replied that he was aware of none. Report of the Commission of Inquiry to Santo Domingo, With the Introductory Message of the President, Special Reports Made to the Commission, State Papers Furnished by the Dominican Government, and the Statements of over Seventy Witnesses (Washington, D.C., 1871), 39, 209–11. 2. A well-protected deep-water bay, thirty miles long and ten miles wide, on the northeastern Atlantic coast of the Dominican Republic. It was first located by Christopher Columbus on his first voyage in 1492. The United States and several European powers had long shown interest in purchasing this strategic region for use as a naval base. Gerald Horne, Confronting Black Jacobins: The United States, the Haitian Revolution, and the Origins of the Dominican Republic (New York, 2015), 213, 238–39, 262–63; Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 1656. 3. Virginian-born Lewis Horan settled at Santa Bárbara de Samaná in the late 1860s and conducted a mercantile business there. He testified before the Santo Domingo Commission on economic conditions in that region and affirmed his belief that the populace desired American annexation. Other witnesses before the commission testified that Horan was also engaged in small-scale land speculation in the province. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 39, 213–15, 219.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 151
9/1/21 4:16 PM
152
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
4. In the 1830s and 1840s, the French-born Jean-Louis Marciacq lived in New Orleans. While there, he became an American citizen and published some of the writings of leading Creole poets and intellectuals. Marciacq later resided in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, where he conducted a school. He had been in Santa Bárbara de Samaná only a few months before appearing before the Santo Domingo Commission. He testified that local Dominicans favored annexation and expected trade with the United States to increase greatly as a consequence, but he told the commission that a majority of Haitians would oppose a similar annexation effort. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 39, 215–17. 5. Douglass confuses the names of two Dominican brothers who testified before the Santo Domingo Commission. The Reverend Jacob James (c. 1823–?) was born in the United States but migrated with his parents to the Caribbean at age two. He became a Methodist minister in Santa Bárbara de Samaná in the mid-1860s and led a congregation of 250 members. James described himself to the commission as “a full black,” and he said his congregants moved there from the United States in the 1820s, when President Jean-Pierre Boyer of Haiti had united the island of Hispaniola and encouraged immigration. James testified that the region had great economic potential if annexed by the United States. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 39, 229–31. 6. The Dominican native Theophilus James was educated in England. He settled in Haiti in 1861, took part in a successful revolution led by Sylvain Salnave, and served as a general in Salnave’s army. When Salnave was overthrown as president in 1869, James fled first to Nassau and then to Samaná, to rejoin his brother. James reported strong support throughout the nation for annexation by the United States. If annexation failed, he predicted that there would be political chaos and that efforts would be made to persuade another power to occupy the country. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 39, 228–29. 7. In December 1869, Henry Allen (1800–?) of Port-au-Prince, Haiti, wrote Ulysses S. Grant asking for help from the U.S. government in seeking compensation from Haitian officials for a substantial amount of business property burned by the government in anti-American protests the previous June. Allen was born in Maryland and migrated to Haiti in 1824. Ulysses S. Grant, The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, ed. John Y. Simon, 32 vols. (Carbondale, Ill., 1967–2012), 20:15; Horne, Confronting Black Jacobins, 300. 8. The capital and chief seaport of Haiti, Port-au-Prince, is located in the southwestern part of the country. The city is situated at the end of the Gulf of Gonaïves at N 18°32´, W 72°10´. It was founded in 1749 by French sugar planters in an area originally called Saint-Dominique, renamed Haiti in 1804. Saul Cohen, ed., The Columbia Gazetteer of the World, 3 vols. (New York, 1998), 2:2489–90. 9. Reputedly the first luxury hotel in New York City, the Astor House was constructed by John Jacob Astor and opened in 1836. A glass rotunda added in the 1850s enclosed the building’s central courtyard, and its restaurant was among the city’s most stylish. By the 1870s, the Astor House was regarded by many as old-fashioned, but it remained in business until the early twentieth century. Kenneth T. Jackson, The Encyclopedia of New York, 2d ed. (New Haven, Conn., 2010), 79. 10. Henry Augustus Ward (1834–1906), professor and naturalist, was born in Rochester, New York. He received only an informal education until he met Professor Louis Agassiz, who encouraged him to study at Harvard. In 1854, he journeyed to Paris, where he studied at the School of Mines. He traveled throughout Europe and Africa, collecting rocks and minerals, and returned to the United States in 1859. Two years later, he was appointed professor of natural sciences at the University of Rochester, holding that post until 1866. After serving as a naturalist on the Santo Domingo Commission in 1871, he devoted the rest of his life to traveling the world, training students, and serving as a supplier of specimens to museums across the country. New York Times, 5 July 1906; Charles Ripley and Charles A. Dana, eds., American Cyclopaedia: A Popular Dictionary of General Knowledge, 16 vols. (New York, 1881), 16:449; General Catalogue of the University of Rochester, 1850–1911 (Rochester, N.Y., 1911), 171; Leonard Schlup and James G. Ryan, eds., Historical Dictionary of the Gilded Age (Armonk, N.Y., 2003), 522.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 152
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
153
11. Arthur Shepherd was managing editor of the Washington National Republican. He was also an alderman in the District of Columbia in 1870. His brother, Alexander R. Shepherd, was director of the district’s Board of Public Works. He oversaw considerable roadway, sewage, and building construction. Alexander became a target of congressional corruption investigations that also implicated Arthur. John H. Crane, The Washington Ring (Washington, D.C., 1872), 5–7; Constance McLaughlin Green, Washington: Village and Capital, 1800–1878, 2 vols. (Princeton, 1962), 1:313–82; William van Zandt Cox, “Matthew Gault Emery, the Last Mayor of Washington, 1870–1871,” Records of the Columbia Historical Society, 20:28, 30, 55 (1917). 12. Henry Van Ness Boynton (1835–1905) was born in Berkshire County, Massachusetts, to the Reverend Charles B. Boynton and Maria Van Buskirk. After moving with his family to Cincinnati, Ohio, in 1846, he studied at Woodward College and the Kentucky Military Institute, graduating from those institutions in 1855 and 1858, respectively. He then served as professor of mechanics and astronomy at the Kentucky Military Institute until the outbreak of the Civil War. He entered the service as major of the Thirty-fifth Ohio Volunteers and was promoted to colonel in April 1864. Having served with distinction at Chickamauga and Missionary Ridge, he received the Medal of Honor. In December 1865, he became the Washington, D.C., correspondent of the Cincinnati Gazette. He then served as a brigadier general in the Spanish-American War, where he remained behind the front lines, organizing troops. Boynton was vital in the effort to preserve the battlefields at Chickamauga, Lookout Mountain, and Missionary Ridge, and he served as the president of the relevant commission from 1897 until his death in 1905. New York Times, 4 June 1905; Walter B. Palmer, “Old Fraternity Records,” Scroll of Phi Delta Theta, 22:366–67 (April 1897); Society of the Army of the Cumberland, Thirty-third Reunion, Chattanooga, Tennessee, 1905 (Cincinnati, 1906), 157–58. 13. William B. Phillips was the chief editorial writer at James Gordon Bennett’s New York Herald during much of Reconstruction. Phillips had been more supportive of Andrew Johnson than Bennett and even sought an appointment from that administration. Garry Boulard, The Swing around the Circle: Andrew Johnson and the Train Ride That Destroyed a Presidency (New York, 2008), 156–57. 14. Douglass conflates the identity of two men accompanying the Santo Domingo Commission on board the U.S.S. Tennessee. Archibald R. Marvine (1848–76) was appointed the commission’s assistant geologist and mineralogist. Born in Auburn, New York, Marvine studied mineralogy at Harvard, where he later became an instructor. He participated in a number of important surveys of the American West and ultimately held a post with the U.S. Geological and Geographical Survey. William Henry Hurlburt (1827–95) represented the New York World on the expedition to the Dominican Republic. Hurlburt had grown up in South Carolina and studied at Harvard before launching a journalistic career, first at the New York Times and then at the New York World, which he eventually edited. Hurlburt later resided in Europe and published numerous works of popular history. Daniel W. Crofts, A Secession Crisis Enigma: William Henry Hurlbert and “The Diary of a Public Man” (Baton Rouge, 2010); American Journal of Science and Arts, 11:424 (May 1876). 15. Charles Carroll Fulton (1815–83), journalist and Republican leader, was born in Philadelphia. He began his career as an apprentice at the Philadelphia National Gazette and eventually bought the Washington Advocate, owning it for five years. He then found employment at the Baltimore Sun, first as a compositor and then as an assistant editor. While at the Sun, he became the first agent of the Associated Press in Baltimore. Fulton purchased an interest in the Baltimore American in 1853, and in 1862 he became the sole owner of the paper. During the Civil War, he served not only as the editor of the American, but also as a special correspondent for the paper. A supporter of Lincoln, Fulton represented the administration’s only real newspaper ally amid secessionist sentiment in Baltimore. A member of the Republican party—and of the Republican National Committee for eight years—he attended every national convention as a delegate from 1864 until his death, excepting the year 1880. He traveled to Europe six times and published a volume of letters from his explorations, entitled Europe Viewed through American Spectacles (1874). Philadelphia North American, 8 June 1883; J. Cutler Andrews, The North Reports the Civil War (Pittsburgh, 1955), 26; Richard A. Schwarzlose,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 153
9/1/21 4:16 PM
154
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
The Nation’s Newsbrokers: The Formative Years; From Pretelegraph to 1865, 2 vols. (Evanston, Ill., 1989), 1:249. 16. Hiram J. Ramsdell (1839–87), originally from Laona, New York, began his journalistic career as an editor of the Wellsboro (Pa.) Agitator. He served for three years in the Sixth Pennsylvania Reserve Regiment during the Civil War, and in 1866 he moved to Washington, D.C. After serving as a reporter for the Washington bureau of the New York Tribune, he became a Washington correspondent for the Cincinnati Commercial, Philadelphia Times, and Philadelphia Press. He then returned as a correspondent to the Tribune under Zebulon White. Ramsdell also held the post of a special agent in the Post Office Department. In 1871, he purchased a copy of the Treaty of Washington, which settled claims between Britain and the United States arising from events during the Civil War. After publishing the still-secret treaty in the Tribune, he was called to testify in the U.S. Senate to reveal his source. After refusing, Ramsdell was briefly jailed. In 1881, President Garfield appointed him register of wills in Washington, D.C.—a position he held until 1886. Philadelphia North American, 26 May 1887; Portage (Wisc.) State Register, 28 May 1887; Donald A. Ritchie, Press Gallery: Congress and the Washington Correspondents (Cambridge, Mass., 1991), 84, 89–90; Victor Fischer and Michael B. Frank, eds., Mark Twain’s Letters, 1870–71, 6 vols. (Berkeley, Calif., 1995), 4:340n. 17. Built in the Brooklyn Navy Yard in 1865 as the U.S.S. Madawaska, the frigate U.S.S. Tennessee was launched in July 1865—too late to participate in the Civil War. The Tennessee was powered by a combination of screw engines and sails and was the largest ship in the U.S. Navy when launched. It served as flagship for the Asiatic and the North Atlantic squadrons before it was retired in 1886. K. Jack Bauer and Stephen S. Roberts, Register of Ships of the U.S. Navy: Major Combatants (Westport, Conn., 1991), 57. 18. Captain William G. Temple (1824–94), commander of the U.S.S. Tennessee, was born in Vermont, joined the U.S. Navy as a midshipman in 1840, and served with distinction in the Mexican War and the Civil War. Temple distinguished himself during the amphibious operations against Fort Fisher. In 1870, he had been serving as the assistant judge advocate when he was promoted to captain and given command of the Tennessee in 1870. Temple subsequently served in shore assignments until promoted to rear admiral in early 1884, after which he soon retired. Washington Evening Star, 29 June 1894. 19. The records of the Santo Domingo Commission report its first meeting on board the Tennessee on 18 January 1871, “twenty-four hours at sea.” Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 35. 20. Benjamin Franklin Wade (1800–78), antislavery lawyer, judge, and legislator, was born in Feeding Hills, Massachusetts, moved to Ohio as a young man, and eventually entered into a law partnership with Joshua Giddings. In 1837, Wade was elected as a Whig to the Ohio senate, where his opposition to stricter fugitive slave laws possibly cost him reelection. He served again in the state legislature from 1841 to 1843, and in 1847 he was appointed presiding judge of the Third Ohio Judicial Circuit. Four years later, Whigs and Free Soilers united to elect him to the U.S. Senate. In the 1850s, he converted to Republicanism and was an outspoken opponent of any move to expand the limits of slavery. An advocate of aggressive military measures during the Civil War, Wade served as chairman of the Joint Committee on the Conduct of the War and, with Congressman Henry Winter Davis of Maryland, sponsored the Wade-Davis Bill of 1864, an alternative to Lincoln’s Reconstruction policy, which the president vetoed. After the war, he continued to advocate Congressional Reconstruction and was one of the leading critics of Andrew Johnson’s conciliatory policies toward the South. As president pro tempore of the Senate at the time of Johnson’s 1868 impeachment trial, Wade stood to gain the presidency upon Johnson’s conviction. Johnson survived impeachment, but Wade, whose radicalism applied to woman suffrage and labor legislation as well as to Reconstruction issues, had alienated many politicians and voters. He never again held public office, but served on the Santo Domingo Commission and was a presidential elector for Rutherford B. Hayes. Albert G. Riddle, The Life of Benjamin F. Wade (Cleveland, 1886); Hans L. Trefousse, Benjamin Franklin Wade: Radical Republican from Ohio (New York, 1963); DAB, 19:303–05.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 154
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
155
21. The reports from the Santo Domingo Commission list Charles R. Douglass as a “messenger” accompanying the party sailing on the U.S.S. Tennessee. There is no other record of his activities during the tour. Records of the Columbia Historical Society, 35–36 (1917). 22. Douglass probably refers to the commission’s address to Dominican president Buenaventura Báez, delivered by Benjamin F. Wade during a public audience on 2 February 1871: “Mr. PRESIDENT: We have the honor to place in your hands an autograph letter of the President of the United States, which will explain to you the object of our mission. Your excellency will see that it is a mission of peace and good will. We come under instructions from Congress, sanctioned by the President of the United States, to make sundry inquiries regarding the republic of which you are the chief magistrate. These instructions explain themselves. We trust that we shall be received as friends, and afforded such simple facilities for the prosecution of our inquiries as may be necessary. Accept sir, through us, the most cordial wishes of the people of the United States for the lasting peace and prosperity of the Dominican Republic.” Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 40. 23. Buenaventura Báez Mendez (1812–84) was born in Azua to a wealthy landowning father and a mulatto slave mother and was educated in France. After the War for Independence (1844–49) from Haiti concluded successfully, leadership of the new Dominican Republic alternated for the next thirty years between the northern Blue party, led by Pedro Santana (1801–64), and the southern Red party, led by Báez. To secure their persons and property from domestic rivals, confront the spiraling national debt, and ward off a Haitian invasion, a number of caudillos (strong men) repeatedly sought to protect their nation from annexation by foreign powers. Spain recolonized the Dominican Republic at Santana’s invitation in 1861, but retreated after the bloody popular resistance the Dominicans named the War of the Restoration (1863–65). During the Spanish annexation, Báez moved to Europe, where he lived off subsidies and titles bestowed by Spain’s queen. When Spanish defeat appeared imminent, Báez renounced his allegiance to the Crown and relocated to Curaçao to orchestrate his return to power. Restoration inaugurated twenty years of political chaos as conflict between conservative Reds and liberal Blues resulted in more than fifty revolts and at least twenty-one changes of government. Báez held the presidency three times during the era—the longest period being from May 1868 to January 1874, during which he encouraged U.S. annexation. Báez died in exile in 1884. Modern historians of the Dominican Republic universally denounce Santana and Báez for creating a national culture in which political and economic chaos was the norm. Sumner Welles, Naboth’s Vineyard: The Dominican Republic, 1844–1924, 2 vols. (1928; Mamaroneck, N.Y., 1966), 1:66–67, 76, 91–92, 96, 100, 136–37, 301–02; Richard A. Haggerty, ed., Dominican Republic and Haiti: Country Studies (Washington, D.C., 1991), 12–18; Frank Moya Pons, The Dominican Republic: A National History (New Rochelle, N.Y., 1995), 219–32; Eric Paul Roorda, Lauren Derby, and Raymundo González, eds., The Dominican Republic Reader: History, Culture, Politics (Durham, N.C., 2014), 141, 146. 24. Miles. 25. O’clock. 26. Christopher Columbus landed on the island that he called Hispaniola (Española) in 1492 and declared it a colony of Spain. It served as the administrative and logistical base for Spain’s conquest of most of the Caribbean, Central America, and South America during the sixteenth century. In the Treaty of Ryswick of 1697, Spain ceded the western third of the island to France. Spain’s colony was named Santo Domingo and France’s Saint-Domingue until it won its independence in 1804 and took the name Haiti. In 1821, Santo Domingo acquired independence from Spain, but in 1822, it was invaded and occupied by Haiti. In 1844, Santo Domingo threw off Haitian rule and declared itself the Dominican Republic. Economic and political instability opened the door to Spanish annexation in 1861, but this was rejected decisively in 1865. Haggerty, Dominican Republic and Haiti, 3–18. 27. Don Pedro Santana y Familias, the first Marquis of Las Carreras (1801–64), was the principal military leader of the successful 1844 independence movement of the Dominican Republic from Haitian control. He exiled other independence leaders and ruled dictatorially as president from 1844 to 1848. Overthrown, Santana returned twice to the nation’s presidency (1853–56 and 1858–61). As the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 155
9/1/21 4:16 PM
156
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
nation fell into chaos and poverty during his last term, he persuaded the Spanish to resume overlordship, and was rewarded with a title of nobility, an appointment as governor of the new colony, and a handsome annual pension. Howard J. Wiarda and Michael J. Kryzanek, The Dominican Republic: A Caribbean Crucible, 2d ed. (Boulder, Colo., 1992), 28–30; Horne, Confronting Black Jacobins, 194, 224–25, 295. 28. A descendant of African American emigrants from Philadelphia, Joseph P. Hamilton (1827– ?) appeared before the Santo Domingo Commission in Santa Bárbara de Samaná on 29 January 1871. Then a Methodist preacher, Hamilton testified that political chaos during the 1860s had ruined his agricultural and mercantile enterprises. He desired U.S. annexation to restore prosperity to the region. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 39, 222–24. 29. At the time of the commission’s visit, two insurgencies were flaring in the Dominican Republic. General José María Cabral (1816–99), who had been an ally of Buenaventura Báez, seized the presidency for himself, acting in that role from August 1866 to January 1868. With covert support from the government of neighboring Haiti, Cabral had control of much of western Dominican Republic in early 1871. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 7–8, 280–83. 30. Probably a reference to a private academy in Santa Bárbara de Samaná run by George Lewis Judd, the son of a white Baptist missionary who had settled in Haiti but sought exile in the Dominican Republic after a revolution displaced President Sylvain Salnave in 1869. The English-language school, popularly dubbed the “Baptist school,” attracted students mainly from the children of descendants of African American immigrants. Judd testified to the Santo Domingo Commission that a majority of Haitians as well as Dominicans would welcome annexation by the United States. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 223, 225–29. 31. Since the Caribbean was known to be an earthquake-prone region, the committee sought to determine the frequency and severity of earthquakes on the island, which undoubtedly prompted Douglass’s notation here. Residents interviewed by the commission noted that the last great destructive earthquake had occurred in 1842, but that “slight shocks” were a common, nearly annual occurrence. In fact, on 23 November 1871, the New York Times cited a report from Santo Domingo that tremors had been felt there on 30 October. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 22, 220, 277. 32. Gregorio Luperón (1839–97) was born in humble circumstances in the northern Dominican port city of Puerto Plata. He rose to prominence as a military leader during the War of the Restoration, which thwarted Spanish efforts to recolonize the Dominican Republic. In response to President Buenaventura Báez’s efforts to secure annexation between 1868 and 1871, Luperón joined General José María Cabral, the other major leader of the northern Blue party, in a pact to overthrow Báez and maintain Dominican national sovereignty. Famous for his audacity, Luperón purchased a steamship that had served as a blockade-runner during the Civil War, and in 1869 he used it to ferry Dominican nationalist revolutionaries from Haiti through a screen of U.S. naval vessels operating in support of Báez. More significant were the defiant letters protesting American annexation that Luperón wrote to President Ulysses S. Grant and Republican senators in 1869 and 1870, which directly contributed to the death of the scheme in 1871. It is not clear which of these initiatives Douglass is referring to here, or whether Douglass actually considered them “treachery” or was merely recording the response of Dominicans he interviewed. Ultimately, if one approved of Báez’s goal of U.S. annexation, as Douglass did, then all activities by Luperón and his allies to undermine that effort qualified as treason. Among modern Dominicans, Gregorio Luperón is highly esteemed as a nationalist who successfully resisted foreign intrusions in their country. Welles, Naboth’s Vineyard, 1:361–64; Pons, Dominican Republic, 228–29; Roorda, Derby, and González, Dominican Republic Reader, 141, 171–72. 33. The governor of Samaná province was José Silvano Acosta (1824–?), who described himself to the Santo Domingo Commission as a Creole born in that province. The Spanish had appointed him governor, and he continued in that post when the Dominican Republic gained independence. He testified in favor of annexation, to bring tranquility to the nation. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 39, 209.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 156
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
157
34. Born around 1744 to a literate slave father, François-Dominique Toussaint L’Ouverture was raised near LeCap in the North Province of Saint-Domingue, in present-day Haiti. Like his father, L’Ouverture learned to read while he was a slave growing up on the plantation. When the slaves of Saint-Domingue revolted, L’Ouverture emerged as a capable military leader, commanding an army of 55,000 men to victory over the combined European forces of England, France, and Spain in 1794. This victory guaranteed him the role of leader of newly independent Haiti. In 1802, he was taken prisoner by the French, who had returned to reclaim the island. While awaiting sentencing, L’Ouverture died of pneumonia in April 1803 after enduring ten months of harsh conditions in a French prison. Ralph Korngold, Citizen Toussaint (Boston, 1944); Martin Ros, Night of Fire: The Black Napoleon and the Battle for Haiti (New York, 1994); Kwame Anthony Appiah and Henry Louis Gates, Jr., eds., Africana: The Encyclopedia of the African and African American Experience; The Concise Desk Reference (New York, 1999), 904–05. 35. Henry Christophe was born to a slave mother in 1767, probably in British Grenada, and arrived in northern Saint-Domingue at a very young age. He gained his freedom while managing a hotel in Cap-Français, a task that gave him a taste for politics as well as an affinity for European culture. He distinguished himself as a soldier throughout the decade-long Haitian Revolution, and was made a general by Toussaint L’Ouverture in 1802. After the death of Toussaint in 1803 and the assassination of the self-proclaimed emperor Jean-Jacques Dessalines in 1806, Christophe engaged in a brief struggle for power against Alexandre Pétion. Haiti was soon divided between these strongmen and their supporters, with Pétion at the head of a mulatto-ruled southern Republic of Haiti and Christophe as the president of a black-dominated northern State of Haiti. In 1811, Christophe declared himself King Henry I and set about creating a kingdom that would demonstrate black achievement in a world dominated by white powers. At the expense of tens of thousands of lives, he constructed the formidable Citadel Henry (now Citadelle Laferrière), the opulent Sans-Souci Palace, and multiple grand residences. Christophe’s policy of corvée, a system of coerced plantation labor similar to slavery, provided the revenue to fund his many projects, but came at the price of the loyalty of the Haitian people. When Christophe suffered a debilitating stroke in 1820, he committed suicide rather than suffer at the hands of vengeful subjects. Christophe left a complex legacy; he contributed significantly to Haitian independence from outside control, but at a weighty cost to the well-being of his people. Hubert Cole, Christophe, King of Haiti (New York, 1967); Haggerty, Dominican Republic and Haiti, 215–18; Victor-Emmanuel Roberto Wilson and Jacqueline Van Baelen, “The Forgotten Eighth Wonder of the World,” Callaloo, 15:849–56 (Summer 1992). 36. In late 1801, Napoleon Bonaparte, first consul of France, charged General Charles Victor Emmanuel Leclerc with leading a military expedition to capture or kill Toussaint L’Ouverture and the leaders of his black army and to reestablish slavery and white rule in Saint-Domingue. Landing in February 1802 at the head of twenty thousand French troops, Leclerc quickly occupied the colony’s ports and convinced nearly all black officers, including L’Ouverture, to retire to private life. In June, L’Ouverture was seized and imprisoned in France, where he died in April 1803. More importantly, in July, word reached Saint-Domingue that the French would restore slavery, whereupon a popular uprising broke out. Desperate to maintain control, Leclerc began massacring black troops and civilians suspected of disloyalty, which only fueled resistance. Upon Leclerc’s death from yellow fever, General Donatien Rochambeau launched a true terror campaign in which black prisoners were systematically shot, burned, drowned, crucified, and broken on the rack. Eyewitnesses claim that he imported special man-eating dogs from Cuba to maul blacks for the entertainment of white planters, and he slaughtered some prisoners by locking them in the holds of ships and gassing them with sulfur. These tactics unified black resistance under the leadership of General Jean-Jacques Dessalines, a former slave, who instilled in his army the goal of killing every white person in the colony. Massive attrition due to yellow fever and black defiance, along with renewed war with Britain, forced Rochambeau to flee the island in November 1803, ending all French hopes of regaining their former colony. Carolyn E. Fick, The Making of Haiti: The Saint-Domingue Revolution from Below (Knoxville,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 157
9/1/21 4:16 PM
158
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
Tenn., 1990), 204–36; Laurent Dubois and John D. Garrigus, Slave Revolution in the Caribbean, 1789–1804: A Brief History with Documents (Boston, 2006), 175–79; Philippe R. Girard, “Liberté, Égalité, Esclavage: French Revolutionary Ideals and the Failure of the Leclerc Expedition to SaintDomingue,” French Colonial History, 6:67–69 (2005). 37. The capital, largest city, and economic hub of the Dominican Republic, the port of Santo Domingo de Guzmán is located on the southern coast of the Caribbean nation. Founded in 1496 by Bartholomew Columbus, the city is the longest continuously inhabited European settlement in the Western Hemisphere. Santo Domingo was the site of the first university, cathedral, castle, monastery, and fortress in the hemisphere. In 1821, the city was briefly the capital of an independent nation, but the eastern half of Hispaniola soon united with Haiti. In 1844, Santo Domingo again became the capital of an independent nation, the Dominican Republic. In 1861, Spain regained control of the country, maintaining power until its expulsion following the War of Restoration in 1865. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 413–14, 1696. 38. A rhodestead (roadstead) is the reasonably safe, sheltered body of water in which ships moor while awaiting their turn to enter the port of call. 39. The navigator and explorer Cristoforo Colombo (1451–1506) was the son of a weaver from a village near Genoa. John Murray (firm), Handbook for Travellers in Northern Italy, 15th ed. (London, 1883), 88. 40. According to a New York Times reporter who accompanied the commission, the Presidential Palace was located on a hill three hundred yards above the city’s Eastern Gate. Containing only six to eight large rooms, it was unworthy of the title of palace, but since it was two stories high and sported Moorish arches, whitewashed brick walls, marble floors, and mahogany doors, it was “probably the finest building in the Republic.” The reporter claimed that superstitious locals believed that “no President or Governor who inhabits it leaves it alive,” wryly noting that President Báez refused to dwell in it. New York Times, 24 February 1871. 41. The son of a banker from Syracuse, New York, Andrew Dickson White (1832–1918) graduated from Yale University and went on to teach history at the University of Michigan. He returned to New York State in the 1860s and helped found Cornell University, where he served as its first president. After his service on the Santo Domingo Commission, White held the posts of U.S. ambassador to Russia (1892–94) and Germany (1897–1902). Andrew Dickson White, The Autobiography of Andrew Dickson White, 2 vols. (New York, 1904); Glenn C. Altschuler, Andrew D. White: Educator, Historian, Diplomat (Ithaca, N.Y., 1979). 42. Born in the Grand Duchy of Baden, Franz Sigel (1824–1902) was a junior officer in that nation’s army when he helped lead an uprising against its monarch in the Revolution of 1848. He fled into exile, first to Great Britain but ultimately the United States. Sigel was a teacher before the Civil War, when he volunteered as an officer in the Union Army. He served with distinction in Missouri and had risen to the rank of major general by early 1862. Sigel’s subsequent military performance was mediocre, but he was popular with the largely German American troops placed under his command. After the war, Sigel worked as a newspaper editor, first in Baltimore and then New York City. He received a variety of minor patronage appointments from Republican administrations and then from the Democrat Grover Cleveland. Stephen D. Engle, Yankee Dutchman: The Life of Franz Sigel (Baton Rouge, La., 1999). 43. Douglass is misinformed here. Neither Christopher Columbus nor any of his family members died in prison in the city of Santo Domingo. There was a period of almost two months in the fall of 1500 when Columbus and his two brothers, Bartholomew and Diego, were stripped of their high positions in the government of Hispaniola on charges of tyranny and incompetence and were imprisoned in Santo Domingo. Nevertheless, upon arriving in Spain in chains in December, the men were pardoned by King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella, and most of their titles and property were restored. While the monarchs had lost faith in Columbus’s ability to govern, they valued his skills as a seaman and explorer, heartily supporting his fourth voyage to the Caribbean, in 1502. Columbus
Y7870-Douglass.indb 158
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
159
died and was buried in Valladolid, Spain, in 1506. The castle Douglass refers to is the Fortaleza Ozama, built between 1502 and 1505 to guard the entrance to the port of Santo Domingo. Used as a prison well into the twentieth century, the fort was erroneously termed “the jail of Columbus” for centuries. William D. Phillips, Jr., and Carla Rahn Phillips, The Worlds of Christopher Columbus (New York, 1992), 223–25, 227–28, 240; Roorda, Derby, and González, Dominican Republic Reader, 41; Silvio A. Bedini, ed., The Christopher Columbus Encyclopedia, 2 vols. (New York, 1992), 1:203. 44. Douglass had interviewed a Methodist missionary, the Reverend Jacob James, in Santa Bárbara de Samaná. That city, with its large population of émigrés from the United States, was the center of Methodism in the Dominican Republic. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 229, 231. 45. William L. Cazneau was a Boston native who in the 1830s acquired both wealth as a speculator in western lands and fame as a leader in the Texas independence movement. In the 1840s, he wed Jane McManus Storms, the daughter of a New York congressman, and for the next three decades they wielded their influence to advance dozens of schemes designed to enrich themselves and exert U.S. power in Mexico, Cuba, Nicaragua, and the Dominican Republic. In 1853, Cazneau was appointed by President Franklin Pierce as special agent to the Dominican Republic, charged with acquiring leasing rights to Samaná Bay for use as a U.S. naval station. Having failed in this mission, the Cazneaus established residence outside Santo Domingo, where they hatched speculative ventures ranging from mining, banking, and cotton production to colonization projects for both ex-slaves and whites. At the conclusion of the Civil War, the Cazneaus used their influence to popularize the idea of U.S. annexation of the Dominican Republic, commonly referred to as Santo Domingo. The Cazneaus’ long-standing association with slavery, the Democratic party, and unsavory speculation fueled opposition among the Republican majority in the Senate, even though the project was proposed by President Ulysses S. Grant. In response to Senate concerns, the Santo Domingo Commission assiduously recorded in their final report the multiple contracts and government grants—mostly mining concessions—the Cazneaus held on the island, as Douglass mentions here in his diary. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 183–84; Horne, Confronting Black Jacobins, 228–30, 261–62, 270–71, 284–86; Pope Atkins and Larman C. Wilson, The Dominican Republic and the United States: From Imperialism to Transnationalism (Athens, Ga., 1998), 17–18, 22–27; Robert E. May, “Lobbyist for Commercial Empire: Jane Cazneau, William Cazneau, and U.S. Caribbean Policy, 1846–1878,” Pacific Historical Review, 48:383–412 (August 1979). 46. Douglass is probably referring to the Alcázar de Colón, built and inhabited by the son of Christopher Columbus, Diego, when he was governor of Hispaniola from 1509 to 1515 and viceroy of the Indies from 1520 to 1524. An impressive palace containing fifty rooms and extensive gardens, it fell into ruin during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Part of the structure was restored in the 1950s, and today it is home to the Museo Alcázar de Diego Colón, which exhibits European medieval and Renaissance art. It is part of the Santo Domingo Colonial Zone, which was designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1990. Christopher P. Baker, National Geographic Traveler: Dominican Republic, 2d ed. (Washington, D.C., 2011), 60, 66, 72. 47. Modern historians continue to disagree over the details of the introduction of African slaves to Hispaniola, Spain’s first colony. Some scholars believe that gentlemen accompanying Columbus on his second voyage (1493–96) brought their African slaves with them from Spain. If true, those slaves were Spanish-speaking Christians, were domestic servants rather than field laborers, and definitely did not land on Santo Domingo, since that port city was established in 1498. Other historians point to the period of 1502–03, when Nicolas de Ovando, newly appointed governor of Hispaniola, arrived in Santo Domingo with Spanish-born African slaves intended for use in the new enterprise of sugar cane cultivation. Still others emphasize that Santo Domingo was not truly integrated into the larger Atlantic slave trade until the 1510s. That said, Douglass’s larger point is correct: African slavery was introduced to the New World in Hispaniola, and Santo Domingo, its capital and main port, was the arrival point for tens of thousands of African slaves for over three centuries. Franklin W. Knight, ed., General History of the Caribbean, vol. 3: The Slave Societies of the Caribbean (London, 1997), 13,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 159
9/1/21 4:16 PM
160
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
42; Carlos Andujar, The African Presence in Santo Domingo (East Lansing, Mich., 2012), 16, 23, 31, 39–40, 64; Haggerty, Dominican Republic and Haiti, 5, 49. 48. Baltimore-born David Brooks (c. 1803–?) migrated to Santo Domingo City in the mid-1820s. He testified in favor of annexation by the United States because he deemed native Dominicans incapable of self-government. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 252–53. 49. Elijah R. Gross testified before the Santo Domingo Commission in Santo Domingo City on 7 February 1871. Born in Philadelphia, he migrated to the island in the mid-1820s. Gross held several important posts in the military and in the Haitian and the Dominican civilian governments. At the time, he was a judge. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 254–55. 50. Joseph Hamilton. 51. The invading army of Prussia had captured Paris on 28 January 1871 after a four-month siege, ending effective military resistance in the Franco-Prussian War. Thanks to the transatlantic cable, major New York City newspapers, such as the Tribune, carried detailed reports of the event on 31 January 1871. 52. Arthur Shephard. 53. Born into one of Boston’s leading families, Samuel Gridley Howe (1801–76) graduated from Brown University in 1821 and the Harvard Medical School in 1824. For the next six years, Howe participated as a soldier, surgeon, and relief worker in the Greek rebellion against Turkish rule. After returning to the United States, he pioneered in the education of the blind, deaf, and insane. Howe married Julia Ward in 1843, and the two coedited the Free Soil newspaper the Boston Commonwealth in the early 1850s. His active support for the free-state movement in Kansas brought Howe into close contact with John Brown, who recruited Howe as one of the “Secret Six” who financed the raid on Harpers Ferry in 1859. After that incident, Howe wrote a public letter disclaiming any advance knowledge of Brown’s plans and briefly fled to Canada, returning later to testify before the congressional panel investigating the raid. During the Civil War, he assisted the U.S. Sanitary Commission; at the conflict’s conclusion, he served on the Freedman’s Inquiry Commission. In 1871, Howe traveled to Santo Domingo as one of the three members of the commission, which Douglass accompanied as secretary. Jeffery Rossbach, Ambivalent Conspirators: John Brown, the Secret Six, and a Theory of Slave Violence (Philadelphia, 1982), 26; ACAB, 3:283–84; NCAB, 8:372–73; DAB, 9:296–97. 54. A graduate of Harvard University in 1844, Henry Blatchford Wheelwright (1824–92) went on to study medicine at the Harvard Medical School, but he did not receive a degree. Instead, he practiced homeopathic medicine in Massachusetts and worked in several capacities for the state, including as general agent of the Board of State Charities. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 36; Edward Wheelwright, The Class of 1844: Harvard College, Fifty Years after Graduation (Cambridge, Mass., 1896), 246–49. 55. The Kentucky native and lawyer Allan A. Burton helped found the Republican party in that state. He briefly held an appointment as a federal judge in the Dakota Territory before being sent as U.S. ambassador to New Grenada (Colombia) during Lincoln’s administration. In the face of considerable political instability in Colombia, Burton worked to keep the Isthmus of Panama free of European influence. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 36; John E. Hurt, My View of the Twentieth Century (n.p., 2005), 8. 56. Possibly the “F. Schumacher” noted in the Santo Domingo Inquiry Commission’s report as, together with Louis P. Angenard, holding a commission from the Dominican government to construct a railroad in the nation’s south. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 183–84. 57. Jean-Pierre Boyer was born in Port-au-Prince, the capital city of Saint-Domingue, in 1776. His father was a French tailor and his mother a former African slave. He was educated in France and served in the French Republican Army before returning to the colony in 1793 with the aim of overthrowing royalist rule. As with all of Haiti’s “founding fathers,” Boyer’s allegiances shifted repeatedly during the chaotic years of the revolution, but in 1803 he and fellow mulatto leader Alexandre Pétion allied with the black leaders Jean-Jacques Dessalines and Henry Christophe to decisively repulse the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 160
9/1/21 4:16 PM
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
161
French army and establish Haitian independence. Upon the division of Haiti after the assassination of Dessalines in 1806, Boyer served as chief aide and adviser during President Pétion’s rule of the southern Republic of Haiti. When Pétion died in 1818, Boyer assumed the presidency and quickly united all of Haiti when King Henry Christophe committed suicide in 1820. Boyer likewise took advantage of internal conflict in eastern Hispaniola to bloodlessly incorporate the newly independent Santo Domingo into Haiti in February 1822. One of Boyer’s first acts proclaimed the emancipation of all slaves in the former Spanish colony, which naturally alienated the white elites and encouraged many to emigrate. Boyer’s further efforts to Haitianize the Dominicans, by redistributing land and instituting French as the official language, devastated the economy and most cultural institutions, particularly education. Boyer’s fall from power at the hands of disgruntled Haitians was followed, within a year, by the successful ousting of Haitian occupation troops and the establishment of the Dominican Republic. Haggerty, Dominican Republic and Haiti, 10–11, 217–19; John Edward Baur, “Mulatto Machiavelli: Jean Pierre Boyer and the Haiti of His Day,” JNH, 32: 315–20 (July 1947). 58. Founded in 1504, the port city of Azua de Compostela is the administrative and economic center of Azua province, located west of the Dominican Republic’s capital of Santo Domingo on that nation’s southern coast. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 133. 59. A tree indigenous to the Caribbean and South America, valued for its hard wood, which had been exported to Europe since the sixteenth century. 60. The official report of the Santo Domingo Commission noted that the standing army of the Dominican Republic had been abolished during the period of the restoration of Spanish suzerainty in 1861–65. The subsequent political instability prevented the commission from estimating the exact number of military forces loyal to President Báez. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 6–9, 167–68. 61. This is probably an allusion to the well-watered region south of Azua between the Bia and Jura rivers, reputedly the site of the most productive sugar plantations in the nation. Marchena was a small city in southwestern Spain and the likely inspiration for the Dominican plantation described by Douglass. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 85; Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 1148. 62. Born in Pittstown, New York, Wesley Newcomb (1808–92) studied medicine at the Vermont Medical School and opened a practice in Albany. Newcomb developed an interest in marine shells and traveled around the world for his research, residing many years in Hawaii and California. He accompanied the Santo Domingo commissioners as a sanitary expert in 1870, later submitting reports on conditions in Santo Domingo City, Samaná, and San Cristobal, Port-au-Prince, Haiti. He later served as a curator and instructor at Cornell University. Robert Edwards Carter Stearns, “In Memoriam—Dr. Wesley Newcomb,” Nautilus, 5:121–24 (March 1892); Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 36, 38, 42, 73–75, 89–93, 120; ACAB, 17:563. 63. English-born Charles Christopher Parry (1823–90) migrated with his parents to upstate New York. After completing a medical degree at Columbia University, he settled in Davenport, Iowa, in 1846. Soon after, he joined the federal government’s scientific survey of the new territories gained in the Mexican War. Parry made more botanical surveys of the Rocky Mountain region in the 1860s in the employ of the U.S. Agriculture Department, which later dispatched him with the Santo Domingo Commission. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 36, 42, 71–73 86–89; Charles A. White, “Biographical Memoir of Charles Christopher Parry,” Annals of Iowa, 7:413–30 (1906). 64. A U.S. Department of Agriculture employee, the little-known H. Brummel accompanied the Santo Domingo Commission and traveled with Henry A. Ward through the Samaná Peninsula, assessing its agricultural potential. Botanical samples gathered by Brummel and Charles Christopher Parry in the Dominican Republic were donated to Harvard University. Report of the Commissioner of Agriculture for the Year 1869 (Washington, D.C., 1870), 93; Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 36, 38, 81–84. 65. Alta Velo Island is actually located off the southwestern coast of the Dominican Republic. First visited by Christopher Columbus in 1494, this small uninhabited island was claimed by the United States through the Guano Island Act of 1856. U.S. and Dominican authorities disputed each
Y7870-Douglass.indb 161
9/1/21 4:16 PM
162
SANTO DOMINGO TRAVEL DIARY
other’s claims to the valuable guano deposits on the island. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 30, 183, 191; Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 53. 66. Douglass probably describes the decommissioned U.S. Navy vessel Hornet. This ship, originally titled the Lady Sterling, was built in Great Britain as a blockade-runner for the Confederacy. It was captured after an engagement with the U.S. Navy off Wilmington, North Carolina, in October 1864. Repaired and renamed the Hornet, the speedy steamer served the U.S. Navy for the remainder of the war. Sold into private hands in 1869, the Hornet had just transported weapons to Cuban revolutionaries in early January 1871 when Douglass saw it. Captured by the Spanish in 1872 and renamed the Marco Aurelia, the vessel was broken up around 1894. New York Times, 26 January 1871; Naval Historical Center, Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships, 8 vols. (Washington, D.C., 1959–81), 3: Paul H. Silverstone, Civil War Navies, 1844–1883 (New York, 2006), 50. 67. Ebenezer Don Carlos Bassett (1833–1908) was born in Litchfield, Connecticut, to Tobias Bassett, a mulatto, and Susan Gregory Bassett, a Pequot Indian. He attended Wesleyan Academy at Wilbraham, Massachusetts, and graduated with honors from the Connecticut State Normal School. While employed as the principal of a high school in New Haven, Connecticut, he continued his studies at Yale College. From 1857 to 1859, he served as the principal of the Institute for Colored Youth in Philadelphia while also teaching mathematics, natural sciences, and classics. In 1869, President Grant appointed him U.S. minister to Haiti and the Dominican Republic, making Bassett America’s first black diplomat. He served in Port-au-Prince for eight years. Following his resignation, he served as consul general for Haiti in New York from 1879 to 1888. Douglass was appointed U.S. minister to Haiti and the Dominican Republic in 1889, and Bassett, an old friend, worked as his secretary and interpreter until 1891. The Haitian government appointed him vice consul general in 1898, a position he held until his death in 1908. Christopher Teal, Hero of Hispaniola: America’s First Black Diplomat, Ebenezer D. Bassett (Westport, Conn., 2008); Elizabeth J. Normen et al., African American Connecticut Explored (Middletown, Conn., 2013), 225–29; Rayford W. Logan and Michael R. Winston, eds., Dictionary of American Negro Biography (New York, 1982), 32. 68. Born in New Haven, Connecticut, Eliza Park Bassett (1836–95) had eight children with her husband, including a son, Frederick Douglass Bassett, who died in 1877 at the age of three. Teal, Hero of Hispaniola. 69. Kingston, Jamaica, was founded in 1692 on the southeastern coast of the island, facing a natural harbor protected by a long sandspit, the Palisadoes. It had become the largest town and trading center in Jamaica by 1716. Sir Charles Knowles transferred governmental offices from Spanish Town to Kingston in 1755, but the next governor rescinded that act. Despite this, Kingston continued to grow and take over functions previously carried out in Spanish Town. The capital was officially moved to Kingston by an act of government passed in 1872. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 950. 70. Douglass probably refers to the Jamaican lawyer Samuel Constantine Burke (1836–1900), who held the post of crown solicitor from 1870 to 1890. Burke was a campaigner for greater selfgovernment on the island. Alistair C. Campbell, The Life of Samuel Constantine Burke, 1836–1900 (Mona, Jamaica, 1991). 71. Originally used as a burial site for the Calusa people, Key West was first settled by Europeans after the arrival of Juan Ponce de León in 1521 and the establishment of Florida as a Spanish territory. In 1763, Great Britain took control of Florida, though the Spanish regained control about twenty years later. In 1815, the Spanish governor of Cuba in Havana deeded the island of Key West to Juan Pablo Salas, an officer of the Royal Spanish Navy Artillery posted in Saint Augustine, Florida. He then sold the island twice—first for a sloop valued at $575 to General John Geddes, a former governor of South Carolina, and then to a U.S. businessman, John W. Simonton, during a meeting in a Havana café on 19 January 1822, for the equivalent of $2,000 in pesos. Finally, on 25 March 1822, Lieutenant Commander Matthew C. Perry claimed the keys as U.S. property. During the Civil War, Key West remained under the control of the Union when Florida seceded and joined the Confederate States of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 162
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
163
America. Most locals supported the South, however, with many even flying Confederate flags over their houses. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 934. 72. Douglass is most likely referring to the San Antonio Cape, the westernmost extremity of the island of Cuba and part of the Pinar del Río province. Its point juts out between the Gulf of Guanahacabibes to the north and Corrientes Bay to the south. A lighthouse, situated on Cape San Antonio, shines around fifteen miles out to sea. U.S. Hydrographic Office, West Indies Pilot: Bermuda Islands, Bahama Islands and the Greater Antilles, 2d ed. (Washington, D.C., 1913), 200; Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 1661. 73. The U.S.S. Tennessee landed the Santo Domingo Commission at Charleston, South Carolina, on 26 March 1871. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 5.
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE (1872) U.S. Grant and the Colored People (Washington, D.C., 1872). Other texts in Grant or Greeley—Which? (Washington, D.C., 1872), 7; NNE, 8 August 1872; Bangor (Me.) Daily Whig and Courier, 12 August 1872; San Francisco Elevator, 24, 31 August 1872.
The presidential election of 1872, between the incumbent, Ulysses S. Grant, and the Liberal Republican and Democratic party candidate, Horace Greeley, was the result of a divided Republican party. Plagued by scandal during his first presidential administration, Grant was commonly accused during the campaign of accepting gifts from favor seekers and compensating them with offices. Liberal Republicans, contending that the goals of Reconstruction had been met, sought to reconcile with the South, demanding “the immediate and absolute removal of all disabilities imposed on account of the rebellion.” They further supported local self-government, a tenet that appealed to the Democratic party. The Democratic party nominated Greeley in the hope of defeating Grant. Douglass, however, remained a loyal Grant supporter and wrote the following pamphlet for the Union Republican Congressional Committee, addressed to the African American voter. He reprinted it in his own New National Era three weeks after delivering it to Republican campaign officials, who used their congressional members’ franking privilege to distribute such literature for free. Newspapers from coast to coast republished Douglass’s endorsement of Grant, in whole or in part, from either the pamphlet or the Era. The committee also reproduced an excerpt from Douglass’s remarks in a second campaign pamphlet,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 163
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
163
America. Most locals supported the South, however, with many even flying Confederate flags over their houses. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 934. 72. Douglass is most likely referring to the San Antonio Cape, the westernmost extremity of the island of Cuba and part of the Pinar del Río province. Its point juts out between the Gulf of Guanahacabibes to the north and Corrientes Bay to the south. A lighthouse, situated on Cape San Antonio, shines around fifteen miles out to sea. U.S. Hydrographic Office, West Indies Pilot: Bermuda Islands, Bahama Islands and the Greater Antilles, 2d ed. (Washington, D.C., 1913), 200; Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 1661. 73. The U.S.S. Tennessee landed the Santo Domingo Commission at Charleston, South Carolina, on 26 March 1871. Report of the Commission of Inquiry, 5.
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE (1872) U.S. Grant and the Colored People (Washington, D.C., 1872). Other texts in Grant or Greeley—Which? (Washington, D.C., 1872), 7; NNE, 8 August 1872; Bangor (Me.) Daily Whig and Courier, 12 August 1872; San Francisco Elevator, 24, 31 August 1872.
The presidential election of 1872, between the incumbent, Ulysses S. Grant, and the Liberal Republican and Democratic party candidate, Horace Greeley, was the result of a divided Republican party. Plagued by scandal during his first presidential administration, Grant was commonly accused during the campaign of accepting gifts from favor seekers and compensating them with offices. Liberal Republicans, contending that the goals of Reconstruction had been met, sought to reconcile with the South, demanding “the immediate and absolute removal of all disabilities imposed on account of the rebellion.” They further supported local self-government, a tenet that appealed to the Democratic party. The Democratic party nominated Greeley in the hope of defeating Grant. Douglass, however, remained a loyal Grant supporter and wrote the following pamphlet for the Union Republican Congressional Committee, addressed to the African American voter. He reprinted it in his own New National Era three weeks after delivering it to Republican campaign officials, who used their congressional members’ franking privilege to distribute such literature for free. Newspapers from coast to coast republished Douglass’s endorsement of Grant, in whole or in part, from either the pamphlet or the Era. The committee also reproduced an excerpt from Douglass’s remarks in a second campaign pamphlet,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 163
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
164
along with pro-Grant endorsements from former abolitionists and African American leaders. William Best Hesseltine, Ulysses S. Grant, Politician (New York, 1935), 145–46; Robert W. Burg, “Amnesty, Civil Rights, and the Meaning of Liberal Republicanism, 1862–1872,” American Nineteenth Century History, 4:29–60 (Fall 2003). To the Colored People of the United States: There are many dissemblers and falsifiers of the Greeley1 party in the South who are seeking the control of the colored voters, by declaring to them that President Grant is not, and never has been, a faithful and sincere friend of my race.2 Indeed, Senator Sumner makes a charge of this kind,3 and while I would not for a moment imply that I have lost faith in the honored Senator’s sincerity and integrity, still I must declare that President Grant’s course, from the time he drew the sword in defence of the old Union in the Valley of the Mississippi till he sheathed it at Appomattox,4 and thence to this day in his reconstruction policy and his war upon the Ku-Klux,5 is without a deed or word to justify such an accusation. In substantiation of my opinion—and I think I may say my race is a unit with me in this opinion—I desire to submit to you, and to the country through you, the following plain and truthful statement of the facts as the records prove them to be. state of public opinion. And first, let me recall the state of public opinion as regards the extent to which the welfare and rights of four millions of my enslaved people6 were involved during the first year and a half of the war. I quote from the letter of Mr. Lincoln’s, dated August 23,1862: “My paramount object is to save the Union, and not either save or destroy slavery.”7 Mr Lincoln, in his proclamation, warned the rebels that he would, on the first day of January following, proclaim emancipation in those States where the people shall be in rebellion against the United States. That glorious proclamation he accordingly issued; but Kentucky, Tennessee, and portions of Louisiana and Virginia were not included in it,8 he was always in advance. General Grant commanded the armies which were moving southward from Cairo9 and operating in territory affected and unaffected by
Y7870-Douglass.indb 164
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
165
the proclamation. I find, by consultation with an ex-officer in that army, who knew all the orders issued, that General Grant was always up with, or in advance of, authority furnished from Washington in regard to the treatment to those of our color then slaves. Thus a large number of our people, through his orders, were furnished employment within his lines, or transportation to homes and places of comfort for themselves and families and education for their children in the North. And when he reached northern Mississippi, or the region where the people of our color were more numerous, I find that he issued November 11, 1862, before the Emancipation Proclamation and before authority was furnished from Washington, but solely on his own conviction of the military necessity and right, an order caring for our people.10 Those of our people fleeing from slavery had been not inaptly designated contrabands of war by General Butler.11 Those of us who participated in or witnessed these scenes can recall with sufficient vividness the exodus from slavery to liberty through the Federal lines whenever the soldiers in blue appeared. he foresees the evil and provides means to avoid it. General Grant saw the demoralizing effect upon the army of thousands of men, women, and children pouring through the camps; he recognized, too, the humane consideration which would not allow, even in those disturbed and fearful scenes, the starvation of those negroes, in regard to whom, as slaves, the Government had not yet fixed its policy. Selecting an officer for the purpose, in Special Order No. 15, dated Headquarters 13th Army Corps, Department of the Tennessee, Legrange, Tennessee, November 11, 1862, he directed this officer to “take charge of the contrabands who came into the camp, organize them into suitable companies for work, see that they were properly cared for, and set them to work. He ordered suitable guards detailed for their protection, and the officer to report to him in person.”12 He followed this with ample orders to the Commissary General and Quartermaster General for issuing of rations, clothing for men, women, and children, and implements necessary for use in their labor. In General Orders No. 13, dated Headquarters 13th Army Corps, Department of the Tennessee, Oxford, Mississippi, December 17, 1862, still half a month before the Emancipation Proclamation, he made the same officer General Superintendent of these affairs for the Department, with authority to designate assistants; and, in a word, increasing his authority,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 165
9/1/21 4:16 PM
166
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
specifying more fully the details of his duties, the kind of labor in which our people were to be employed, and enforcing their compensation. They were to fill every position occupied by the soldier save what depended upon his enlistment. Their wives and children were also to be cared for and given employment as far as possible.13 he anticipates the freedmen’s bureau. Indeed, looking over a report of the General Superintendent, which was printed in the winter of 1865, and favorably reviewed by the North American Review,14 I find that each military post came to have an office, and that office had one officer to care for supplies furnished them, another for the enforcement of justice in their behalf, another for their medical attendance, another for their education. All abandoned property was ordered used for them. In all these benefits I find white refugees shared also. Here was the full germ of the Freedemen’s Bureau15 apparent in the orders of General Grant before the Emancipation Proclamation, not as a theory, but as a practical solution of the relation of slaves in the South to the suppression of the rebellion, and in the interest of the welfare of all concerned. How do these facts comport with the accusations in question? We know General Grant dislikes everything dramatic, yet what a scene is this for the contemplation of the people of our color! Here, in the midst of the terrible scenes of war, still slaves, so far as law and the action of Government is concerned, they are as far as possible protected in their families and lives, sheltered and clothed, their sick furnished medicines, and the well furnished with employment that they might learn self-support. After slavery was declared abolished as spring approached, the Government determined to employ the freedmen as soldiers, and Adjutant General Thomas16 was sent out with proper authority to organize regiments in the Mississippi Valley. Already one company of colored troops had been organized, furnished with arms, and put on duty. General Grant was at Milliken’s Bend, Louisiana.17 His General Orders No. 25, say: “Commissaries will issue supplies, and quartermasters will furnish stores on the same requisitions and returns as are required from the troops. It is expected that all commanders will especially exert themselves in carrying out the policy of the Administration, not only in organizing colored regiments and rendering them efficient, but also in removing prejudice against them.”18 Was this opposing the organization of troops?
Y7870-Douglass.indb 166
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
167
General Grant, in his letter to General Lee, October 19, 1864, although declining to discuss the slavery question, declares, “I shall always regret the necessity of retaliating for wrongs done our soldiers, but regard it my duty to protect all persons received into the army of the United States, regardless of color or nationality!”19 he was always ready to hear concerning the freedmen. I learn from an ex-officer, who was thoroughly cognizant of the facts, that in the midst of the fearful labor around Vicksburg,20 General Grant always found time to attend to the calls necessary to make upon him in regard to the colored people or colored troops, that he gave every aid to the development of their industry and the means of their improvement. He favored no Utopian schemes, and sought practical solution of every difficulty in the way of the welfare of our people. That when before Vicksburg, he, and his associates in the chief command of the troops, who, night and day, were pressing the siege, found time to listen to an extended report of the officer he had placed in charge of our people in the November previous. This report he afterwards forwarded to President Lincoln with a private letter, dated June 11, 1863, in which he says: “Finding that negroes were coming into our lines in great numbers and receiving kind or abusive treatment according to the peculiar view of the troops they first came in contact with, and not being able to give that personal attention to their care and use the matter demanded, I determined to appoint a General Superintendent over the whole subject, and give him such assistants as the duties assigned him might require. I have given him such aid as was in my power, by the publication, from time to time, of such orders as seemed to be required, and generally at the suggestion of the Superintendent.[”]21 He speaks of the results up to that date as of great service to the blacks in having them provided for, when otherwise they would have been neglected, and to the Government in finding employment for the negro whereby he might earn what he was receiving. And in closing, directs special attention to that portion of the report which would suggest orders regulating the subject which a Department Commander is not competent to issue. abraham lincoln was satisfied with him. The officer who delivered this letter and report to Mr. Lincoln, states that Mr. Lincoln received them with the greatest satisfaction, asking many questions about General Grant’s views upon the whole subject of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 167
9/1/21 4:16 PM
168
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
the treatment of the colored people, and in thus learning something in detail of the success of General Grant’s plans and the usefulness in his judgment, of colored soldiers, he repeated the expressions of his gratification that a General who was winning such military successes over the rebels was able, from a military standpoint, to give him so many practical illustrations of the benefits of the emancipation policy.22 he organizes free labor where he goes. I find in a printed copy of a letter to Mr. Levi Coffin,23 then in England, written by the General Superintendent,24 and dated at Vicksburg only a year after its fall, a statement that “this supervision, embracing the territory within the lines of our army, from Cairo down the Mississippi to Red River, together with the state of Arkansas, numbered in its care during the past year 113,650 freedmen. These are now disposed as follows: In military service as soldiers, laundresses, cooks, officers’ servants, and laborers in the various staff departments, 41,150; in cities, on plantations, and in freedmen’s villages and cared for, 72,500. Of these, 62,300 are entirely self-supporting—the same as any industrial class anywhere—as planters, mechanics, barbers, hack-men, dray men, &c., conducting enterprises on their own responsibility, or as hired laborers. The remaining 10,200 receive subsistence from the Government. Thirty thousand of them are members of families whose heads are carrying on plantations, and have under cultivation 4,000 acres of cotton, and are to pay the Government for their subsistence from the first income of crop. The other 7,200 include the paupers (those over and under the self-supporting age, the crippled and sick in hospital) of the 113,650, and those engaged in their care, and instead of being unproductive, have now under cultivation, 500 acres of corn, 790 acres of vegetables, and 1,500 acres of cotton, besides the work done at wood chopping, &c. There are reported in the aggregate something over 100,000 acres of cotton under cultivation. Of these about 7,000 acres are leased and cultivated by blacks. Some of these are managing as high as 300 or 400 acres. It is impossible to give, at the present date, any definite statement of many of the forms of industry. Fifty-nine thousand cords of wood are reported to me by Col. Thomas, Superintendent and Provost Marshall of Freedmen, as cut within the lines of 110 miles on the river banks above and below this place. It would be only a guess to state the entire amount cut by the people under this supervision; it must be enormous. The people have been paid from 50 cents to $2.50 per cord for
Y7870-Douglass.indb 168
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
169
cutting. This wood has been essential to the commercial and military operations on the river. “Of the 113,650 blacks here mentioned, 13,130 have been under instruction in letters; about 4,000 have learned to read quite fairly, and about 2,000 to write.”25 So our people were helped by General Grant’s policy through this terrible transition. he sees no peace while there is slavery. August 16, 1864, General Grant wrote Mr. Washburne26 the celebrated letter so widely quoted, in which he affirms that the Confederate leaders had robbed the cradle and the grave to carry on the war, urging that our friends in the North could have no hope for peace from separation; and among the special reasons in reply to “peace on any terms,” he affirms that the South would demand the restoration of their slaves already free; they would demand indemnity for losses sustained; they would demand a treaty which would make the North slave hunters for the South; they would demand pay for every slave that escaped to the North.27 In his last and noted order to the great army, dated June 2, 1865, General Grant distinctly recognizes the good results they had accomplished; affirms that they had “overthrown all armed opposition to the enforcement of the laws, and the proclamation forever abolishing slavery—the cause and pretext of the rebellion.”28 May we not justly say, will it not be the unquestioned sentiment of history that the liberty which Mr. Lincoln declared with his pen General Grant made effectual with his sword—by his skill in leading the Union armies to final victory? But I prefer that General Grant shall speak for himself, by here quoting from his private letter to Mr. Washburne, and published without the General’s knowledge or permission, dated August 30, 1863, in which he said: “The people of the North need not quarrel over the institution of slavery. What Vice President Stephens acknowledges as the corner-stone of the Confederacy is already knocked out. Slavery is already dead, and cannot be resurrected. It would take a standing army to maintain slavery in the South, if we were to make peace to-day guaranteeing to the South all their former constitutional privileges. “I never was an Abolitionist—not even what could be called anti slavery—but I try to judge fairly and honestly, and because patent to my mind, early in the rebellion, that the North and South could never live in peace with each other except as one nation. As anxious as I am to see peace, and
Y7870-Douglass.indb 169
9/1/21 4:16 PM
170
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
that without slavery, re-established, I would not therefore be willing to see any settlement until this question is forever settled.”29 In a letter written by Mr. Lincoln to General Grant, April 30, 1864, is this emphatic sentence: “I wish to express in this way my entire satisfaction with what you have done up to this time.”30 he has been true in peace as in war. But since he became President how faithfully has he carried out his pledges in which we are most directly interested? In his inaugural, March 4, 1867, we find these wise words in regard to suffrage and the fifteenth amendment: “The question of suffrage is one which is likely to agitate the public so long as a portion of the citizens of the nation are excluded from its privileges in any State. It seems to me very desirable that this question should be settled now, and I entertain the hope and express the desire that it may be by the ratification of the fifteenth article of amendment to the Constitution.”31 Indeed, his language often points to his clear apprehension of the fact that peace could only be restored by removing the causes of disturbance. In his message in regard to Mississippi and Virginia, April 7, 1869, while he urges the restoration of the States to their proper relations to the Government as speedy as possible, he clearly states that it must be conditioned that the people of those States shall “be willing to become peaceful and orderly communities, and to adopt and maintain such constitutions and laws as will effectually secure the civil and political rights of all persons within their borders.[”]32 he commends the industry of the freedmen. True to all his instincts, all his declarations and acts in his first annual message, he has for our people as freedmen a kind word, and declares “the freedmen, under the protection they have received, are making rapid progress in learning, and no complaints are heard of lack of industry on their part where they receive fair remuneration for their labor[”]; and among the reasons which he finds for gratitude to the Giver of all good, is a country “with a population of forty millions of free people, all speaking one language; with facilities for every mortal to acquire an education; with institutions closing to none the avenues to fame or any blessing of fortune that may be coveted; with freedom of the pulpit, the press, and the school.” Again, he declares that the “second great object of the Govern-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 170
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
171
ment is to secure protection to the person and property of the citizen of the United States in each and every portion of our common country wherever he may choose to move, without reference to original nationality, religion, color, or politics, demanding of him only obedience to the laws and proper respect for the rights of others.”33 the ratification of the 15th amendment. Though, as he said, it is unusual to notify the two Houses by message, of the promulgation of the ratification of an amendment to the Constitution, yet he sent one in regard to the ratification of the fifteenth amendment, in which he said: “Institutions like ours, in which all power is derived directly from the people, must depend mainly upon their intelligence, patriotism, and industry. I call the attention, therefore, of the newly-enfranchised race to the importance of their striving in every honorable manner to make themselves worthy of their new privilege. To the race more favored heretofore by our laws i would say, withold no legal privilege of advancement to the new citizen. The framers of our Constitution firmly believed that a republican government could not endure without intelligence and education generally diffused among the people.”34 The “Father of his country,” in his farewell address, used this language: “Promote, then, as a matter of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of the Government gives force to public opinion it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.”35 In his first annual message to Congress the same views are forcibly presented, and are again urged in his eighth message. I repeat that the adoption of the fifteenth amendment to the Constitution completes the greatest civil change, and constitutes the most important event that has occurred since the nation came to life. The change will be beneficial in proportion to the heed that is given to the urgent recommendations of Washington. If these recommendations were important then, with a population of but a few millions, how much more important now, with a population of forty millions, and increasing in a rapid ratio. I would, therefore, call upon Congress to take all the means within their constitutional powers to promote and encourage popular education throughout the country; and upon the people everywhere to see to it that all who possess and exercise political rights shall have the opportunity to
Y7870-Douglass.indb 171
9/1/21 4:16 PM
172
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
acquire the knowledge which will make their share in the Government a blessing, and not a danger. colored men appointed to officer. An inquiry into the appointments of colored men to office under General Grant gives results more satisfactory than I anticipated. No records, so far as I learn, appear to be kept of the color of the appointees. I can only ascertain facts by my own personal knowledge and from the personal knowledge of others acquainted with the appointees. It is impossible for me to [illegible] the exact number, but I find them in all departments of the civil service. Two have been appointed foreign Ministers,36 several Collectors of Customs, some Assessors of Internal Revenue,37 and so on down through all the various grades of the service—as route agents, postmasters, clerks, messengers, &c., according to the intelligence and character of the applicants.38 I should have been glad to have obtained the exact number of appointees of our color. In one Department at Washington I found 2[illegible]9, and many more holding important positions in its service in different parts of the country. In other Departments I ascertain corresponding gratifying facts as I pursued the inquiry, meeting some new man at every step, and left it satisfied, as I think any colored man would be, that there has been a hearty disposition to disregard all past prejudices and treat us in the matter of appointments according to our merits. The appointments to West Point, as overcoming the army prejudices, are well known, and too significant to be overlooked.39 protection against the ku-klux. And what shall I say of his enforcement of the law for the preservation of life and property in the South, whereby the savage outrages of organizations, known as Ku-Klux Klans, upon an innocent and suffering people have been so generally suppressed? What a change has come? These outrages, the burning of school-houses and churches, the whipping and shooting of teachers, the midnight murder of men and women without cause by masked villains, were so contrary to the ideas of the country that they hardly seemed possible in a civilized land. But by the quiet yet firm course of General Grant in enforcing the law, thousands have openly acknowledged the crimes charged, the organizations stand confessed to the amazement of all good men North and South, and peace has come to many places as never before. The scourging and slaughter of our people have so far ceased.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 172
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
173
History will not mistake the first and yet humane part General Grant has performed in this work. Have not all violence and injustice to us ceased, it is not because he has failed to do his duty, but because of the prejudices and opposition of those who now claim to be the special friends of the colored man. And should not the good work of peace and good will go on till every American citizen is known in the law and treated the same without regard to his color, it will be by the fatal success of those who assail General Grant, and would defeat his election, and thus prevent the successful accomplishment of his benign purpose of perpetual union for the country and of assured liberty and protection to every person in it. Indeed, I closed the inquiry thoroughly satisfied, and believe that any man of my race would be, with the same facts before him, that with General Grant at the head of the Administration of the country we are assured, in due time, not only of our rights, but of our privileges. Let me now come to my own personal relations with General Grant, as well as my own personal knowledge of him; for I have the honor to know him well. Very much that you have heard concerning him is true, and very much is false. He, like most public men, has been severely criticized, not only as an officer, but as a man. Here, then, is my testimony concerning him. During my varied public career of more than thirty years, I have, perhaps, more than any other colored man of my times, been brought into direct contact with our nation’s great men, and taking my whole experience into account, I affirm that after our martyred President, Abraham Lincoln, and Senator Charles Sumner, no man in high position has manifested in his intercourse with me upon all occasions and in all places a more entire freedom from vulgar prejudice of race and color, than Ulysses S. Grant. I have called upon him often,40 (never, however, to solicit office for myself or for others,) and have always found him to be easily accessible, gentlemanly, and cordial. Like most of you when meeting with distinguished white persons, I was on the lookout when meeting with General Grant for some indication of the presence in his manners and words of the slavery-born aversion to my race. I found nothing of the kind in him. You have heard that General Grant is a man of few words, and the inference has been drawn by his enemies, that he is a man of few ideas.41 Never was an inference more unjust. It often requires more talent to be silent, than to speak. It is the merit of this man that he knows just when to speak, and when to be silent. I have heard him converse, and converse freely, and to those who have seen him only in his silent moods my statement will
Y7870-Douglass.indb 173
9/1/21 4:16 PM
174
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
hardly be credited, that few men in public life, or otherwise, can state facts with greater clearness and fluency, than General Grant. I have often been called upon to reconcile my exalted opinion of President Grant with the fact that I failed to be invited with the Commissioners of Inquiry to Santo Domingo to dine with the President at the White House.42 I have two answers to those who inquire of me on this point. First. The failure of the President to invite me could not have been because my personal presence on account of color would have been disagreeable to him, for he never withheld any social courtesy to General Tate, the Minister of Plenipotentiary from the Republic of Hayti, a man of my own complexion;43 and in this connection I may state that during the war he showed himself as free from Indian prejudice as negro prejudice, by retaining upon his staff General Eli Parker.44 It is, besides, impossible that color is the explanation of the omission to invite me, because the gentlemen whom he did invite had dined with me daily during ten weeks on an American ship, under an American flag, and in presence of representatives of the leading presses of the United States, and this doubtless by the President’s special direction. It is further obvious that color had nothing to do with the omission, because other gentlemen accompanying the expedition to Santo Domingo equally with myself, though white, failed to receive an invitation to dine at the White House. The only Commissioners provided for by the act of Congress, were Messrs, B. F. Wade,45 Andrew D. White,46 and S. G. Howe, with one Secretary, Mr. Allan A. Burton.47 These gentlemen called in a body upon the President and were invited in an informal way to dine with him. I was not in company with the Commissioners when this call was made, and did not see the President until afterward. Had I been in company with the Commissioners at the time of their visit, I have no question but that an invitation would have been extended to me as freely as to any of the gentlemen of the Commission who were invited. My second answer is that my devotion to General Grant rests upon high and broad public grounds, and not upon personal favor. I see in him the vigilant, firm, impartial, and wise protector of my race from all the malign reactionary, social and political elements that would whelm them in destruction. He is the rock-bound coast against the angry and gnawing waves of a storm-tossed ocean saying, thus far only shalt thou come. Wherever else there may be room for doubt and uncertainty, there is nothing of the kind with Ulysses S. Grant as our candidate. In the midst of political changes he is now as ever—unswerving and inflex-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 174
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
175
ible. Nominated regularly by the time-honored Republican party,48 he is clothed with all the sublime triumphs of humanity which make its record. That party stands to-day free from alloy, pure and simple. There is neither ambiguity in its platform nor incongruity in its candidates. U.S. Grant and Henry Wilson,49 the one from the West and the other from the East—the soldier and the Senator—are men in whom we can confide. No two names can better embody the precious and priceless results of the suppression of rebellion and the abolition of slavery. We can no more array ourselves against these candidates and this party than we can resume our chains or insult our mothers. We are allied to the Republican party by every honorable sentiment of the human soul. While affection and gratitude bind us to the party, the well known character of the Democratic party, and the long line of antecedents of that party, repel us and make it impossible for us to cast in our lots with it. To vote for Messrs. Greeley and Brown50 would justly invite to our heads the contempt and scorn of honest men. We should not only brand ourselves as political knaves but as political fools, meanly marching to occupy a position to which we are invited by the Democratic party, which party during the last forty years has existed almost exclusively to make sure our slavery and degradation as a race. The key-note of the whole Greeley movement was sounded by Mr. James E. Doolittle51 upon taking the chair of the convention that nominated Mr. Greeley. He announced as one of the objects of the movement the “overthrow of negro supremacy.” Can any negro be so blind as not to see the meaning of this? Where has the negro been supreme in this country? Is the simple exercise of the elective franchise (for surely this is all we have exercised) to be overthrown? We leave the question with you. In view of the foregoing facts, the following most excellent letter should be added: Executive MANSION, Washington, D.C., May 9, 1872.
GENTLEMEN: I am in receipt of your invitation extended to me to attend a mass meeting, to be held for the purpose of aiding in securing civil rights for the colored citizens of our country. I regret that a previous engagement will detain me at the Executive Mansion, and that I shall not be able to participate with you in person in your efforts to further the cause in which you are laboring. I beg to assure you, however, that I sympathize most cordially in any effort to secure for all our people, of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 175
9/1/21 4:16 PM
176
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
whatever race, nativity, or color, the exercise of those rights to which every citizen should be entitled. I am, very respectfully, U.S. GRANT 52
Such is the record of the great chieftain whose sword cleft the hydrahead of treason, and by whose true heart and good right arm you gained the ballot, that glorious insignia of your citizenship. Such is the record of the wise statesman for whom you trusted your first ballot for President; for no other than him can you trust your second. Rally, then, to his support with that resistless spirit in which you fought for your liberties, with that deep sincerity in which you mourned the foul death of your liberator— Lincoln—and with the same exultant hope in which you made General Grant your first President, with your first votes in 1868. FREDERICK DOUGLASS. Washington, July 17, 1872. 1. Horace Greeley (1811–72), journalist, reformer, and Republican politician, was the founder and lifelong editor of the New York Tribune. Born in Amherst, New Hampshire, Greeley moved to New York City in 1831 and became coeditor of a small literary periodical in 1834. With the sponsorship of William H. Seward and Thurlow Weed, Greeley soon entered the field of political journalism, editing Whig campaign weeklies in 1838 and again in 1840. The next year, he launched the Tribune, which quickly outstripped its local competitors and attained a large circulation throughout the North. Under Greeley, the Tribune became the leading editorial voice of the Republican party during the 1850s. Openly hostile to abolitionism during the early 1840s, Greeley grew steadily more radical on the slavery issue, but his racial attitudes mirrored the ambivalence of many Northern free-labor spokesmen. In his Recollections, Greeley claims to have rejected colonization during the mid-1830s, but he gave periodic support to emigrationist schemes throughout the antebellum era, clashing repeatedly with Frederick Douglass, James McCune Smith, and other black leaders over the issue. In 1872, Greeley secured the presidential nomination from the newly formed Liberal Republican party, pitting himself against Grant and the Republicans he had supported before and after the war. The Democrats, unable to find a suitable candidate and wishing to unite the opposition vote, also nominated Greeley for president, making him the first-ever presidential candidate for two political parties. Ultimately, Grant won reelection, securing every state in the North. Exhausted, disappointed, and grieving the recent death of his wife, Greeley became despondent and died three weeks after the election. Horace Greeley, Recollections of a Busy Life (New York, 1868); Glyndon G. Van Deusen, Horace Greeley: Nineteenth-Century Crusader (Philadelphia, 1953); Ralph Ray Fahrney, Horace Greeley and the “Tribune” in the Civil War (Cedar Rapids, Iowa, 1936); Eric Foner, Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the Republican Party before the Civil War (New York, 1970), 262– 63, 297–300; McFeely, Grant, 383–85; Robert C. Williams, Horace Greeley: Champion of American Freedom (New York, 2006), 293, 295–96, 298–99, 305; DAB, 7:528–34. 2. While not considered an abolitionist or a radical antislavery man, Grant defended black rights, both as a general and as president. From a pragmatic standpoint, Grant realized that emancipation would greatly benefit the Union, and so he embraced blacks as soldiers. He also successfully set up refugee camps to serve as “a prototype for a humane transition from slavery to freedom” while acting as the commander in the Mississippi Valley. After the war, he generally supported civil rights
Y7870-Douglass.indb 176
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
177
legislation, but he did not push for social equality between the races. During his first administration, Grant made efforts, albeit limited, to defend black political rights. For example, he supported the Fifteenth Amendment as well as the series of acts passed between 1870 and 1872 that helped enforce it. He also signed three measures, known as the Force Acts, designed to combat violence against blacks in the South with the power of the federal government. Brooks D. Simpson, Ulysses S. Grant: Triumph over Adversity, 1822–1865 (2000; Minneapolis, Minn., 2014), 162–63, 186–87; Joan Waugh, U. S. Grant: American Hero, American Myth (Chapel Hill, N.C., 2009), 72–73, 115–16, 138, 141; Thomas R. Pegram, “Reconstruction during the Grant Years: The Conundrum of Policy,” in A Companion to the Reconstruction Presidents, 1865–1881, ed. Edward O. Frantz (Chichester, Eng., 2014), 281. 3. The professional relationship between Senator Charles Sumner and President Ulysses Grant began negatively. From the moment Grant took office, Sumner realized that the new president was not going to defer to the seasoned politician, as he had previously assumed. Sumner expected to serve as secretary of state and was displeased when Grant not only passed him over for the position but also failed to ask for his advice on whom to appoint. Tensions between the two men escalated during the dispute over the annexation of Santo Domingo, beginning in 1870. While Grant pushed hard to pass the annexation treaty, he was met with resistance from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, headed by Sumner. The senator opposed annexation on the grounds that it would complicate relations with European powers, involve the United States in the Dominican civil war, and threaten the independence of the neighboring black republic of Haiti. Erroneously believing that Sumner desired annexation, Grant was taken aback when the senator emerged as the opposition’s leader. By the 1872 election, Sumner, having been ousted as the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, openly broke with Grant and threw his support to Horace Greeley. The senator argued that Grant had not worked hard enough to pass the Civil Rights Bill or to combat violence against blacks in the South. Ultimately, Sumner believed that the rights of the freedmen would be more secure under an administration led by Greeley rather than Grant. Moorfield Storey, Charles Sumner (Boston, 1900), 382–99; David Donald, Charles Sumner and the Rights of Man (New York, 1970), 552; McFeely, Grant, 334, 340–41, 351; Foner, Reconstruction, 495–96, 506–07. 4. General Robert E. Lee surrendered his army to Grant at Appomattox Court House on 9 April 1865. In the days leading up to his surrender, Lee requested to meet with Grant on the battlefield to negotiate peace, but the Union general continued to insist that he would accept only the complete surrender of the Army of Northern Virginia. Poorly supplied and surrounded by larger Union forces, Lee finally agreed. Most notable regarding Grant’s role at Appomattox were his generous terms of surrender, which included allowing the paroled Confederate soldiers to return to their homes, therefore implying that those who surrendered would be pardoned. He even offered 25,000 rations to the Rebels after Lee explained that his men were destitute. Saluting Lee as he rode away from Appomattox, Grant halted the firing of victory cannons out of respect for his fellow Americans. McFeely, Grant, 217, 219, 220; Jean Edward Smith, Grant (New York, 2001), 402–04, 406. 5. From 1869 to 1872, the depredations of the Ku Klux Klan spread throughout the South, particularly in Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Since the Klan’s strength exceeded the power of any one state to control it, President Grant and Congress took measures to curb the terror. In his first few years in office, Grant cautiously helped reinforce state militias so that they could combat the Klan. On 31 May 1870, Congress passed the Enforcement Act. Intended primarily to protect the guarantees of the Fifteenth Amendment, the act made it a federal felony for anyone in disguise to deprive someone of his or her rights or to retaliate against someone for exercising them. This bill received President Grant’s support and laid the basis for further federal indictments against the Klan. Under growing public pressure, especially from Republicans in the South, President Grant and Congress created a committee in January 1871 to investigate the Klan further. From this inquest issued the Ku Klux Klan Act of 20 April 1871, which made any conspiracy to travel on public highways in disguise with the purpose of depriving anyone of his or her rights a federal offense. The
Y7870-Douglass.indb 177
9/1/21 4:16 PM
178
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
act empowered the president to use U.S. troops against the Klan and to suspend habeas corpus if necessary. President Grant speedily issued a proclamation in support of the act and gave warning to conspirators in the South. When Klan terror became extremely alarming in North and South Carolina during the summer of 1871, Grant sent Attorney General Amos T. Akerman there to investigate; by mid-October, Grant had suspended habeas corpus in nine South Carolina counties, and Akerman began making mass arrests. Although Grant’s actions had inhibited some of the Klan’s expansiveness by 1872, he had by no means thwarted the silent society. Klan activities continued unabated in many districts of the South, while political considerations and constraints upon the exercise of federal power within the states often checked the hand of President Grant. James E. Sefton, The United States Army and Reconstruction, 1865–1877 (Baton Rouge, 1967), 220–29; Allen W. Trelease, White Terror: The Ku Klux Klan Conspiracy and Southern Reconstruction (1971; Baton Rouge, La., 1995), 383–418; Hesseltine, Ulysses S. Grant, 238–51; McFeely, Grant, 367–73. 6. The U.S. census of 1860 enumerated 4,441,830 slaves and free blacks. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Population of the United States in 1860, 594–95. 7. This Lincoln quotation, cited by Douglass, comes from his 22 August 1862 letter to Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune. A few days before, Greeley had penned a letter to Lincoln, immediately printed in the Tribune, in which he reprimanded the president for being too conservative on the issue of emancipation. In his reply, Lincoln reiterated his main objective in the war: “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery.” In his citation of this Lincoln quotation, Douglass omits the words “in this struggle.” New York Tribune, 20 August 1862; Abraham Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 1859–1865: Speeches, Letters, and Miscellaneous Writings, Presidential Messages and Proclamations, ed. Don E. Fehrenbacher (New York, 1989), 357–58. 8. On 1 January 1863, the Emancipation Proclamation went into effect, which by executive order freed most black slaves in the states in secession. The proclamation was the political and social outgrowth of the reality of the Civil War. Initially, President Lincoln could not emancipate slaves without losing conservative Democratic support in the North and in Border States; later he was unable to emancipate them, because an act of emancipation set against the Union’s lack of military success would make the Union look weak. The platform for emancipation began when General Benjamin Butler defined captured slaves as contraband, which prompted congressional Republicans to pass the First and Second Confiscation Acts. Using his war powers as president and following a military victory at Antietam on 17 September 1862, Lincoln announced the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, declaring that all slaves held in rebel states on 1 January 1863 would be free. On that date, he signed the permanent Emancipation Proclamation. Lincoln did not believe that his war powers extended to Border States not in open rebellion or to portions of rebel states then under Union control. Therefore, slaves in many counties in Tennessee, Virginia, and Louisiana, as well as in the Border States, were unaffected by the proclamation, which made vital the crafting of a constitutional amendment outlawing slavery. Despite the proclamation’s somewhat limited application to states in open rebellion, historians note that the conservative use of Lincoln’s war powers in this matter successfully avoided the legal problems of emancipation created by the Confiscation Acts; began to shift the Union’s focus of the war from a legal battle against rebellion to a moral battle against slavery; and started a gradual change within the country regarding race relations. John Hope Franklin, The Emancipation Proclamation (Garden City, N.Y., 1963), 50–56, 61; Abraham Lincoln, The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln, ed. Roy P. Basler, 9 vols. (New Brunswick, N.J., 1953–55), 5:433–36; David S. Heidler and Jeanne T. Heidler, eds., Encyclopedia of the American Civil War: A Political, Social, and Military History, 5 vols. (Santa Barbara, Calif., 2000), 2:650–52. 9. Cairo is the southernmost city in Illinois—stretching farther south than Richmond, Virginia—and is located in Alexander County. The Mississippi and Ohio rivers converge at Cairo, and the city borders Missouri and Kentucky. Cairo represented one of the most strategic points in the Union at the beginning of the Civil War because of its southern location and position on the two riv-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 178
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
179
ers. In September 1861, Grant established his headquarters at Cairo and received orders to hold back any Confederate moves northward along the Mississippi and Ohio rivers into the Midwest. Grant remained in command of troops at Cairo until February 1862, when the northern line of Confederate forces was pushed southward. John McMurray Lansden, A History of the City of Cairo, Illinois (Chicago, 1910), 32, 136; McFeely, Grant, 89–91; Edward G. Longacre, General Ulysses S. Grant: The Soldier and the Man (Cambridge, Mass., 2006), 98; T. K. Kionka, Key Command: Ulysses S. Grant’s District of Cairo (Columbia, Mo., 2006), 1, 6. 10. In 1862, Grant was confronted with the issue of how to care for the slaves entering Union lines. Although at first hesitant to accept blacks into his camp, Grant changed course following the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, issued in September 1862. In November, following Grant’s occupation of Grand Junction, Tennessee, thousands of blacks flocked to his ranks. He ordered his assistant adjunct general, John A. Rawlins, to issue Special Orders No. 17 in an effort to organize the “contrabands” into working groups, as well as to supply them with clothing and food. Soldiers were assigned to guard the workers, and others provided medical attention and distributed rations. Grant appointed Chaplain John Eaton of the Twenty-seventh Ohio Volunteer Infantry Regiment as general superintendent of contrabands, and together the two men “began one of the largest-scale military establishments for helping the freedmen.” Douglass cites this particular order as Special Orders No. 15, issued on 11 November 1862, as does Eaton in his memoirs. According to The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, another version of Special Orders No. 17 lacks the section regarding Eaton, suggesting that perhaps the orders may have been entered in Grant’s records incorrectly. John Eaton and Ethel Osgood Mason, Grant, Lincoln, and the Freedmen: Reminiscences of the Civil War with Special Reference to the Work for the Contrabands and Freedmen of the Mississippi Valley (New York, 1907), 5; George R. Bentley, A History of the Freedmen’s Bureau (Philadelphia, 1955), 21–22; Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 6:315–16n; McFeely, Grant, 126–27. 11. Benjamin Franklin Butler (1818–93) was one of the most famous “political generals” of the Civil War. A native of New Hampshire and a graduate of Colby College, Butler established prosperous law practices in both Boston and Lowell, Massachusetts. An active Democratic politician, Butler attended his party’s 1860 national convention, where he supported Jefferson Davis for the presidential nomination. Later that year, he unsuccessfully ran for governor of Massachusetts on a Democratic ticket pledged to John Breckinridge for president. As a brigadier general of the Massachusetts militia, Butler won national prominence for leading the troops that pacified pro-Confederate Baltimore, thereby reopening Washington’s communications with the North. While commander of Union forces at Fortress Monroe in Virginia in the summer of 1861, he began the policy of sheltering runaway slaves within his lines as “contrabands of war.” In October 1861, Lincoln removed Butler from command of Fortress Monroe and sent him to recruit soldiers in New England. While military governor of New Orleans in 1862, Butler alienated the conquered population and embarrassed Washington with his General Order No. 28, which threatened that Southern women demonstrating contempt for Union troops would be treated as prostitutes. An incompetent field commander, Butler was finally relieved after Lincoln’s reelection made his political support for the administration no longer crucial. Following the war, he served six terms as a Republican congressman and was a leader in the impeachment effort against Andrew Johnson. Returning to the Democratic party, Butler was elected governor of Massachusetts in 1882, and two years later he ran as the presidential candidate of the Greenback-Peoples’ party. Richard S. West, Jr., Lincoln’s Scapegoat General: A Life of Benjamin F. Butler, 1818–1893 (Boston, 1965); Robert Werlich, “Beast Butler”: Biography of Union Major General Benjamin Franklin Butler (Washington, D.C., 1962); ACAB, 1:477–78; NCAB, 1:121–24. 12. Douglass is actually referring to Grant’s Special Orders No. 17, issued on 13 November 1862. Eaton and Mason, Grant, Lincoln, and the Freedmen, 5; Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 6:315–16n. 13. By order of Grant, Assistant Adjutant General John A. Rawlins issued General Orders No. 13 on 17 December 1862. The order appointed Chaplain John Eaton of the Twenty-seventh Ohio
Y7870-Douglass.indb 179
9/1/21 4:16 PM
180
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
Volunteer Infantry Regiment as general superintendent of contrabands for the department. It also gave Eaton the power to select assistant superintendents to aid him in organizing the freedmen into “working parties.” These working groups would perform jobs such as harvesting cotton and working on railroads and steamboats. The freedmen were to be clothed “and in every way provided for, out of their earnings so far as practicable,” with an account being kept of all earnings and expenditures, subject to inspection. Eaton was also ordered to collect, inventory, and distribute all contributions, including clothing, made to the freedmen. Lastly, the order mandated that “in no case will negroes be forced into the service of the Government, or be enticed away from their homes except when it becomes a military necessity.” Eaton and Mason, Grant, Lincoln, and the Freedmen, 26–27; Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 6:316–17n. 14. The report that Douglass refers to is John Eaton’s Report of the General Superintendent of Freedmen, Department of the Tennessee and State of Arkansas, for 1864, printed in 1865. Eaton’s account, along with several reports from other freedmen’s departments, was reviewed in the October 1865 edition of the North American Review. As Douglass suggests, the review of the report was favorable, stating that “of all the government reports named at the head of this article, that of Colonel Eaton, of the Department of the Tennessee and State of Arkansas, for the last year, is the most full, and treats of the most extensive system of superintendence.” In the detailed report, Eaton adds that on behalf of the freedmen, “all the wise and humane” plans of Grant “antedate the past year,” alluding to the fact that Grant had long since been making efforts to provide and care for former slaves entering his lines. John Eaton, Report of the General Superintendent of Freedmen, Department of the Tennessee and State of Arkansas, for 1864 (Memphis, Tenn., 1865), 5; “General Orders of the Freedmen’s Bureau; First, Second, and Third Annual Reports of the New England Freedmen’s Aid Society (Educational Commission); Freedmen’s Record; First, Second, and Third Annual Reports of the National Freedmen’s Relief Association; The National Freedman; Annual Report of the Western Freedmen’s Association; Pennsylvania Freedmen’s Bulletin; Chicago Freedmen’s Bulletin; Reports of the Superintendents of Freedmen for Eastern Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas, and of the Board of Education for Freedmen, Department of the Gulf. 1864, 1865,” NAR, 101:538–49 (October 1865). 15. Legislation suggested by President Lincoln to create the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, popularly known as the Freedmen’s Bureau, passed Congress in March 1865. Although originally authorized for only a single year after the conclusion of the Civil War’s military hostilities, the bureau remained in operation until 1872. The bureau originally supplied displaced Southerners, whites as well as blacks, with temporary rations, shelter, health care, and other essential services. Most whites soon ceased taking assistance from the Freedmen’s Bureau, and Andrew Johnson unsuccessfully attempted to block legislation to extend its mandate. Under the leadership of General O. O. Howard, the bureau expanded its mission into establishing schools and arbitrating labor disputes concerning freedmen. The bureau engendered vociferous opposition in the South, and Grant allowed financial appropriations for the bureau’s operations to dwindle. He terminated the agency in 1872 after reassigning Howard to deal with western Indian problems. Foner, Reconstruction, 68–70, 82–88, 144–51. 16. Born in New Castle, Delaware, Lorenzo Thomas (1804–75) graduated from the U.S. Military Academy in 1823. He went on to serve in the Seminole War and the Mexican War and served as General Winfield Scott’s chief of staff until promoted to the position of adjutant general of the army in 1861, with the rank of brigadier general. In March 1863, Thomas was ordered to the Mississippi Valley to organize black regiments, where he was supposed to meet with Douglass. But the latter declined the appointment to become a recruiter. In February 1868, Thomas permitted President Andrew Johnson to appoint him secretary of war ad interim in the place of Edwin Stanton, precipitating the impeachment crisis. As for the black regiment organized before Stanton’s 25 March 1863 orders to Thomas, Douglass is most likely referring to the First South Carolina Colored Volunteers. While other black regiments were formed in Kansas and Louisiana, the soldiers in South Carolina
Y7870-Douglass.indb 180
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
181
represented the Union’s “first large-scale organized effort” to arm blacks. According to the historian Dudley Cornish, the regiment was also the only one to have the full authorization of the War Department. Under the leadership of General David Hunter, the First South Carolina Colored Volunteers was mustered into the army on 31 January 1863. Dudley Cornish, The Sable Arm: Negro Troops in the Union Army, 1861–1865 (New York, 1966), 67, 78, 92, 95, 113, 216; Benedict, Compromise of Principle, 297; Foner, Reconstruction, 8, 335; ACAB, 6:84; DAB, 18:441–42. 17. In January 1863, Grant ordered two of his generals—John McClernand and William T. Sherman—to move troops to Young’s Point and Milliken’s Bend. Situated on the Louisiana side of the Mississippi, this location served as the winter quarters of Grant’s army. Having failed to capture Vicksburg, Mississippi, the previous autumn, Grant continued his pursuit of the city while headquartered at Milliken’s Bend. McFeely, Grant, 126, 128; Smith, Grant, 228; Longacre, General Ulysses S. Grant, 168. 18. By order of Grant, Assistant Adjutant General John A. Rawlins issued General Orders No. 25 on 22 April 1863. The only correction to Douglass’s citation of the order is that it reads “from other troops” instead of “from the troops.” OR, ser. 3, 3:147 (1899). 19. Douglass correctly quotes Grant’s letter to Confederate general Robert E. Lee. Modern scholars, however, have concluded that Grant’s letter was originally dated 10 October instead of 19 October 1864. Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 12:323–24. 20. General Ulysses S. Grant, in concert with the Union Navy, oversaw a six-week siege of the key Confederate Mississippi River city of Vicksburg from 22 May to 4 July 1863. Defended by Confederate general John C. Pemberton, the city and over 30,000 troops surrendered only when food and supplies were exhausted, with no prospects of relief. The victory successfully split off the states of Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas from the rest of the Confederacy and ensured Union control of the Mississippi. On 29 June 1863, three black regiments, the Forty-sixth, Forty-ninth, and Fifty-first U.S. Colored Troops, participated in an indecisive skirmish at Mound Plantation in Louisiana. John David Smith, “Let Us All Be Grateful That We Have Colored Troops that Will Fight,” in Black Soldiers in Blue: African American Troops in the Civil War Era, ed. Smith (Chapel Hill, N.C., 2002), 46; Long and Long, Civil War Day by Day, 373–79. 21. Douglass correctly quotes Grant’s report to Lincoln, dated 11 June 1863, regarding the Union Army’s treatment of Mississippi blacks. Douglass omits one section of the letter, which follows Grant’s statement that he was determined to appoint a superintendent and give him assistants as the duties assigned him might require. Grant goes on to say that he chose Mr. Eaton for the superintendent position and that “his labors in his undertaking have been unremitting and skillful.” Douglass then correctly summarizes the closing of Grant’s report, in which he notes that Eaton successfully provided for the blacks under his care and helped them find employment when they would have otherwise been neglected. Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 8:342. 22. In June 1863, John Eaton traveled to Vicksburg, Mississippi, to meet with Grant regarding his 29 April 1863 report on the recent work he and his assistant superintendents had accomplished regarding the freedmen. Although he expected to simply submit his report to Assistant Adjutant General John A. Rawlins, Grant requested that Eaton read the report to him instead. Upon hearing the report, Grant instructed Eaton to travel to Washington to share it with Lincoln. He also included a personal letter to the president describing Eaton’s appointment and his evaluation of the superintendent’s work. Eaton left Vicksburg on 2 July, bound for Washington, D.C. He gave the president Grant’s personal letter, dated 11 June 1863, along with a copy of his own report. According to Eaton, Lincoln’s “cordial manner” put him at ease, and the president immediately began to discuss his “fighting General.” Lincoln asked questions regarding the freedmen and told Eaton he would take his report to the Soldiers’ Home that night to review it and meet with him again at the White House in the morning. After meeting with Lincoln the next day, Eaton recalled that the president “left me in no doubt as to the satisfaction with which he had read the information therein.” Before Eaton left Washington, Lincoln requested that he report to the American Freedmen Inquiry Commission in New
Y7870-Douglass.indb 181
9/1/21 4:16 PM
182
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
York. The members of this commission had been appointed to consider the subject of the Department of Tennessee’s policy toward the freedmen “in the present emergency,” and Eaton agreed to meet with them. Eaton and Mason, Grant, Lincoln, and the Freedmen, 63–64, 86–93; Kenneth P. Williams, Lincoln Finds a General: A Military Study of the Civil War, 5 vols. (New York, 1956), 4:406–07. 23. Levi Coffin (1798–1877), raised in North Carolina, was a Quaker antislavery advocate. His devout religious beliefs led him to defy Southern principles and become a supporter of the antislavery cause. In 1821, Coffin, along with his cousin Vestal Coffin, organized a Sunday school for African Americans and taught some slaves how to read the Bible. Pressured by local slaveholders, Coffin closed his school, and in 1826 he and his wife, Catherine, moved to Indiana. Coffin established a store in Wayne County and began to aid slaves escaping to freedom. For his efforts, Coffin earned the title “President of the Underground Railroad,” and his home became known as “Grand Central Station.” During his time in Indiana, Coffin also was a founding member of the Indiana State Anti-Slavery Society. In 1847, Coffin moved to Cincinnati and started a business that sold products produced only by free labor. During the Civil War, Coffin served as a member of the Western Freedmen’s Aid Society, helping educate former slaves. In 1867, Coffin continued his antislavery work and traveled to Paris as a delegate to the International Anti-Slavery Society. A year before his death, Coffin completed an autobiography detailing his abolitionist labors. Coffin, Reminiscences of Levi Coffi n; Ripley, Black Abolitionist Papers, 3:39, ANB (online); DAB, 4:268–69. 24. John Eaton (1829–1906) was born in Sutton, New Hampshire, graduated from Dartmouth College, and taught in schools in Ohio. He then attended Andover Theological Seminary. Ordained in 1861, Eaton joined the army as chaplain of the Twenty-seventh Ohio Infantry Regiment. In November 1862, Grant appointed Eaton to oversee the numerous Southern blacks who had flocked to the Union lines. Following orders from Grant, Eaton organized the freedmen into camps and provided them with supplies to meet their physical and educational needs. They were also directed to work picking cotton, cutting wood, and building railroads. As general superintendent of freedmen in the Department of the Tennessee, Eaton’s jurisdiction included Tennessee as well as Arkansas. Over the course of the war, he was given the rank of colonel of a regiment of blacks and later promoted to brigadier general. Eaton’s efforts to safeguard and provide for the freedmen within the Union lines set a precedent for the Freedmen’s Bureau, which was established in March 1865. Eaton was appointed an assistant commissioner of the bureau, given supervision of the District of Columbia, Maryland, and sections of Virginia. Following his resignation from the army in December 1865, he edited a Unionist newspaper, the Memphis Post, in Memphis, Tennessee, in 1866–67. President Grant appointed Eaton to the board of visitors at West Point in 1869, and the following year he selected Eaton as U.S. commissioner of education. Eaton thereafter became president of Marietta College (1886–91) and later of Sheldon Jackson College (1895–99). Bentley, History of the Freedmen’s Bureau, 21–23, 59–60; Louis S. Gerteis, From Contraband to Freedman: Federal Policy toward Southern Blacks, 1861– 1865 (Westport, Conn., 1973), 120, 188–89; McFeely, Grant, 126–27; Longacre, General Ulysses S. Grant, 162; DAB, 5:608–09. 25. John Eaton, general superintendent of freedmen, wrote a letter to Levi Coffin on 5 July 1864. Douglass quotes a portion of this letter to emphasize how freedmen benefited from Grant’s policy. There are some slight differences between Douglass’s citation and the printed letter. Instead of “thirty thousand of them are members of families whose heads are carrying plantations,” Eaton wrote “three thousand.” In another instance, Douglass writes that it is “1,500 acres of cotton,” while the letter reads “1,600 acres.” Douglass also writes that “13,130 have been under instruction in letters,” while Eaton cites the number as “13,320.” Two other insignificant differences: Douglass writes “cut within the lines” and it “would be only a guess,” while the Eaton letter reads “out within the lines” and it “would only be a guess.” Joseph Warren, comp., Extracts from the Reports of Superintendents of Freedmen, From Records in the Office of Col. John Eaton, Jr., General Superintendent of Freedmen, Department of the Tennessee and State of Arkansas, series 2: June 1864 (Vicksburg, Miss., 1864), 50–51.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 182
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
183
26. One of the four sons in a farm family from Livermore, Maine, to serve as a Republican congressman, Elihu Benjamin Washburne (1816–87) studied law after working as a farmer and a journalist. He moved to Galena, Illinois, to establish a law practice and soon became a respected Whig party leader, attending the 1844 and 1852 national conventions. After losing an election for the U.S. House of Representatives in 1848, he won the seat in 1852 and served eight consecutive terms. Highlights of Washburne’s congressional career were his opposition to all forms of subsidies to railroad companies and his sponsorship of military promotions for his close friend Ulysses S. Grant. As a reward, Grant appointed Washburne to be his secretary of state, but he switched him after only a few days in office to the post of U.S. minister to France, where he served until 1877. At the 1876 and 1880 Republican National Conventions, Washburne received a small number of votes for the presidential nomination and finished second in the balloting for the vice presidential spot in the latter campaign. Gallard Hunt, comp., Israel, Elihu, and Cadwallader Washburne: A Chapter in American Biography (New York, 1925), 155–289; McFeely, Grant, 75–76, 83–84, 154, 294–95; ACAB, 6:370–71; NCAB, 4:14–15; DAB, 19:504–06. 27. On 16 August 1864, Grant wrote a letter to Elihu B. Washburne, discussing the frail state of the Confederate forces he had encountered. Taking into account the Rebels’ high desertion rate and scarce resources, Grant argued that their only hope at that point was a divided North. Douglass correctly summarizes Grant’s claims that to have peace “on any terms,” the South would demand the restoration of their slaves, compensation for any losses, and assistance from the North in hunting slaves. Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 12:16–17. 28. Douglass correctly cites a portion of Grant’s 2 June 1865 letter. The rest of the sentence from which Douglass cites is as follows: “and opened the way to the Rightful Authorities to restore Order and inaugerate [sic] Peace on a permanent and enduring basis on every foot of American soil.” Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 15:120–21. 29. Douglass’s quotation of Grant’s 30 August 1863 letter to Elihu B. Washburne differs slightly from the one reproduced in John Y. Simon’s The Papers of Ulysses S. Grant. For example, Douglass spelled the Confederate vice president’s name “Stephens,” while Grant misspelled it as “Stevens.” Other differences include spelling discrepancies and Douglass’s addition of italics at the end of the quotation. Massachusetts senator Henry Wilson first made the contents of this letter public during the Republican State Convention held in Boston in September 1863. During a speech, Wilson claimed to have seen a letter written by Grant in which the general expressed that while he was not an abolitionist or an antislavery man, he believed that the North and the South could unite only as a free nation. Months after the convention, some newspapers printed portions of this letter from Grant to Washburne to support Wilson’s statements regarding Grant’s views on slavery. Boston Daily Advertiser, 25 September 1863; Lowell (Mass.) Daily Citizen and News, 14 December 1863; Bangor (Me.) Daily Whig and Courier, 15 December 1863; Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 9:217–18. 30. Douglass correctly quotes Lincoln in the president’s letter to Grant dated 30 April 1864. The full quotation reads: “Not expecting to see you again before the Spring campaign opens, I wish to express, in this way, my entire satisfaction with what you have done up to this time, so far as I understand it.” Lincoln, Speeches and Writings, 591–92. 31. Douglass correctly cites this particular quotation from Grant’s inaugural address. But Grant delivered it on 4 March 1869, not in 1867, as Douglass suggests. Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 19:142. 32. On 7 April 1869, Grant addressed Congress on the issue of restoring former Confederate states to the Union. He argued that any state must “be willing to become peaceful and orderly communities, and to adopt and maintain such constitutions and laws as will effectually secure the civil and political rights of all persons within their borders” before rejoining the Union. Grant then mentioned the state conventions of Virginia and Mississippi, which had met recently to adopt constitutions in preparation for state elections and eventual restoration to the United States. Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 19:163–64.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 183
9/1/21 4:16 PM
184
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
33. Grant delivered his annual message to Congress on 6 December 1869. Douglass uses three excerpts from this address. He correctly cites the first two quotations, and the third is only slightly different, according to the speech published in Grant’s scholarly papers edited by John Y. Simon. The beginning of the original quotation reads, “First among these is strict integrity in fulfilling all our obligations. Second; is to secure protection to the person and property of the citizen of the United States.” The remainder of the passage, which Douglass cites, is correct. Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 20:18, 20, 37. 34. On 30 March 1870, President Grant delivered a speech to Congress in support of the Fifteenth Amendment. Overall, Douglass correctly cites portions of Grant’s address, with only some minor differences. Douglass begins to quote Grant with the sentence that starts “Institutions like ours” and continues for two paragraphs, ending with Grant’s call to the people to ensure that political rights are exercised properly, making everyone’s “share in the Government a blessing, and not a danger.” Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 20:130–32. 35. In his 30 March 1870 speech to Congress, Grant referred to and quoted George Washington. Douglass includes Grant’s quotation of Washington in his own citation of Grant’s address. The sentence “In his first annual message to Congress the same views are forcibly presented, and are again urged in his eighth message” is part of Grant’s speech as he refers to Washington’s two annual messages, and is not Douglass referring to any annual speeches given by Grant. Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 20:130–32. 36. Douglass is referring to Ebenezer Don Carlos Bassett, ambassador to Haiti and the Dominican Republic, and James Milton Turner, ambassador to Liberia. James Milton Turner (1840–1915) was born a slave in St. Louis County, Missouri, to John Turner, a free farrier, and Hannah Turner, a slave of Aaron and Theodosia Young. In 1844, Turner and his mother were freed. In the mid-1850s, his parents sent him to preparatory school at Oberlin College. He left after two years, returning to Missouri and working as a porter until the outbreak of the Civil War. During the war, he served as a body servant to a Union officer, Colonel Madison Miller. In 1865, he became a member of the Missouri Equal Rights League and served as the organization’s secretary. Turner taught at a black school from 1868 to 1869 and then worked for the Freedmen’s Bureau as an agent of the state department of education for seven months. In March 1871, President Grant appointed Turner U.S. minister resident and consul general in Liberia. He served as minister until 1878. Upon returning to America, he established the Colored Emigration Aid Association in an effort to help establish homes for blacks who had fled the South during Reconstruction. He also represented the black former slaves of the Cherokee Indians and succeeded in getting Congress to pass the Cherokee Freedmen’s Act in 1888, which allotted money to the freedmen. Following many years as a public servant, Turner became disillusioned with the Republican party and politics in general, and his work as a black leader diminished. Jack Salzman, David Lionel Smith, Cornel West, eds., Encyclopedia of African-American Culture and History, 5 vols. (New York, 1996), 1:289; DAB, 19:66–67; ANB (online). 37. Grant did appoint some blacks as customs collectors and revenue assessors during his administration. In 1869, Edwin Belcher, representing the third district of Georgia, served as the first black assessor of internal revenue appointed by Grant. That same year, Grant also appointed Charles Edmund Nash as inspector of customs in New Orleans. James Thomas Rapier was then appointed assessor of internal revenue for the Second District in Alabama in 1871. These men represent a few of the better-known blacks who occupied these lucrative patronage positions. J. Clay Smith, Jr., Emancipation: The Making of the Black Lawyer, 1844–1944 (Philadelphia, 1993), 195; Stephen Middleton, ed., Black Congressmen during Reconstruction (Westport, Conn., 2002), 267, 310; Richard Bailey, Neither Carpetbaggers Nor Scalawags: Black Officeholders During the Reconstruction of Alabama, 1867–1878 (1991; Montgomery, Ala., 2010), 213. 38. During Grant’s administration, African Americans held all levels of federal positions, as Douglass suggests. In Washington, D.C., blacks occupied offices such as clerks, postmasters, justices of the peace, and census marshals. For example, Grant appointed John A. Gray, who was a
Y7870-Douglass.indb 184
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
185
caterer and restaurant owner, to the District’s governor council in 1871. Pliny Locke served as the first black appointee to a civil service job, holding clerkships at the Freedmen’s Bureau (1871–72) and the Treasury Department (1872–76). Also serving in the Treasury Department, John H. Smythe was appointed as a revenue agent in 1872. John M. Langston, one of the most prominent spokesmen for the Republican party after the Civil War, worked for the Freedmen’s Bureau as the general inspector. Grant also appointed him to the Board of Health of the District of Columbia in 1871, and he served until 1877. Eric Foner, Freedom’s Lawmakers: A Directory of Black Officeholders During Reconstruction (New York, 1993), 90, 93, 127–28, 135, 201; Middleton, Black Congressmen during Reconstruction, 126. 39. In 1870, James Webster Smith became the first black cadet appointed to the U.S. Military Academy. That same year, three other young black men were appointed but denied admittance: two based on medical reasons and a third, Michael Howard, for failing his entrance examination. While Douglass seems to imply that Grant directly appointed blacks to West Point, it is more likely that he simply approved the nominations made by congressmen. In fact, Grant appeared somewhat indifferent toward the issue of blacks attending the academy. For example, when white cadets harassed Smith, the Northern philanthropist David Clark urged the president to support Smith and promote him as an example of racial equality in society. According to the historians William S. McFeely and Eric Foner, Grant ignored Clark’s advice and did not offer Smith protection from his tormentors. Although Smith was the first black admitted to West Point, the first black to graduate was Henry O. Flipper in 1877. Between 1870 and 1889, only twenty-three blacks were nominated to attend the U.S. Military Academy. Out of the twelve that were admitted, only three graduated: Henry O. Flipper in 1877, John H. Alexander in 1887, and Charles Young in 1889. George L. Andrews, “West Point and the Colored Cadets,” International Review, 9:477–98 (November 1880); Stephen E. Ambrose, Duty, Honor, Country: A History of West Point (Baltimore, 1966), 232–33; Theodore J. Crackel, West Point: A Bicentennial History (Lawrence, Kans., 2002), 115, 145; McFeely, Grant, 356, 375–79; Foner, Reconstruction, 531. 40. During Grant’s two administrations, Douglass frequented Washington, D.C., eventually moving there in 1870. He served as editor of the New National Era, a newspaper based in the nation’s capital, from 1870 to 1874. During his first term, Grant created a commission to inquire for the annexation of Santo Domingo to the United States, and in 1871 he appointed Douglass to serve as its assistant secretary. Douglass returned from the Caribbean in late March 1871, and Grant appointed him to a two-year term on the Territorial Government’s legislative council the following month. This governmental body acted as the legislature for Washington, D.C. Although he resigned less than two months later, Douglass characterized his appointment as an example of Grant’s “high sense of justice, fairness, and impartiality.” During this time, the lives of Grant and Douglass intersected frequently, and there were several other occasions when the two men might have met. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:486, 496, 500, 502–03, 505; John Muller, Frederick Douglass in Washington, D.C.: The Lion of Anacostia (Charleston, S.C., 2012), 37–38, 42–45; Pitre, “Frederick Douglass and Santo Domingo,” 390–94, 397. 41. During his childhood, many who knew Grant characterized him as reserved and “reluctant to draw attention to himself.” This restrained manner continued into adulthood, and as he gained popularity, his reputation as a man of few words became well known. Although some mistook his reservation for coldness, others admired his brevity. President Lincoln dealt with enough outspoken, immodest Union generals to appreciate Grant’s direct and simple nature. Grant disliked public speaking, yet everywhere he went after the war, people gathered around him, often clamoring for him to make a few remarks. Many citizens could relate to his ordinary demeanor and his straightforwardness, which contributed to his popularity as president. As the historian Jean Edward Smith concluded, the “answer to the riddle of Grant’s success, it was decided, lay in his unpretentious but resolute demeanor, his shy but manly bearing.” McFeely, Grant, 154–55, 234; Smith, Grant, 288–91, 295, 300; Longacre, General Ulysses S. Grant, 11–12.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 185
9/1/21 4:16 PM
186
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
42. President Grant invited members of the Santo Domingo Commission to dine with him at the White House upon their return to Washington, D.C., in March 1871. But Douglass was not extended an invitation, much to the chagrin of black leaders, equal rights advocates, and anti-Grant forces. Neither the president nor Douglass immediately addressed the matter publicly. During the presidential election the following year, Horace Greeley and his supporters used this incident to prove Grant’s hypocrisy on the issue of equal rights. This letter, written by Douglass over a year after the dinner, was his first public response to the incident. He not only attempted to satisfy those who criticized him for remaining silent on the issue, but also used this platform to reiterate his support for Grant’s reelection, despite any injury he might have felt for being excluded from the commissioners’ dinner. Concord (N.H.) Independent Statesman, 6 June 1872; Walter Gaston Shotwell, Life of Charles Sumner (New York, 1910), 675; McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 277; Pitre, “Frederick Douglass and Santo Domingo,” 62:394. 43. General Alexander Tate was the Haitian minister to the United States during Grant’s administration. Tate arrived in Washington, D.C., in November 1869. He attended the New Year’s Day reception on 1 January 1870 at the White House and was cordially welcomed by Grant, who displayed no racial animosity toward the black diplomat. According to the New York Tribune, this was not Tate’s first trip to the United States. He had lived in the country for several months during the start of the Civil War, residing for a time in Washington, D.C. Under the Haitian president Sylvain Salnave, he served as secretary of foreign affairs and finances before being appointed minister to the United States. Following both the overthrow of the Haitian government and Salnave’s execution on 15 January 1870, Tate resigned and remained in the United States. New York Tribune, 22 November 1869; Washington Evening Star, 22 November 1869; Rayford W. Logan, The Diplomatic Relations of the United States with Haiti, 1776–1891 (1941; Chapel Hill, N.C., 1969), 335–37; McFeely, Grant, 337. 44. Ely Samuel Parker (1828–95) was born on the Tonawanda Reservation in New York State to the Seneca chief William Parker and Elizabeth (Johnson) Parker. Parker was educated at a Baptist mission school during his early childhood years, Yates Academy in Orleans County, and, eventually, Cayuga Academy in Aurora, New York. Prevented from practicing law because he was an Indian, Parker studied civil engineering, and in 1857 he was appointed by the Treasury Department as superintendent in Galena, Illinois, to supervise the construction of two buildings. It was in Galena in 1860 that Parker met Ulysses S. Grant and formed a long-lasting friendship. In 1861, Parker was replaced as superintendent, and he spent the next two years on the Tonawanda Reservation, despite his unceasing efforts to join the Union Army. Finally, in 1863, Parker was commissioned an assistant adjutant general and joined General Grant’s staff in Vicksburg, Mississippi, becoming Grant’s personal secretary within a year. Present during Lee’s surrender to Grant, Parker wrote the official copy of the terms of surrender. Following the war, Parker served on a commission between the U.S. government and southwestern Indian tribes that had supported the Confederate Army. In 1869, when Grant became president, Parker was appointed U.S. Commissioner of Indian Affairs, the first Native American to hold that office. William H. Armstrong, Warrior in Two Camps: Ely S. Parker, Union General and Seneca Chief (Syracuse, N.Y., 1978); ANB (online). 45. Benjamin Franklin Wade. 46. Andrew Dickson White (1832–1918) was born in Homer, New York, to Horace White, a wealthy businessman and banker, and Clara Dickson White. By the age of twenty-five, White had earned a bachelor’s and master’s degree from Yale College, studied in France and Germany, and served as a translator for Thomas Seymour, the U.S. minister to Russia. From 1857 to 1863, White held a position as professor of history and rhetoric at the University of Michigan, where he was well known for his exuberance, unconventional teaching methods, and abolitionist views. Although he did not serve in the Civil War, White drilled students who were preparing to enlist and traveled to England to dissuade the British from supporting the South. Upon his return to the United States, White was elected to the New York state senate, where he served from 1864 to 1867. In 1865, along with fellow senator Ezra Cornell, White founded Cornell University and became its first president, serving
Y7870-Douglass.indb 186
9/1/21 4:16 PM
U.S. GRANT AND THE COLORED PEOPLE
187
from 1868 to 1885. White also had a lengthy diplomatic career, serving as U.S. minister to Germany (1879–81), U.S. minister to Russia (1892–94), and U.S. ambassador to Germany (1897–1902). Additionally, White served as the head of the U.S. delegation at The Hague International Peace Conference in 1899 before finally retiring in 1902. Altschuler, Andrew D. White; ANB (online). 47. Allan A. Burton (1820–78) was born in Garrard County, Kentucky, to Robert A. Burton and Sallie (Williams) Burton. At age nineteen, Burton enrolled in Transylvania University in Lexington, where he studied law. In 1842, Burton was admitted to the bar and served as a judge in Garrard County, in several adjoining counties, and on the Kentucky Court of Appeals for twenty years. Although raised in a proslavery family, Burton was antislavery and served as a Kentucky delegate to the Republican National Convention in 1860, where Lincoln was nominated for president. From 1861 to 1868, Burton served as the U.S. minister resident in Bogota, Colombia, and in 1871, under President Grant, Burton was appointed to the U.S. Commission to Santo Domingo, serving as secretary and interpreter. As secretary, he compiled a report of the commission for the U.S. government. Upon his return to the United States, Burton returned to the practice of law in Lancaster, Kentucky. The History of Livingston County, Illinois (Chicago, 1878), 763–65. 48. The Republican National Convention was held on 5 June 1872 in Philadelphia. Despite Grant’s sustained popularity, a group of Republicans was willing to run against the president, favoring a limited government led by the intellectually well bred. Although these men, discouraged by the corruption and unabated Southern resistance to Reconstruction under the Grant administration, bolted to form the Liberal Republican party, the delegates at the national convention unanimously nominated Grant as the Republican presidential candidate. Henry Wilson, a senator from Massachusetts, replaced Schuyler Colfax as the president’s running mate. Philadelphia North American and United States Gazette, 7 June 1872; McFeely, Grant, 380–83; Smith, Grant, 547–48, 549n, 550n. 49. Elected to the U.S. Senate from Massachusetts by a coalition of Free Soilers, Know-Nothings, and Democrats in 1855, Henry Wilson (1812–75) strongly advocated the abolition of slavery as a political goal. In 1862, he introduced a bill to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, and as a Radical Republican, he was one of the strongest voices denouncing the Black Codes enacted under Presidential Reconstruction. In 1865, he introduced a bill aimed at nullifying all laws and ordinances discriminating against freedmen and former slaves. Wilson replaced Schuyler Colfax as vice president during Ulysses S. Grant’s second term, but died in office. Ernest McKay, Henry Wilson: Practical Radical (London, 1971), 94–95, 197–98. 50. Horace Greeley secured the presidential nomination of the Liberal Republican party on 1 May 1872 in Cincinnati, with Governor B. Gratz Brown of Missouri running second. The liberals had garnered Greeley’s support by eliminating the free-trade plank from their platform. As the campaign progressed, Greeley’s stump speeches hinged on what he called a “New Departure,” and throughout the campaign, he focused on amnesty and sectional reconciliation. On 9 July, the Democratic National Convention adopted the liberal platform, along with Greeley’s nomination. Republican attacks on Greeley were swift and harsh, and Douglass, in columns in his New National Era, denounced him as having never been a genuine opponent of slavery. Greeley’s own words were used against him, as the Tribune’s editor had for years attacked Democrats and others with whom he was now ostensibly united. Late in the campaign, Greeley’s wife, Molly, succumbed to dropsy (edema) and other maladies, but by then Greeley had already witnessed Republican victories in North Carolina, Maine, Vermont, and the “October states,” Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Indiana. Greeley and the liberals carried only six states, all along on the border or in the South. Greeley died before the Electoral College met. James G. Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress: From Lincoln to Garfield, 2 vols. (Norwich, Conn., 1884–86), 2:520–36; Van Deusen, Horace Greeley, 400–420; Earle Dudley Ross, The Liberal Republican Movement (1919; New York, 1967), 36, 56–59, 79, 92–94, 140, 157–60, 183. 51. James Rood Doolittle (1815–97) was born in Hampton, New York, and graduated from Geneva (Hobart) College in 1834. After practicing law in western New York for thirteen years, he moved to Racine, Wisconsin, in 1851. Originally a Democrat with free-soil principles, Doolittle joined the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 187
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK HERALD
188
Republican party in 1856 and was elected to the U.S. Senate the following year. Although a supporter of a vigorous military effort in the Civil War, he had favored gradual emancipation and colonization before the adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment. When he refused to follow the Wisconsin legislature’s instructions to support the Civil Rights Bill of 1866, that body called on him to resign. Doolittle voted for acquittal in Andrew Johnson’s impeachment trial. Aligning himself with the Democrats after 1868, he lost his Senate seat and subsequent races for governor and the U.S. House of Representatives. Doolittle presided over the 1872 Democratic National Convention, which endorsed the Liberal Republicans’ nomination of Horace Greeley for president. LaWanda C. Fenlason Cox and John Henry Cox, Politics, Principle, and Prejudice, 1865–1866: Dilemma of Reconstruction America (1963; New York, 1976), 215–16, 224, 227; Howard K. Beale, The Critical Year: A Study of Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction (1930; New York, 1958), 123–31; ACAB, 2:201–02; DAB, 5:274–75. 52. On 9 May 1872, Douglass presided over a meeting on the subject of civil rights in Washington, D.C. Previously, members of a committee of invitation—Edward S. Atkinson, Frederick G. Barbadoes, George T. Downing, Frederick Douglass, Jr., and John W. Le Barnes—had invited President Grant to attend the meeting. Douglass quotes the president’s response to that invitation. The letter published in Grant’s scholarly papers edited by John Y. Simon differs only slightly from Douglass’s reproduction, which includes the words “this evening” following the phrase “engagement will detain me at the Executive Mansion.” Milwaukee (Wisc.) Sentinel, 10 May 1872; Bangor (Me.) Daily Whig and Courier, 10 May 1872; Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 23:99.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK HERALD (1874) U.S. Congress, Senate, Select Committee to Investigate the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, Report, 2 April 1880, U.S. Congress, 46th Congress, 2d Session, Senate Report 440 (Serial 1895), Appendix, 42–44.
Douglass’s connection to the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, popularly known as the Freedman’s Bank, was one of the most disappointing episodes of his post–Civil War public career. The bank had been authorized by Congress in March 1865 to meet the financial needs of the emancipated slaves and grew to operate thirty-seven branches in seventeen states and the District of Columbia. The national economic panic in 1873 revealed a major financial weakness in the Freedman’s Bank, much of it a result of incompetent and corrupt management. In mid-March 1874, a reorganized board of trustees appointed Douglass the bank’s president in hope of restoring public confidence in its solvency. A month later, Douglass issued the following public letter to the press to deny newspaper reports that the bank’s main office in Washington had closed its doors because it lacked currency. He asked for the “patience” of the bank’s depositors while its affairs were being stabilized. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:313–18;
Y7870-Douglass.indb 188
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK HERALD
188
Republican party in 1856 and was elected to the U.S. Senate the following year. Although a supporter of a vigorous military effort in the Civil War, he had favored gradual emancipation and colonization before the adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment. When he refused to follow the Wisconsin legislature’s instructions to support the Civil Rights Bill of 1866, that body called on him to resign. Doolittle voted for acquittal in Andrew Johnson’s impeachment trial. Aligning himself with the Democrats after 1868, he lost his Senate seat and subsequent races for governor and the U.S. House of Representatives. Doolittle presided over the 1872 Democratic National Convention, which endorsed the Liberal Republicans’ nomination of Horace Greeley for president. LaWanda C. Fenlason Cox and John Henry Cox, Politics, Principle, and Prejudice, 1865–1866: Dilemma of Reconstruction America (1963; New York, 1976), 215–16, 224, 227; Howard K. Beale, The Critical Year: A Study of Andrew Johnson and Reconstruction (1930; New York, 1958), 123–31; ACAB, 2:201–02; DAB, 5:274–75. 52. On 9 May 1872, Douglass presided over a meeting on the subject of civil rights in Washington, D.C. Previously, members of a committee of invitation—Edward S. Atkinson, Frederick G. Barbadoes, George T. Downing, Frederick Douglass, Jr., and John W. Le Barnes—had invited President Grant to attend the meeting. Douglass quotes the president’s response to that invitation. The letter published in Grant’s scholarly papers edited by John Y. Simon differs only slightly from Douglass’s reproduction, which includes the words “this evening” following the phrase “engagement will detain me at the Executive Mansion.” Milwaukee (Wisc.) Sentinel, 10 May 1872; Bangor (Me.) Daily Whig and Courier, 10 May 1872; Grant, Papers of Ulysses S. Grant, 23:99.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK HERALD (1874) U.S. Congress, Senate, Select Committee to Investigate the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, Report, 2 April 1880, U.S. Congress, 46th Congress, 2d Session, Senate Report 440 (Serial 1895), Appendix, 42–44.
Douglass’s connection to the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, popularly known as the Freedman’s Bank, was one of the most disappointing episodes of his post–Civil War public career. The bank had been authorized by Congress in March 1865 to meet the financial needs of the emancipated slaves and grew to operate thirty-seven branches in seventeen states and the District of Columbia. The national economic panic in 1873 revealed a major financial weakness in the Freedman’s Bank, much of it a result of incompetent and corrupt management. In mid-March 1874, a reorganized board of trustees appointed Douglass the bank’s president in hope of restoring public confidence in its solvency. A month later, Douglass issued the following public letter to the press to deny newspaper reports that the bank’s main office in Washington had closed its doors because it lacked currency. He asked for the “patience” of the bank’s depositors while its affairs were being stabilized. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:313–18;
Y7870-Douglass.indb 188
9/1/21 4:16 PM
TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK HERALD
189
Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 37–39, 174–75, 183–99, 211–13.
Washington, April 29, 1874.
To the Editor of the New York Herald:1 The reference in the Herald of Tuesday to the present condition of the Freedman’s Bank was not only just but considerate and generous, and displays your well-known love of fair play.2 While that reference told the simple truth about the bank, there was nothing in it to produce distrust and start a run upon its deposits. Of course no banking institution in the land can well afford to invite runs upon its deposits, and it is not generous to excite such runs without good and almost irresistible necessity. Within the last eighteen months the Freedman’s Bank, by reason of suspicions set afloat through the press and otherwise, has suffered three heavy runs upon its deposits.3 The last one of these, which occurred during the late financial panic, required half a million dollars to carry the bank safely through it, and the fact that it was able to survive a shock which brought other long-standing and long-trusted institutions to the ground may just now be stated, without boasting, in its favor. The Freedman’s Bank, as its name imports, was especially established to encourage and assist the freedmen to save and increase their hard-earned money and thus to help them in the race to knowledge and higher civilization. This institution has been in existence less than ten years, and during that time it has held and handled with profit to its depositors not less than $25,000,000. The bank now comes before the public, after the severest valuation of its property, rating articles at their lowest cash value in these dull times, with its liabilities $217,000 in excess of its assets. Every business man will see at once that with assets amounting, as they do, to more than $3,000,000, if only tolerably well managed and let well alone, a few months only would be required to enable it to overcome this small excess of liabilities and pay all its depositors a small amount of interest.4 My connection with the Freedman’s Bank as its president is of very recent date.5 I accepted the position with the honest purpose to forward, as well as I might, the beneficent objects had in view by its founders, to watch and guard the hard earnings of my people, and to see that those earnings shall be kept to their profit, if possible, but kept safely, at any rate.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 189
9/1/21 4:16 PM
190
TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK HERALD
In regard to the condition of the branches, I sent last night through the Associated Press6 all over the Southern States a quieting telegram,7 assuring our depositors that, in the opinion of the officers of the bank, if the depositors will exercise only a reasonable degree of patience, we shall be able to pay dollar for dollar; and this is my opinion now. Respectfully yours, FREDERICK DOUGLASS. 1. The owner and publisher of the New York Herald in 1874 was James Gordon Bennett, Jr. (1841–1898), who had assumed that post from his father, the newspaper’s founder, in 1866. A prototypical playboy and yachtsman, the younger Bennett turned much of the paper’s editorial direction over to managing editor Thomas B. Connery. Don Carlos Seitz, The James Gordon Bennetts, Father and Son, Proprietors of the New York Herald (Indianapolis, Ind., 1928), 217–19, 239, 251–53, 352; DAB, 2:199–202. 2. Douglass alludes to a report in the 28 April 1874 issue of the New York Herald claiming that the Washington, D.C., branch of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company had closed its doors the previous day to avoid a run by its depositors. An accompanying story indicated that business was conducted as usual on that day at the bank’s branch office in New York City. Douglass expresses gratitude for the comment in the first story in the Herald that “responsibility for the conduct of that business does not rest with the present managers, who have been in office but four weeks.” The Herald instead blamed the comptroller of the currency’s office for concealing evidence of mismanagement from congressional investigators. 3. The Freedman’s Bank had experienced runs following the publication of the March 1873 report of the comptroller of the currency and during the widespread financial panic sparked by the failure of the firm of Jay Cooke and Company the next September. Douglass is probably referring to the response to the comptroller’s report of March 1874. When released in April, it disclosed a deficit of $217,866.15, which many viewed as evidence of fraud and mismanagement. Panic among depositors ensued, and runs on the Freedman’s Bank induced some branches to require sixty days’ notice before funds could be withdrawn. Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 187–91; Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 87. 4. Douglass’s optimistic assessment proved unfounded. The federal government closed the Freedman’s Bank and liquidated its resources to repay depositors, a process that took nearly a decade to complete. The government was able to return only 62 percent of the depositors’ investments. Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 211–15. 5. The trustees elected Douglass to the presidency of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company on 14 March 1874. While he had intended to assume his duties on 1 April, he was apparently at his desk on 30 March. He held this position until the bank’s official demise on 2 July 1874. Douglass to Henry Highland Garnet, 19 March 1874, General Correspondence File, reel 2, frame 730, FD Papers, DLC; Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 85–86; Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 183. 6. Founded in 1846, the Associated Press served as a nonprofit news cooperative for the sharing of reports among New York City’s leading newspapers. The telegraph permitted stories to be sent almost instantaneously to newspapers. Faced with regional rivals, the AP grew into a national organization during the Civil War. Douglass’s telegram to the AP allowed him to reach a wide readership in order to quell worries regarding the financial solvency of the Freedman’s Bank. Schwarzlose, Nation’s Newsbrokers, 2:14–17, 59–62. 7. The New York Herald, Tribune, and Times, along with other major newspapers, published stories on Tuesday, 28 April 1874, and the following day, commenting on the comptroller of the cur-
Y7870-Douglass.indb 190
9/1/21 4:16 PM
GEN. O. O. HOWARD AGAIN ACQUITTED
191
rency’s pessimistic assessment of the financial health of the Freedman’s Bank. The Times was the most critical, calling the bank’s problems “deeply disgraceful to its managers” and “almost criminal.” The story was outweighed, however, by reports of the burial services for Massachusetts senator Charles Sumner, which dominated most of those newspapers’ columns. New York Herald, 28 April 1874; New York Tribune, 28 April 1874; New York Times, 28, 29 April 1874.
GEN. O. O. HOWARD AGAIN ACQUITTED (1874) Chicago Advance, 4 June 1874.
In March 1874, Major General Oliver Otis Howard faced a court-martial, charged with misappropriation of funds intended for black soldiers under his command during the Civil War, as well as with corruption throughout his appointment as commissioner of the Freedmen’s Bureau. Although the statute of limitations protected Howard, he requested that the investigation take place in order to clear his name. The military court, presided over by General Philip Sheridan, acquitted Howard of all charges. In the pages of the Chicago Advance, Douglass defended Howard, known as the “Christian General” because of his religious piety, and praised him for his contributions to the advancement of the African American race. Published from 1867 to 1917, the Advance was an evangelical newspaper that claimed to be the “leading organ of the Congregationalists of the West.” C .A. Cook and Co’s United States Newspaper Directory (Chicago, 1876), 24.
However trite the saying, it is a normal fact that truly great men encounter great trials. They are, however, very frequently, more indebted to the relentless persecutions of their envious and malignant enemies, than to the kind, but less active devotion of their friends. Byron might have lavished his wayward fancies in the monotonous obscurity of a lordly indolence, and passed into utter oblivion, but for the venomous assaults upon him of the “British Bards and Scotch Reviewers.”1 The brutal assault of Brooks2 upon Sumner3 in the Senate was the culminating deed of violence by which that statesman’s life became forever dedicated to the cause of human freedom. That act did not perhaps rankle in the heart of Sumner with half the power that it pervaded the hearts of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 191
9/1/21 4:16 PM
GEN. O. O. HOWARD AGAIN ACQUITTED
191
rency’s pessimistic assessment of the financial health of the Freedman’s Bank. The Times was the most critical, calling the bank’s problems “deeply disgraceful to its managers” and “almost criminal.” The story was outweighed, however, by reports of the burial services for Massachusetts senator Charles Sumner, which dominated most of those newspapers’ columns. New York Herald, 28 April 1874; New York Tribune, 28 April 1874; New York Times, 28, 29 April 1874.
GEN. O. O. HOWARD AGAIN ACQUITTED (1874) Chicago Advance, 4 June 1874.
In March 1874, Major General Oliver Otis Howard faced a court-martial, charged with misappropriation of funds intended for black soldiers under his command during the Civil War, as well as with corruption throughout his appointment as commissioner of the Freedmen’s Bureau. Although the statute of limitations protected Howard, he requested that the investigation take place in order to clear his name. The military court, presided over by General Philip Sheridan, acquitted Howard of all charges. In the pages of the Chicago Advance, Douglass defended Howard, known as the “Christian General” because of his religious piety, and praised him for his contributions to the advancement of the African American race. Published from 1867 to 1917, the Advance was an evangelical newspaper that claimed to be the “leading organ of the Congregationalists of the West.” C .A. Cook and Co’s United States Newspaper Directory (Chicago, 1876), 24.
However trite the saying, it is a normal fact that truly great men encounter great trials. They are, however, very frequently, more indebted to the relentless persecutions of their envious and malignant enemies, than to the kind, but less active devotion of their friends. Byron might have lavished his wayward fancies in the monotonous obscurity of a lordly indolence, and passed into utter oblivion, but for the venomous assaults upon him of the “British Bards and Scotch Reviewers.”1 The brutal assault of Brooks2 upon Sumner3 in the Senate was the culminating deed of violence by which that statesman’s life became forever dedicated to the cause of human freedom. That act did not perhaps rankle in the heart of Sumner with half the power that it pervaded the hearts of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 191
9/1/21 4:16 PM
192
GEN. O. O. HOWARD AGAIN ACQUITTED
others, but it rendered him, by necessity if not by choice, a life-long leader against the cohorts of slavery. He was then and there in the eyes of the nation consecrated with his own blood, in the face of the slave-holding power and by that power itself, in the very Temple where it had for half a century held almost irresponsible supremacy. A free-soil Democrat exclaimed when that deed was done, “Henceforth slavery is doomed. Freedom needs no better battle flag than Sumner’s bloody shirt!”4 Men are sometimes forced to become the very embodiment of principles they at first but faintly advocate, and, if sincere, all efforts to crush such men, if their motives be but pure, only tend to exalt them. Gen. O. O. Howard5 has become as odious to the black man’s enemies, as was Charles Sumner and John Brown,6 and, like those men, the more he is reviled, traduced and persecuted for the freedman’s sake, the more he grapples their growing millions to his heart—the more he resembles the embodiment of the ideal they would worship. The more he is accused and tried, the more he will appear like good gold refined and purified by fire. He has now been thrice accused, and thrice acquitted, of the most odious accusations, by three dissimilar tribunals—acquitted because he could not justly be convicted. The most blood-hound sagacity and lynx-eyed7 scrutiny, have labored to ferret out some single charge with which to brand his name with infamy, or to discover even some technical error to justify a censure, but all efforts were in vain; even the rigid, exacting and summary trial by courtmartial, has failed to find a single flaw in all the long years of service of this gallant and intrepid friend of man. The Statute of Limitation, with which the wisdom of the law invariably protects the innocent from being harassed with unjust charges for acts which might at the time have been justified, or their criminality disproved, was unselfishly—and, as some thought, rashly—waived by Gen. Howard, to allow the whole record of his official life to undergo the most thorough scrutiny. Conscious of his own innocence, and confident of the over-ruling justice of a divine Providence, he did not fear the ordeal, nor trust in vain; but with the same undaunted faith that bore him through the battles of the war—wounded, scarred and maimed, it is true, but still triumphant—he has met and conquered all his more covert and less manly opponents, in all the dark star-chamber trials8 and entangling civil and military inquisitions they have been able to institute against him. Every assault upon his integrity has recoiled upon his assailants and resulted to his advantage; and, by the very efforts to drive him from his
Y7870-Douglass.indb 192
9/1/21 4:16 PM
GEN. O. O. HOWARD AGAIN ACQUITTED
193
holy mission, he has become more and more devotedly dedicated to the cause of freedom and the amelioration of mankind than ever could have been possible, had no such infamous and malicious machinations have been perpetrated against him. He has become great, because he has labored sincerely to do good, and when men strike against the good, they strike against the Author of all goodness, and the blow sooner or later recoils upon themselves. Gen. Howard’s name has, by the industry of his opponents, been heralded over every section of the country, by telegraph, by press, by letter, and by every gossiping device that malice could invent to blast his fame and impair his power; but, instead of blasting the one or lessening the other, they have produced the very opposite result; they have blazoned forth and impressed upon the whole American people a just conviction of the glowing virtues of a modest and meritorious man, of whom they would else have remained in comparative ignorance. They have concentrated attention upon the man, of whom they would else have remained in comparative ignorance. They have concentrated attention upon the man, and the more the people hear and see, the more they admire, until now his enemies begin to retract and feign to sympathize with him and to deprecate his persecution as unwise, if not unjust. Oh, yes, gentlemen, it is “unwise”; nay, more than unwise, it is madness thus to kick against the pricks. But whom the gods determine to destroy they first make mad,9 and just such madness has been manifested by the advocates of oppression ever since the first assault upon Sumner in the Senate. Gen. Howard’s brother officers, with all their West Point proclivities of pride and caste, could not close their eyes to his glorious record upon the tented field, nor forget their own self-respect so much as to heed the groundless clamor of unworthy calumniators whose envy and jealousy towards the man, and hatred toward the race he dared to befriend, had instigated the investigation in the base hope to disparage him and to injure them. The court was composed of men of integrity—above suspicion—of men who, though they were not his special friends, were incapable of being swayed by fear, or won by favor to swerve from the most scrupulous regard to right and duty. They acquitted him upon every charge. But had he been convicted, had he been stricken down and overwhelmed with the floods of defamation poured upon him—had the foul breath of slander for a time stifled justice and triumphed over his integrity—we still believe that at length the truth would prevail over falsehood, and greater good
Y7870-Douglass.indb 193
9/1/21 4:16 PM
194
GEN. O. O. HOWARD AGAIN ACQUITTED
would inure both to him, and the cause he has so faithfully served. When Gen. O. O. Howard was selected by President Lincoln10 —not at the General’s desire, but from the President’s own knowledge of the man—“to stand between the freedman and his former masters,” he became the inevitable victim of the numberless persecutions that his envious competitors, as well as the malignant enemies of himself and the race, could devise for his overthrow. Though he had not sought, he did not shrink from the duties of the new position any more than he had shrunk from those perhaps less arduous and less perilous in the open field, where his health had been impaired, his right-arm lopped off, and his life so frequently endangered, but where his character, more dear than either, had not been assailed. He has conquered greatness upon the field for freedom; he has achieved greatness in council, and by devotion to good works in behalf of the black man, the Indian, and the unfortunate of his own color. He has had greatness thrust upon him11 in heaps of intended infamy which the alchemy of heaven has transformed into greatness and glory. He has been so constantly driven into the hearts and affections of the people he has served—he has become so inseparably connected with so many schemes for their amelioration, he has been so often calumniated for the zeal he has manifested for their welfare, and persecuted because of his success in their behalf—that they feel, as do all who sympathize with them, that General Howard, like Sumner, Brown, and Lincoln, must be a marked instrument in the hands of Providence, and destined for some still nobler and more exalted mission in the interests of mankind yet undeveloped. WASHINGTON. 1. Lord Byron’s first poetry collection, Fugitive Pieces, was privately printed in 1806 and publicly published as Hours of Idleness the following year. The latter received scathing reviews that deemed it immature and self-indulgent. In 1809, Byron responded with British Bards and Scotch Reviewers, a satire mocking his critics, including William Wordsworth and most of the British literary establishment. Byron then departed on a two-year tour of Continental Europe, during which he composed his first masterpiece, Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage. Leslie A. Marchand, Byron: A Biography, 3 vols. (New York, 1957), 1:133–34, 142, 166–72. 2. Preston Smith Brooks (1819–57) was born in Edgefield County, South Carolina. Brooks was a member of one of the most prominent slaveholding families in South Carolina’s Upcountry, and he was privately educated. In 1839, he was expelled from the College of South Carolina for unruly behavior, without receiving a degree. After being wounded in a duel with Louis Wigfall in 1840, Brooks walked with a cane for the rest of his life. In 1844, he was elected to a single term in the South Carolina House of Representatives. He was admitted to the bar in 1846 in Edgefield County, and in 1853 he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives as a Democrat. On 22 May 1856, while serving his second term in Congress, Brooks assaulted Senator Charles Sumner of Massachusetts with a cane on the floor of the Senate. The beating was motivated by Brooks’s outrage over Sumner’s 19 and 20 May 1856 speech, “The Crime Against Kansas,” which had included a personal attack on Brooks’s cousin,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 194
9/1/21 4:16 PM
GEN. O. O. HOWARD AGAIN ACQUITTED
195
Senator Andrew P. Butler. Although Sumner barely survived the caning, members of the House of Representatives were unable to muster the two-thirds majority required to expel a sitting member of Congress. Nonetheless, Brooks resigned his seat in July 1856. Viewed as a hero in his home state, however, he was promptly elected to fill the vacancy created by his own resignation. Brooks remained a member of Congress until his death in January 1857. Donald, Sumner and the Civil War, 282–97; Heidler and Heidler, Encyclopedia of the American Civil War, 1:288–89; DAB, 3:88; ANB (online). 3. Charles Sumner. 4. Although the author of this statement cannot be identified, the statement refers to the caning of Charles Sumner by Preston Brooks, which caused the South Carolina congressman to be reviled in the North and lionized in the South. Northerners considered Brooks’s assault an attack on free speech, while Southerners considered it a just punishment for Sumner’s speech. The image of Sumner’s bloody shirt was used to represent the danger posed by the slave power of the South. Southerners believed that Sumner’s bloody shirt was physically used to mock them and their support of slavery, but Northerners were merely using it as a metaphor for their disgust with Southern actions. Eric Walther, The Shattering of the Union: America in the 1850s (Lanham, Md., 2004), 97–101; Manisha Sinha, “The Caning of Charles Sumner: Slavery, Race, and Ideology in the Age of the Civil War,” Journal of the Early Republic, 23:233–262 (Summer 2003); Williamjames Hull Hoffer, The Caning of Charles Sumner: Honor, Idealism, and the Origins of the Civil War (Baltimore, 2010), 1–11. 5. General Oliver Otis Howard (1830–1909) was born to a farming family in Leeds, Maine. A well-educated man, Howard received a degree from Bowdoin College and then attended the U.S. Military Academy, graduating fourth in his class in 1854. Before the Civil War, Howard became deeply religious, converting to evangelical Christianity during his service in the Third Seminole War in 1857. He served in the Union Army during the Civil War, but his combat record was mixed. While he won the Medal of Honor for heroism and lost an arm during the Battle of Fair Oaks, his command of the Eleventh Corps of the Army of the Potomac was problematic at best. At the Battle of Chancellorsville, his refusal to follow orders led to the total collapse of his command, and at Gettysburg the Eleventh Corps was once again badly defeated, running from the field in panic during the fighting on the first day. Transferred west after Gettysburg, Howard finished the war under General William T. Sherman’s command, serving with distinction and skill. After the Civil War, he was appointed commissioner of the Freedmen’s Bureau, serving from May 1865 to July 1874. While he seems to have genuinely desired to help recently freed slaves—he founded Howard University, which was open to blacks and women, in 1867—his record as commissioner was not impressive. This may have partially been due to naiveté, since he did not publicly recognize that white Southerners would respect the newly won rights of African Americans. Oliver Otis Howard, Autobiography of Oliver Otis Howard, Major General, United States Army, 2 vols. (New York, 1908); John A. Carpenter, Sword and Olive Branch: Oliver Otis Howard (New York, 1999); A. J. Langguth, After Lincoln: How the North Won the Civil War and Lost the Peace (New York, 2014), 103–15. 6. Born in Torrington, Connecticut, John Brown (1790–1859) grew up in Hudson, Ohio. After receiving a rudimentary education, he unsuccessfully attempted to work as a tanner, a wool dealer, and a farmer. A longtime supporter of emancipation, Brown became more militant in his antislavery activities after passage of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850. In 1855, Brown followed four of his sons to Kansas, where he became a leader of the armed opposition to the admission of the territory as a slave state. Because of his participation in the massacre of proslavery settlers at Pottawatomie Creek in May 1856, he became a nationally known figure. In 1857, Brown secretly began to recruit men and raise funds for a plan to establish a base in the southern Appalachian Mountains, from which they would raid plantations and free slaves. Brown’s plotting culminated in the unsuccessful attack by a small band on the federal armory at Harpers Ferry, Virginia, in October 1859. Captured and tried for treason under Virginia law, he was executed on 2 December 1859 and immediately became a martyr to many Northerners. Richard O. Boyer, The Legend of John Brown: A Biography and a History (New York, 1973); Oates, To Purge This Land; ACAB, 1:404–07; NCAB, 2:307–08; DAB, 3:131–34.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 195
9/1/21 4:16 PM
196
FREEDMAN’S SAVINGS AND TRUST COMPANY
7. “Lynx-eyed” is an earlier version of the term “hawk-eyed” and means “sharp-sighted.” The entire phrase meant “to examine the issue as closely as possible.” 8. Star-chamber trials are trials or hearings that make a mockery of due process by preventing defendants from exercising their lawful rights. The practice began in King Henry VII’s courts and continued into the reigns of his descendants. Such trials were held in a large chamber at the Royal Palace in Westminster that had stars painted on the roof. Here, judgments and punishments were predetermined, and defendants were routinely denied their rights under English law. Thomas Gardner and Terry Anderson, Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases, 7th ed. (Stamford, Conn., 2009), 153; Daniel L. Vande Zande, “Coercive Power and the Demise of the Star Chamber,” American Journal of Legal History, 50:326 (Philadelphia, 2008). 9. The quotation “But whom the gods determine to destroy, they first make mad” appears in Western thought as early as ancient Greece. While the idea may be derived originally from a line in Antigone by Sophocles—“Evil sometimes seems good to a man whose mind a god leads to destruction”—it appears in several prominent nineteenth-century American works, including Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem The Masque of Pandora and William Anderson Scott’s Daniel: A Model for Young Men. William Anderson Scott, Daniel: A Model for Young Men (New York, 1854), 248; Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, The Poetical Works of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, 4 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1858), 3:165; Sophocles, The Tragedies of Sophocles in English Prose, a New Literal Translation, trans. John Hall (London, 1844), 227. 10. General Oliver Otis Howard was selected to head the Freedmen’s Bureau by President Abraham Lincoln shortly before the latter’s assassination. Howard was officially appointed by President Andrew Johnson at the recommendation of Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. Paul Cimbala, Under the Guardianship of the Nation (Athens, Ga., 1997), 1; John Cox and LaWanda Cox, “General O. O. Howard and the ‘Misrepresented Bureau,’ ” Journal of Southern History, 19:432 (November 1953). 11. Twelfth Night, sc. 10, lines 1125–26.
TO THE DEPOSITORS OF THE FREEDMAN’S SAVINGS AND TRUST COMPANY (1874) U.S. Congress, Senate, Select Committee to Investigate the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, Report, 2 April 1880, U.S. Congress, 46th Congress, 2d Session, Senate Report 440 (Serial 1895), Appendix, 44–45.
Soon after taking over the presidency of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company in April 1874, Douglass became aware of the institution’s insolvency. He, along with a new board of trustees, struggled to correct the internal management policies that had contributed to the bank’s financial woes. Douglass also lent the bank $10,000 to help it meet pressing obligations. In mid-June, Congress passed legislation intended to assist those reorganization efforts and restore public confidence in the bank. Shortly after the law was enacted, Douglass issued the following circular to the Freedman’s Bank’s depositors, describing the sources of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 196
9/1/21 4:16 PM
196
FREEDMAN’S SAVINGS AND TRUST COMPANY
7. “Lynx-eyed” is an earlier version of the term “hawk-eyed” and means “sharp-sighted.” The entire phrase meant “to examine the issue as closely as possible.” 8. Star-chamber trials are trials or hearings that make a mockery of due process by preventing defendants from exercising their lawful rights. The practice began in King Henry VII’s courts and continued into the reigns of his descendants. Such trials were held in a large chamber at the Royal Palace in Westminster that had stars painted on the roof. Here, judgments and punishments were predetermined, and defendants were routinely denied their rights under English law. Thomas Gardner and Terry Anderson, Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases, 7th ed. (Stamford, Conn., 2009), 153; Daniel L. Vande Zande, “Coercive Power and the Demise of the Star Chamber,” American Journal of Legal History, 50:326 (Philadelphia, 2008). 9. The quotation “But whom the gods determine to destroy, they first make mad” appears in Western thought as early as ancient Greece. While the idea may be derived originally from a line in Antigone by Sophocles—“Evil sometimes seems good to a man whose mind a god leads to destruction”—it appears in several prominent nineteenth-century American works, including Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem The Masque of Pandora and William Anderson Scott’s Daniel: A Model for Young Men. William Anderson Scott, Daniel: A Model for Young Men (New York, 1854), 248; Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, The Poetical Works of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, 4 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1858), 3:165; Sophocles, The Tragedies of Sophocles in English Prose, a New Literal Translation, trans. John Hall (London, 1844), 227. 10. General Oliver Otis Howard was selected to head the Freedmen’s Bureau by President Abraham Lincoln shortly before the latter’s assassination. Howard was officially appointed by President Andrew Johnson at the recommendation of Secretary of War Edwin Stanton. Paul Cimbala, Under the Guardianship of the Nation (Athens, Ga., 1997), 1; John Cox and LaWanda Cox, “General O. O. Howard and the ‘Misrepresented Bureau,’ ” Journal of Southern History, 19:432 (November 1953). 11. Twelfth Night, sc. 10, lines 1125–26.
TO THE DEPOSITORS OF THE FREEDMAN’S SAVINGS AND TRUST COMPANY (1874) U.S. Congress, Senate, Select Committee to Investigate the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, Report, 2 April 1880, U.S. Congress, 46th Congress, 2d Session, Senate Report 440 (Serial 1895), Appendix, 44–45.
Soon after taking over the presidency of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company in April 1874, Douglass became aware of the institution’s insolvency. He, along with a new board of trustees, struggled to correct the internal management policies that had contributed to the bank’s financial woes. Douglass also lent the bank $10,000 to help it meet pressing obligations. In mid-June, Congress passed legislation intended to assist those reorganization efforts and restore public confidence in the bank. Shortly after the law was enacted, Douglass issued the following circular to the Freedman’s Bank’s depositors, describing the sources of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 196
9/1/21 4:16 PM
FREEDMAN’S SAVINGS AND TRUST COMPANY
197
the bank’s difficulties, outlining recent corrective measures, and beseeching them not to withdraw their funds. These efforts fell short, however, and the bank was forced to cease operations the following month. Douglass had to wait for years until federally managed liquidation procedures returned just sixty-two cents on the dollar to depositors. Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 183–99, 211–13.
[25 June 1874.]
To the depositors of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company: The recent legislation of Congress, so amending the charter of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company as to place the institution upon a broader and firmer basis and give to its trustees a larger measure of discretion and control of its management,1 may be well enough made the occasion for a brief statement of facts and circumstances which have a bearing upon the legislation in question and upon the future existence and success of the Freedman’s Bank. It is very evident that Congress was animated in its legislation by a generous desire to conserve and strengthen an institution of known usefulness to the people in whose interest it was created. In regard to the condition of this corporation, certain facts have already come to public knowledge through the publication of the report of Mr. Meigs,2 the bank examiner. It is not necessary to disguise or explain away by false processes the facts therein stated. It is known that on the 1st of January, 1874, our liabilities exceeded our assets to the extent of $217,000, and it is also known that nothing has occurred since that time to materially diminish the space between these assets and liabilities, though it is due to state that several considerable loans which were supposed at the time the report was made to be bad, have turned out to be good loans. This deficit, now admitted and never denied by the undersigned, is very easily accounted for, and it may serve a good purpose to state the cause of its existence. First. The managers of the “Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company” have unfortunately endeavored to make the Freedman’s Bank compete with older and better-established institutions of the kind in attracting and securing a large amount of deposits, by holding out the inducement of a larger percentage of interest than was warranted by the earnings of the bank.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 197
9/1/21 4:16 PM
198
FREEDMAN’S SAVINGS AND TRUST COMPANY
Of course any corporation, nation, or family which spends more than it earns will in due time find its coffers exhausted. Second. Another cause of this deficit of $200,000 is found in the fact that the former managers of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company undertook to do too much work in another direction; impressed as they were with the sense of the many benefits of savings institutions among the freedmen of the South, they were tempted into a sort of banking missionary movement. They started, established, and supported branches of the institution in remote places in the Southern States, and where it was almost impossible that they could become speedily self-sustaining.3 Third. It cannot be doubted that a third cause has in a large measure operated against the success of the Freedman’s Bank, and this cause happens to be one which it is most difficult to deal with,—because it is inherent in the enterprise itself,—and one which no wisdom that the managers of the bank can exercise can counteract or remove. This institution conspicuously and pre-eminently represents the idea of progress and elevation of a people who are just now emerging from the ignorance, degradation, and destitution entailed upon them by more than two centuries of slavery. A people who are hated not because they have injured others but because others have injured them. This feeling of caste, this race malignity, has naturally enough taken about the same offence at the Freedman’s Bank as it did at the existence of the Freedman’s Bureau. It is as desirous to destroy the former as it was to destroy the latter. Fourth. Still another and greater source of evil has been the senseless runs made from time to time upon the bank. These have compelled the withdrawal of large sums of money from very safe and profitable investments, and diverted the regular business of the bank from making money for its depositors to the work of obtaining the means of meeting the demands of these disastrous panics. The Freedman’s Bank has been subjected to no less than three of these raids during the last eighteen months. The run made upon the bank by the failure of Jay Cooke & Co. cost us not less then $50,000, and required the withdrawal of a half million of dollars from safe and profitable investments.4 Add to these causes the general prostration of business, the great loss of confidence to all moneyed institutions, the disturbed condition of affairs, especially in the District of Columbia, where most of our loans have been made, and you will easily understand why the Freedman’s Bank is now under a heavy strain and found it necessary to seek protection in the recent amendments to its charter. In respect to the future of the bank some of the main sources of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 198
9/1/21 4:16 PM
FREEDMAN’S SAVINGS AND TRUST COMPANY
199
danger and ruin have been entirely removed. The trustees, governed by an increasing concern for the safety of their depositors rather than for large profits in the way of interest, have abandoned their unwise competition with others in the offer of a high percentage of interest, and have now resolved to pay only such a rate as the net earnings of the bank will warrant them in paying. They have also given up their wild and visionary schemes of banking, and have abandoned the policy of establishing branches in remote corners of the country. They will now establish none where there is not a very strong likelihood of their becoming self-sustaining. Not only have they discarded the policy of extension, they have adopted the policy of closing up as speedily as is convenient and practicable the non-paying branches now in operation. They are not only for decreasing the number of branches but also the number of employés, and for reducing the salaries of their agents to the lowest point consistent with securing the services of good men. With this retrenchment in expenses, with wise and vigorous management, and with the returning confidence of our people, it is believed that the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company, which has already been a powerful instrument in promoting the moral, social, and intellectual welfare of our people, will survive and flourish despite the machinations of its enemies. The effect of the legislation recently enacted upon the bank will naturally inspire confidence. It is indirectly a strong indorsement of the honesty and ability of the trustees of the institution. It puts the destiny of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company more completely than heretofore within their power and discretion. It devises an honest method of keeping the institution in continued and successful operation, while it at the same time enables it to accomplish all the objects usually sought in suspension. It completely divorces the past from the present and future; it separates the old from the new, and allows the dead past to bury its dead;5 it aims to protect the new depositor from all the mistakes and misfortunes connected with the management and past condition of the bank. For the interests of the old depositors it enables the trustees to hold their securities as long as may be necessary to reap the full amount of interest they are capable of drawing, and then allows the trustees to fill up the chasm which may exist between assets and liabilities. It puts it in the power of the officers and agents of the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company to say with confidence and truth to all our old depositors, give us time and we will pay you every dollar due you from the company. To the new depositors it enable us to say with even more confidence, you may deposit with safety and profit. You are neither affected by past losses nor past mismanagement. Your
Y7870-Douglass.indb 199
9/1/21 4:16 PM
200
FREEDMAN’S SAVINGS AND TRUST COMPANY
money shall not be in any way mixed up with the old nor taken to pay old debts. It shall be held as special and invested for your special benefit. In one aspect this bill may be said to place the old bank in liquidation while it at the same time creates a new one. It preserves the old body but infuses it with new life, and gives it a better assurance of continued existence. What is now needed is wisdom, courage, skill, and determination. With these the Freedman’s Savings Bank may be made not only a success in itself, but a grand means of success to the colored people of the South, to whom it has already taught important lessons of industry, economy, and saving. The history of civilization shows that no people can well rise to a high degree of mental or even moral excellence without wealth. A people uniformly poor and compelled to struggle for barely a physical existence will be dependent and despised by their neighbors, and will finally despise themselves. While it is impossible that every individual of any race shall be rich—and no man may be despised for merely being poor—yet no people can be respected which does not produce a wealthy class. Such a people will only be the hewers of wood and drawers of water, and will not rise above a mere animal existence.6 The mission of the Freedman’s Bank is to show our people the road to a share of the wealth and well being of the world. It has already done much to lift the race into respectability, and, with their continued confidence and patient co-operation, it will continue to reflect credit upon the race and promote their welfare. It has long been a bitter complaint against the Freedman’s Bank that it withdrew money from distant localities and invested it here at the capital. The bill which has now become a law has removed all ground of complaint on this point. It provides that loans shall be made in the vicinity of the different branches, so that the people who deposit their money may now feel assured that it will not be withdrawn to build up Washington, but will be employed to quicken industry and improve the condition of the country where it is collected.7 This feature of the bill alone goes far to recommend the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company to the confidence and favor of the colored people. FREDERICK DOUGLASS, President. 1. Douglass refers to Congress’s last attempt to revitalize the bank. A bill passed on 20 June 1874 was meant to reform the bank’s internal structure and protect new income by treating assets as “special deposits” not subject to old liabilities. This legislation gave the trustees authority to close the bank and appoint three commissioners to oversee its dissolution if they decided it could not be saved. The trustees attempted to appoint a board of commissioners composed of their relatives, but
Y7870-Douglass.indb 200
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE EMANCIPATED MAN WANTS KNOWLEDGE
201
the secretary of the treasury rejected their slate. The trustees then selected Robert Purvis, John A. J. Creswell, and Robert H. T. Leipold to oversee liquidation of the bank. NNE, 9 May 1874; Washington Evening Star, 14 May 1874; Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 192–99; Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 101. 2. In late April 1874, Charles Austin Meigs (1816–83), an examiner for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, reported the Freedman’s Bank’s assets at a value of $3,121,101, with liabilities valued at $3,338,896.15—resulting in a deficit of $217,886.15. Later, John A. J. Creswell, one of three commissioners appointed to repay the bank’s depositors, testified to a House select committee that in December 1874, the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company had liabilities equal to $2,879,031.78 and assets equal to $2,693,095.20, producing a deficiency of just under $200,000. U.S. Congress, House, Freedmen’s Bank, House Report 502, 44th Cong., 1st sess., 1876, 1–2; Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 84; Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 187–88, 187n. 3. At its peak, the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company had thirty-seven branches. By the time of its closing, in 1874, thirty-four remained open. As early as 1867, though, several branches, including those in Alexandria, Huntsville, and Vicksburg, were in crisis, since their expenses exceeded deposits. Other branches, such as those in Augusta, Houston, Jacksonville, and Tallahassee, were to be carefully monitored by the bank’s main office because of similar concerns. Poor accounting practices and neglectful oversight made it difficult to ascertain exactly how many branches were “non-paying.” Branches in smaller black communities, such as those in Lynchburg, Chattanooga, Raleigh, Atlanta, and Montgomery, clearly outspent deposits, but experts believe that as many as half the branches at the time of the bank’s closing may have been “non-paying.” Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 98–99; Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 37–39, 174–75. 4. There had been runs on the Freedman’s Bank following the publication of the March 1873 report of the comptroller of the currency, as well as during the widespread financial panic sparked by the failure of the firm of Jay Cooke and Company the following September. Douglass is probably referring to the response to the comptroller’s report of March 1874. When released in April, it disclosed a deficit of $217,866.15, which many viewed as evidence of fraud and mismanagement. Panic among depositors ensued, and runs on the Freedman’s Bank induced some branches to require sixty days’ notice before funds could be withdrawn. Douglass to the editor of the New York Herald, 29 April 1874, in U.S. Senate, Freedmen’s Savings and Trust Company, Appendix, 44–45; Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 187–91; Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 87. 5. This line is found in the sixth stanza of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem “A Psalm of Life,” originally published in the Knickerbocker in October 1838 and then in his first collection, Voices of the Night, the following year. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, The Complete Works of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, rev. ed., 7 vols. (Boston, 1872), 1:16–17. 6. The phrase “hewers of wood and drawers of water” comes from Joshua 9:21, 23. 7. The recently passed congressional legislation required that half of the bank’s deposits be invested in the communities of its branches, and the remainder invested in federal bonds or deposited in a national bank by the bank’s Washington, D.C., board of officers. Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 193–94.
THE EMANCIPATED MAN WANTS KNOWLEDGE (1875) American Missionary Magazine, 19:171 (August 1875).
Along with four other writers, Douglass contributed a brief response that was printed following the text of the short pamphlet The Nation Still in Danger: or, Ten Years after the War: A Plea by
Y7870-Douglass.indb 201
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE EMANCIPATED MAN WANTS KNOWLEDGE
201
the secretary of the treasury rejected their slate. The trustees then selected Robert Purvis, John A. J. Creswell, and Robert H. T. Leipold to oversee liquidation of the bank. NNE, 9 May 1874; Washington Evening Star, 14 May 1874; Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 192–99; Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 101. 2. In late April 1874, Charles Austin Meigs (1816–83), an examiner for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, reported the Freedman’s Bank’s assets at a value of $3,121,101, with liabilities valued at $3,338,896.15—resulting in a deficit of $217,886.15. Later, John A. J. Creswell, one of three commissioners appointed to repay the bank’s depositors, testified to a House select committee that in December 1874, the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company had liabilities equal to $2,879,031.78 and assets equal to $2,693,095.20, producing a deficiency of just under $200,000. U.S. Congress, House, Freedmen’s Bank, House Report 502, 44th Cong., 1st sess., 1876, 1–2; Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 84; Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 187–88, 187n. 3. At its peak, the Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company had thirty-seven branches. By the time of its closing, in 1874, thirty-four remained open. As early as 1867, though, several branches, including those in Alexandria, Huntsville, and Vicksburg, were in crisis, since their expenses exceeded deposits. Other branches, such as those in Augusta, Houston, Jacksonville, and Tallahassee, were to be carefully monitored by the bank’s main office because of similar concerns. Poor accounting practices and neglectful oversight made it difficult to ascertain exactly how many branches were “non-paying.” Branches in smaller black communities, such as those in Lynchburg, Chattanooga, Raleigh, Atlanta, and Montgomery, clearly outspent deposits, but experts believe that as many as half the branches at the time of the bank’s closing may have been “non-paying.” Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 98–99; Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 37–39, 174–75. 4. There had been runs on the Freedman’s Bank following the publication of the March 1873 report of the comptroller of the currency, as well as during the widespread financial panic sparked by the failure of the firm of Jay Cooke and Company the following September. Douglass is probably referring to the response to the comptroller’s report of March 1874. When released in April, it disclosed a deficit of $217,866.15, which many viewed as evidence of fraud and mismanagement. Panic among depositors ensued, and runs on the Freedman’s Bank induced some branches to require sixty days’ notice before funds could be withdrawn. Douglass to the editor of the New York Herald, 29 April 1874, in U.S. Senate, Freedmen’s Savings and Trust Company, Appendix, 44–45; Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 187–91; Fleming, Freedmen’s Savings Bank, 87. 5. This line is found in the sixth stanza of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s poem “A Psalm of Life,” originally published in the Knickerbocker in October 1838 and then in his first collection, Voices of the Night, the following year. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, The Complete Works of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, rev. ed., 7 vols. (Boston, 1872), 1:16–17. 6. The phrase “hewers of wood and drawers of water” comes from Joshua 9:21, 23. 7. The recently passed congressional legislation required that half of the bank’s deposits be invested in the communities of its branches, and the remainder invested in federal bonds or deposited in a national bank by the bank’s Washington, D.C., board of officers. Osthaus, Freedmen, Philanthropy, and Fraud, 193–94.
THE EMANCIPATED MAN WANTS KNOWLEDGE (1875) American Missionary Magazine, 19:171 (August 1875).
Along with four other writers, Douglass contributed a brief response that was printed following the text of the short pamphlet The Nation Still in Danger: or, Ten Years after the War: A Plea by
Y7870-Douglass.indb 201
9/1/21 4:16 PM
202
THE EMANCIPATED MAN WANTS KNOWLEDGE
the American Missionary Association. Prepared by the American Missionary Association’s corresponding secretary, the Reverend Martin E. Strieby, the pamphlet detailed the poor status of educational opportunities afforded to African Americans in the Southern states and called on the North to offer its assistance. The American Missionary Association, an active abolitionist organization, had lobbied Northern churches to take a stronger stand against slavery since before the Civil War. After the Civil War, the association sent hundreds of teachers into the South to educate freedmen. Some of these efforts evolved into full-fledged institutions of higher education, such as Atlanta University, Dillard University, Fisk University, Howard University, and Talladega College. The Nation Still in Danger: or, Ten Years after the War: A Plea by the American Missionary Association (New York, 1875); McKivigan, War against Proslavery Religion, 114– 15; EAA, 1:39–40. I am obliged by your circular entitled “The Nation still in danger.” There is much of wholesome truth and timely warning in its pages. The mere abolition of the form of slavery in the South, while the spirit of slavery is permitted to shape itself into new forms, will neither benefit the emancipated class nor the class from which they were emancipated. Ignorance, superstition and groveling sensuality were the natural outgrowths of slavery and slaveholding religion. These evils could not be reached by the forcible abolition of slavery. Time and patient labor are required for this, and I rejoice that the Association you represent1 has been able to do so much of the needed work. Through two hundred years of bondage the slave was permitted to hear only the gospel of contentment. He was told to be contented with ignorance, with slavery, with superstition and with a sensual religion—full of animal heat and excitement—of boundless ecstasy and boundless depression. All his hopes and aspirations were to be fixed upon another world. The present world was nothing for him—the other world everything. What the emancipated man wants now is knowledge. To get this he needs money and land, something that will give him time to think and improve his mind. His poverty and destitution are his greatest obstacles to progress. Teach him how to make the best of this world, how to be useful to himself, his family, to the community and to the world of mankind. Most of our colored preachers represent the old
Y7870-Douglass.indb 202
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLORED EXODUS
203
religion borrowed from their masters, and are hardly fit for the new work of moral reconstruction needed at the South. The new times require new men and new ideas. I certainly wish you success in your humane and educational work. 1. Formed in 1846 in Albany, New York, the American Missionary Association was an organization of Christian abolitionists who chose not to associate with established missionary agencies of the major denominations. Early leaders of the group included Lewis Tappan (treasurer) and Simeon S. Jocelyn and George Whipple (secretaries). The organization promoted education and missionary activities for blacks in the United States and abroad. By 1855, the American Missionary Association had more than one hundred missions in North America as well as posts in Egypt, Thailand, Haiti, Jamaica, and West Africa. In addition to establishing missions, the American Missionary Association made major contributions to the antislavery movement in churches and formed an important medium through which Christian abolitionists could lobby American churches for antislavery action. McKivigan, War against Proslavery Religion, 114–15; Clifton H. Johnson, “The American Missionary Association, 1846–61” (Ph.D. diss., University of North Carolina, 1958).
THE COLORED EXODUS (1879) Washington National View, 24 May 1879. Another text in Washington National Republican, 5 May 1879; Topeka (Kans.) Colored Citizen, 24 May 1879; Subject File, reel 13, frame 15, FD Papers, DLC.
Frustrated by discriminatory labor practices, the lack of educational opportunity, and violent white opposition to their political participation, thousands of blacks from Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Tennessee, and other Southern states launched the “Exoduster” movement in early 1879. These blacks began a poorly coordinated migration to Kansas and adjacent areas of the Midwest. Although many former abolitionists supported the migration, Douglass remained unswervingly opposed to the Exodus movement, believing that conditions for blacks in the South would soon improve and that to leave would indicate surrender to white pressure. After criticizing the Exodus in an address in Baltimore on 4 May 1879, Douglass was called upon by Lee Crandall, editor of the National View, the weekly Washington, D.C., newspaper of the Greenback Labor party, to clarify his opposition to the Exodusters. This widely reprinted article provoked what Douglass labeled “base accusations” from “maligners” throughout the subsequent summer. He finally agreed to present a detailed
Y7870-Douglass.indb 203
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLORED EXODUS
203
religion borrowed from their masters, and are hardly fit for the new work of moral reconstruction needed at the South. The new times require new men and new ideas. I certainly wish you success in your humane and educational work. 1. Formed in 1846 in Albany, New York, the American Missionary Association was an organization of Christian abolitionists who chose not to associate with established missionary agencies of the major denominations. Early leaders of the group included Lewis Tappan (treasurer) and Simeon S. Jocelyn and George Whipple (secretaries). The organization promoted education and missionary activities for blacks in the United States and abroad. By 1855, the American Missionary Association had more than one hundred missions in North America as well as posts in Egypt, Thailand, Haiti, Jamaica, and West Africa. In addition to establishing missions, the American Missionary Association made major contributions to the antislavery movement in churches and formed an important medium through which Christian abolitionists could lobby American churches for antislavery action. McKivigan, War against Proslavery Religion, 114–15; Clifton H. Johnson, “The American Missionary Association, 1846–61” (Ph.D. diss., University of North Carolina, 1958).
THE COLORED EXODUS (1879) Washington National View, 24 May 1879. Another text in Washington National Republican, 5 May 1879; Topeka (Kans.) Colored Citizen, 24 May 1879; Subject File, reel 13, frame 15, FD Papers, DLC.
Frustrated by discriminatory labor practices, the lack of educational opportunity, and violent white opposition to their political participation, thousands of blacks from Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, Tennessee, and other Southern states launched the “Exoduster” movement in early 1879. These blacks began a poorly coordinated migration to Kansas and adjacent areas of the Midwest. Although many former abolitionists supported the migration, Douglass remained unswervingly opposed to the Exodus movement, believing that conditions for blacks in the South would soon improve and that to leave would indicate surrender to white pressure. After criticizing the Exodus in an address in Baltimore on 4 May 1879, Douglass was called upon by Lee Crandall, editor of the National View, the weekly Washington, D.C., newspaper of the Greenback Labor party, to clarify his opposition to the Exodusters. This widely reprinted article provoked what Douglass labeled “base accusations” from “maligners” throughout the subsequent summer. He finally agreed to present a detailed
Y7870-Douglass.indb 203
9/1/21 4:16 PM
204
THE COLORED EXODUS
explanation of his position at the annual meeting of the American Social Science Association, scheduled for September in Saratoga, New York. Douglass failed to appear to deliver that address, but allowed it to be published nonetheless. Two years later in his third autobiography, Life and Times of Frederick Douglass, he was still laboring to defend his reputation from criticism from other leading African Americans in regard to the Exodus. New York Times, 5 May 1879; Douglass to Blanche K. Bruce, 25 August 1879, General Correspondence File, reel 3, frames 366–67, FD Papers, DLC; Douglass, “The Negro Exodus from the Colored States,” Journal of Social Science, 11:1–21 (May 1880); Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 5:510–33, ser. 2, 3:335–44; Nell Irvin Painter, Exodusters: Black Migration to Kansas after Reconstruction (New York, 1992), 7–10, 184–201, 247–50; Robert G. Athearn, In Search of Canaan: Black Migration to Kansas, 1879–80 (Lawrence, Kans., 1978), 233–38. Editor of the National View:1 Sir: I cheerfully accept your offer of a limited space in your columns, in which to state the grounds of my opposition to the so called colored exodus.2 I am, briefly, opposed to that movement, because it is not the proper solution of the Southern question. That question will not be solved and cannot be solved until the constitutional provisions guaranteeing equal rights shall be peacefully executed in every State of the Union, South as well as North. I am opposed to this exodus, because it is a wretched substitute for the fulfillment of the national obligations by which the Government is held and firmly bound to protect every American citizen, of whatever color, upon any and every part of the American domain. I am opposed to this exodus, because it is an untimely concession to the idea that colored people and white people cannot live together in peace and prosperity unless the whites are a majority, and control the Legislation and hold the offices of the State. I am opposed to this exodus because it will cast upon the people of Kansas and other Northern States a multitude of deluded, hungry, homeless, naked, and destitute people to be supported in a large measure by alms. I am opposed to this exodus, because it will enable our political adversaries to make successful appeals to popular prejudice, (as in the case of the Chinese,)3 on the ground these people, so ignorant and helpless, have been imported for the purpose of making
Y7870-Douglass.indb 204
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLORED EXODUS
205
the North solid by out-voting intelligent white Northern citizens. I am opposed to this exodus, because rolling stones gather no moss, and I agree with Emerson, that the men who made Rome, or any other locality worth going to see staid there. There is in my judgment no part of the U. S. where an industrious and intelligent colored man can serve his race more wisely and efficiently than upon the soil where he was born and reared and is known. I am opposed to this exodus, because I see in it a tendency to convert colored laboring men into traveling tramps, first going North because they are persecuted, and then returning South because they have been deceived and disappointed in their expectations: who will excite against themselves and against our whole race an increased measure of popular contempt and scorn. I am opposed to this exodus, because I believe that the condition of existence in the Southern States are steadily improving, and that the colored man there will ultimately realize the fullest measure of liberty and equality accorded and secured in any section of our country. It is all nonsense (and perhaps something worse) and almost beneath contempt to compare the evils (great as they are) from which the colored man is now fleeing to the North, with those endured by colored men in the time of slavery. The men who make this comparison with a view to convict me of inconsistency know that there is nothing analogous in the two situations. There the black man was a chattel; now he is a man and a man among men. Then the black man was a slave: now he is a free man. Then the black man had no legal or constitutional rights which anybody was bound to respect; now he has all the legal and constitutional rights which are guaranteed to the most exalted citizen of the republic. It is true that these rights have been in many instances cloven down by violence, and that for the present the Constitution is inoperative: but shall we, who have borne so many hardships and outrages and seen so many changes in our favor, now throw up the sponge, abandon our vantage ground of possession, which is nine points of the law, and go among strangers in pursuit of homes in a cold and uncongenial climate, rather than remain on the soil of our birth, where we may live down persecution and oppression. If there is any part of the U. S. to which the negro has a stronger claim for peaceful residence than any other, that part is that lying south of Mason and Dixon’s line.4 Whatever the South is in point of wealth and civilization the negro has made her. His labor has converted the Southern wilderness into fruitful fields, and dotted them about with comfortable homes. His arm has leveled her forest, extracted the stumps, reclaimed her waste places, graded her roads, supported her commerce, developed her resources: in
Y7870-Douglass.indb 205
9/1/21 4:16 PM
206
THE COLORED EXODUS
a word tilled her soil with his hard hands moistened with sweat, and enriched it with his blood, and has a claim to remain on her soil against all comers. Armed as the negro is now, with legal and constitutional guarantees, and being the muscular and laboring arm of the South, I cannot yet believe that with these advantages he is so destitute of manual power, that he cannot make living terms with those who want his labor, and who must have it or accept poverty and ruin instead. My counsel to him, therefore, is to bide his time to labor and wait, in the full assurance time and events will sooner or later, establish his rights in the South upon enduring foundations. I have seen many attempts to lash colored men into schemes of emigration. I am old enough to remember the Haytian emigration scheme fifty-our years ago;5 another to the British West Indies forty years ago;6 another still to Central America sixteen years ago;7 and they only served to unsettle the minds of the colored people, deranging their plans of enterprise for home improvements, and were transient, as I believe this one will be. The hundreds may go, but the millions will stay behind, and will finally have their wisdom in so doing rewarded with peace and prosperity. FREDERICK DOUGLASS 1. Lee Crandall (1832–1926) was the editor of the National View, the official newspaper of the Greenback Labor party, which was published in Washington, D.C., from 1879 until 1888. A native of New York, Crandall lived in New Orleans at the start of the Civil War and served as an officer in the Confederate Army until he was captured at the Battle of Mine Creek, Kansas, in October 1864. After the war, he lived in Philadelphia, where he was a branch manager of the New York Graphic. By 1878, he was the secretary of the Pennsylvania Greenback Labor party—the same office he held for the national party during most of his tenure as editor of the National View. Crandall then moved to Arizona, where he engaged in copper and gold mining; in 1901, he was elected president of the Confederate Mining Company. In 1914, he was appointed deputy collector of internal revenue for Washington, D.C. During his twelve years of federal employment, Crandall was a prominent figure in the city because of his leadership roles in Confederate veterans’ activities. New York Times, 4 May, 14 July 1879, 7 August 1880; Washington Post, 2 March 1919, 4 June 1923, 21 December 1924; Atlanta Constitution, 12 September 1926; N. W. Ayer and Son, N. W. Ayer & Son’s American Newspaper Annual: Containing a Catalogue of American Newspapers, a List of All Newspapers of the United States and Canada, 1880 (Philadelphia, 1880), 94; “Col. Lee Crandall, Pres., Confederate Mining Co.,” Confederate Veteran, 10:88 (January 1902); Mark A. Lause, The Civil War’s Last Campaign: James B. Weaver, the Greenback-Labor Party, and the Politics of Race and Section (Lanham, Md., 2001), 56; “Lee Crandall: Colonel, Confederate States of America Army,” Arlington National Cemetery Website (online). 2. A number of prominent black leaders and politicians, including James E. O’Hara, Isaiah C. Wears, B. F. Watson, and Senator Blanche Kelso Bruce, agreed with Douglass’s views. Painter, Exodusters, 184–201, 247–50; Athearn, In Search of Canaan, 233–38. 3. White citizens of the United States had demonstrated a long history of anti-Chinese prejudice before immigrants from China began arriving in large numbers during the California Gold Rush of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 206
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLORED EXODUS
207
1849–50. Americans from nearly all classes and regions considered the Chinese utterly devoid of religion, morality, or hygiene, and popular print culture commonly depicted them as a subhuman species, usually as insects or rodents. Despite their intense animosity to Chinese culture, white Americans of the Civil War era nevertheless agreed that Chinese workers were industrious, persevering, frugal, and willing to endure hardship without complaint—qualities admired by all except those competing with Chinese immigrants in the rapidly expanding unskilled wage labor market. Accordingly, the fifteen years following 1865 were marked by lavish schemes by entrepreneurs for the mass importation of indentured Chinese workers to operate Southern plantations, Western mines, and Eastern factories. Vociferous and sometimes violent efforts were organized by white laborers to enact discriminatory labor and housing laws and to restrict Chinese immigration. Most large-scale Chinese labor importation initiatives proved fleeting and ineffective; the total number of Chinese immigrant laborers increased steadily throughout the period. In 1882, after nearly a decade of economic depression and labor unrest, Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which denied Chinese laborers entry into the United States for a period of ten years. The act was strengthened and renewed in 1892 and made permanent in 1902. In 1943, it was repealed by Congress to improve America’s relations with the Nationalist Chinese government, with which it was allied in the war against Japan. New York Times, 5 October 1873, 7 April 1876, 1 March 1877; Andrew Gyory, Closing the Gate: Race, Politics, and the Chinese Exclusion Act (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1998), 3–16, 254–59; Rosanne Currarino, The Labor Question in America: Economic Democracy in the Gilded Age (Urbana, Ill., 2011), 36–59. 4. Disputes between Pennsylvania to the North and Maryland and Virginia to the South were resolved when the English surveyors Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon determined and marked the precise borders between these colonies in 1763–67. Hubertis M. Cummings, The Mason and Dixon Line: Story for a Bicentenary, 1763–1963 (Harrisburg, Pa., 1962). 5. In 1824, the Haitian Jean-Pierre Boyer began working with a group of black and white New York ministers, including Samuel Cornish, Peter Williams, and Loring D. Dewey, to recruit African American migrants to the Caribbean republic. Support grew in other cities, such as Philadelphia, where Richard Allen and James Forten endorsed the effort. Many supporters, who viewed this as a combination of religious and political missionary work, agreed with the white abolitionist Benjamin Lundy that the elevation of Haiti would aid antislavery efforts in the United States. As many as 6,000 traveled to Haiti to settle in rural colonies, but financial difficulties forced Boyer to cease subsidizing the migration. By the 1840s, all immigrants had abandoned the rural plantations, with most returning to the United States and the remainder resettling in Haitian cities. Chris Dixon, African America and Haiti: Emigration and Black Nationalism in the Nineteenth Century (Westport, Conn., 2000), 34–47; Floyd J. Miller, The Search for a Black Nationality: Black Emigration and Colonization, 1787–1863 (Urbana, Ill., 1975), 76–80. 6. In the 1830s, the African American minister Lewis Woodson of Pittsburgh supported black migration from the United States to British colonies in Canada and the West Indies as a means of escaping racial prejudices. In 1839, sugar planters on Trinidad attempted to recruit free African Americans to replace their former slaves as workers. This effort found support in African American communities, from Baltimore to Boston. But the largely urban migrants soon began sending home complaints about working conditions in the Caribbean, and no more than a few hundred ever settled there. Dixon, African America and Haiti, 64; Miller, Search for a Black Nationality, 101, 114. 7. In the late 1850s, African American leaders such as H. Ford Douglass, Henry Highland Garnet, and J. D. Harris had advanced proposals for large-scale immigration to Central America. Harris corresponded with the Missouri Republican politician Francis J. Blair, Jr., who had advocated for such colonization in congressional speeches as a means of spreading American influence in the isthmus. In 1862, Blair persuaded Congress to appropriate $600,000 for President Abraham Lincoln to begin colonizing African Americans in Central America. Lincoln explored proposals to create a colony on the island of Chiriqui, off the coast of Honduras, and appointed Senator Samuel C. Pomeroy of Kansas to recruit settlers. Some historians argue that Lincoln advocated colonization as a means of making his Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation more politically palatable. By 1863, Lincoln
Y7870-Douglass.indb 207
9/1/21 4:16 PM
208
NEGROES, MONGOLS AND HEBREWS
had abandoned the Chiriqui plan to briefly focus on an effort to colonize American blacks on Haiti’s Vache Island. The following year, surviving settlers were brought home from the island, and Lincoln lost all further interest in colonization programs. Robert E. May, Slavery, Race, and Conquest in the Tropics: Lincoln, Douglas, and the Future of Latin America (New York, 2013), 183–84; Dixon, African America and Haiti, 112–14, 153–57; Michael Vorenberg, “Abraham Lincoln and the Politics of Black Colonization,” Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association, 14:26–45 (Summer 1993).
NEGROES, MONGOLS AND HEBREWS (1880) ChR, 23 December 1880.
The nineteenth century was plagued with discrimination against religious and racial minorities. Douglass often compared the plight of black slaves to that of the Jews. He likewise addressed the oppression of Chinese immigrants, who first came to America in large groups during the California Gold Rush of the late 1840s. In the pages of the African Methodist Episcopal Church’s Christian Recorder, Douglass addressed these groups and questioned why those of a Christian nation persecuted and perpetuated violence against them. Along with the Christian Recorder, the A.M.E. Church had several publications. Its first, the A.M.E. Magazine, began in 1841 and ended in 1848. The church then purchased the Mystery, run by the black leader Martin Delany, and renamed it the Christian Herald. In 1852, the publication was renamed the Christian Recorder and moved from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia, where it continued to be published until 1960. From 1868 to 1884, Benjamin Tucker Tanner was its editor. William Seraile, Fire in His Heart: Bishop Benjamin Tucker Tanner and the A.M.E. Church (1998; Knoxville, Tenn., 2000), 20, 100.
Very opposite are the characters and attainments of these three races of men, and yet they strongly resemble each other in one important particular, in the Christian virtue of peace. They are of all the races of men the most patient and forbearing under wrong and violence. The Indian with his tomahawk and scalping-knife spurns the yoke of slavery and dies in his tracks, preferring to go into the presence of the Great Spirit with the tyrant’s blood upon his hands to meekly bowing his neck to the yoke of a hateful bondage. The Celt, proud, impetuous and reckless, is ready for the open field of war when he is strong, and for assassination when he
Y7870-Douglass.indb 208
9/1/21 4:16 PM
208
NEGROES, MONGOLS AND HEBREWS
had abandoned the Chiriqui plan to briefly focus on an effort to colonize American blacks on Haiti’s Vache Island. The following year, surviving settlers were brought home from the island, and Lincoln lost all further interest in colonization programs. Robert E. May, Slavery, Race, and Conquest in the Tropics: Lincoln, Douglas, and the Future of Latin America (New York, 2013), 183–84; Dixon, African America and Haiti, 112–14, 153–57; Michael Vorenberg, “Abraham Lincoln and the Politics of Black Colonization,” Journal of the Abraham Lincoln Association, 14:26–45 (Summer 1993).
NEGROES, MONGOLS AND HEBREWS (1880) ChR, 23 December 1880.
The nineteenth century was plagued with discrimination against religious and racial minorities. Douglass often compared the plight of black slaves to that of the Jews. He likewise addressed the oppression of Chinese immigrants, who first came to America in large groups during the California Gold Rush of the late 1840s. In the pages of the African Methodist Episcopal Church’s Christian Recorder, Douglass addressed these groups and questioned why those of a Christian nation persecuted and perpetuated violence against them. Along with the Christian Recorder, the A.M.E. Church had several publications. Its first, the A.M.E. Magazine, began in 1841 and ended in 1848. The church then purchased the Mystery, run by the black leader Martin Delany, and renamed it the Christian Herald. In 1852, the publication was renamed the Christian Recorder and moved from Pittsburgh to Philadelphia, where it continued to be published until 1960. From 1868 to 1884, Benjamin Tucker Tanner was its editor. William Seraile, Fire in His Heart: Bishop Benjamin Tucker Tanner and the A.M.E. Church (1998; Knoxville, Tenn., 2000), 20, 100.
Very opposite are the characters and attainments of these three races of men, and yet they strongly resemble each other in one important particular, in the Christian virtue of peace. They are of all the races of men the most patient and forbearing under wrong and violence. The Indian with his tomahawk and scalping-knife spurns the yoke of slavery and dies in his tracks, preferring to go into the presence of the Great Spirit with the tyrant’s blood upon his hands to meekly bowing his neck to the yoke of a hateful bondage. The Celt, proud, impetuous and reckless, is ready for the open field of war when he is strong, and for assassination when he
Y7870-Douglass.indb 208
9/1/21 4:16 PM
NEGROES, MONGOLS AND HEBREWS
209
is weak, and most other races are like them in this respect.1 Far down the ages, a thousand years before the Christian era, amid the learning and religions of Egypt, among the people who taught the world to propitiate the gods by burnt-offering and sacrifices, the Negroes and the Hebrews toiled together as slaves under the yoke of a hateful bondage, after fainting under burdens and dying under the lash.2 Today three races, Negroes, Hebrews and Mongols, are the special objects of oppression persecution and wrong, in the eyes of Christian nations. Why is this? Why is the Mongol murdered in California,3 the Negro in Mississippi,4 and the Jew persecuted and oppressed in Europe?5 Can it be because these people conform their lives more closely to Christian precepts and examples than do the so-called Christian people among whom their lot is cast? Is the Negro and the Jew too Christ-like? Or are the people who persecute them hypocrites and liars when they claim to be the followers of Christ? The Jew is said to be hated in Europe because he is rich, the Negro in America because he is poor. The Chinese is hated because he is industrious and the Negro because he is indolent. But I will not pursue the subject. I leave it to you, Dr. Tanner,6 to answer the questions here suggested or leave them to your respected readers as you may think best. Please accept my kind congratulations and best wishes for the success of your effort to lift up and defend the rights of our oppressed people at all points. 1. Some social historians have characterized traditional Celtic culture in a way that closely resembles that of the antebellum South. Just as the English found Celtic customs barbaric, the North criticized the South for slavery and its rather unindustrialized state. The Celts were characterized as a people who enjoyed drinking, fighting, hunting, and leisure. They preferred to enjoy the gaieties of life rather than work in the pursuit of riches. In this view, the Celts were portrayed as characteristically violent. Proud and argumentative, they were ready to duel anyone who challenged their honor. Warfare, in its many forms, was extremely important to the Celtic culture. In Scotland, clansmen were always armed when they traveled, and the amount and the scale of violence in the country were unknown in England. Similarly, Southerners in the United States, influenced by the Celtic culture, were quicker to resort to violence than Northerners, especially when honor was in question. Generally, the Celts were agrarian, favored leisure to work, and often turned to violence in order to solve their issues. Grady McWhiney, Cracker Culture: Celtic Ways in the Old South (Tuscaloosa, Ala., 1988); Nora Chadwick, The Celts (1971; New York, 1991), 131. 2. Exod. 1:8–14. 3. The first Chinese immigrants are thought to have entered California in the late 1840s with the discovery of gold. Like any frontier state, California faced a shortage of labor, and Chinese workers helped fill this void. But as more and more Chinese laborers poured into California, they were met with economic, moral, and political resistance. While some considered the Chinese a “mongrel” race, the economic argument against the Chinese immigrants was the most prevalent. As a whole, Chinese men and women worked for cheaper wages, and native-born Americans, along with European immigrants, claimed that they could not compete with them. Anti-Chinese groups sprouted not only in California but also in places such as Boston and New York. Many critics drew analogies to slavery because California whites claimed they could not compete with the Chinese willingness to work for
Y7870-Douglass.indb 209
9/1/21 4:16 PM
210
NEGROES, MONGOLS AND HEBREWS
low wages, just as free labor could not survive in the American South during the antebellum period in competition with slaves. There were several mob attacks on Chinese immigrants in California, the first large-scale one occurring in Los Angeles in October 1871, in which eighteen people were killed. Anti-Chinese sentiment in California reached a climax in 1878, when delegates met to draft a new state constitution. Although the convention failed to adopt a section that would have prohibited further Chinese immigration to California, the constitution still contained discriminatory acts toward the Chinese. Delegates did pass a law that fined businesses and corporations for hiring Chinese workers, although the U.S. Circuit Court declared it unconstitutional two weeks later. Elmer Clarence Sandmeyer, The Anti-Chinese Movement in California (1939; Champaign, Ill., 1991), 11–15, 25–31, 48–57, 67–73; Stuart Creighton Miller, The Unwelcome Immigrant: The American Image of the Chinese, 1785–1882 (1969; Berkeley, Calif., 1974), 7–14; Alexander Saxton, The Indispensable Enemy: Labor and the Anti-Chinese Movement in California (1971; Berkeley, Calif., 1995), 1–7, 18. 4. During the 1870s, conservative whites in Mississippi became increasingly discontented with Reconstruction policies and desired to return the Democrats to power, which would restore the racial order of the antebellum period. Political “White Men’s Clubs” were established across the state to unite white voters against not only the Republican-led Reconstruction, but also black voters. By 1875, many had turned to a program of violence to intimidate blacks from voting for the Republican party. Race riots broke out across the state, and the Ku Klux Klan and similar groups ran rampant, harassing and killing black—and white—Republicans. The organized violence and intimidation was known as the “Mississippi Plan,” and it allowed the Democrats to successfully sweep the state in the 1875 election. During the 1876 presidential election, other Southern states—most notably South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida—implemented their own versions of the “Mississippi Plan” in order to defeat Republicans. After a close presidential campaign between the Republican Rutherford B. Hayes and the Democrat Samuel Tilden, a compromise was made whereby Hayes would be president as long as federal troops were withdrawn from the South. Reconstruction ended, but the violence and discrimination against blacks in the South, especially in Mississippi, raged on. Vernon Lane Wharton, The Negro in Mississippi, 1865–1890 (1947; New York, 1965), 181–85; Michael Newton, The Ku Klux Klan in Mississippi: A History (Jefferson, N.C., 2010), 12, 18–26; Ben Wyne, “Mississippi,” in Black America: A State-by-State Historical Encyclopedia, ed. Alton Hornsby, Jr. (Santa Barbara, Calif., 2011), 432–33. 5. The persecution of Jews in Europe has existed for many centuries, varying in intensity and volume. By the nineteenth century, anti-Semitism had become deep rooted, and evidence of violence against Jews arose in universities, the government, and churches as well as the streets. During this time period, anti-Semitic literature became widespread, and it increasingly described the Jewish people as thieves, cheats, and degenerates. Journalists such as the German Wilhelm Marr invented a form of anti-Semitism that appealed to feelings of envy and frustration, claiming that the Jews were a minority growing in wealth and power while the majority suffered. In countries like Russia, sporadic pogroms or violent riots erupted against the Jews, and racism and discrimination escalated in France and Austria-Hungary. In 1880, organized gangs in Berlin attacked Jews in the street, chased them from cafés, and broke the windows of their stores. In the German provinces, several synagogues were set on fire. Although Jews had experienced violence and persecution in Europe throughout history, anti-Semitism flourished in the late nineteenth century with a virulence that would escalate to unimaginable heights. Vamberto Morais, A Short History of Anti-Semitism (New York, 1976), 173–74, 183; Léon Poliakov, The History of Anti-Semitism, 4 vols. (New York, 1985), 4:17–21; Rachel Jakobowicz, Jews and Gentiles: Anti-Semitism and Jewish Assimilation in German Literary Life in the Early 19th Century (New York, 1992), 6, 23; David Aberbach, The European Jews, Patriotism, and the Liberal State, 1789–1939: A Study of Literature and Social Psychology (New York, 2013), 1, 3, 9, 28. 6. Benjamin Tucker Tanner (1835–1923), an African Methodist Episcopal bishop, was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. While studying at Avery College in Allegheny City (now Pittsburgh) from 1852 to 1857, he supported himself as a part-time barber. In 1856, he converted to Methodism,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 210
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
211
received a license to preach, and then trained at the Western Theological Seminary, in Allegheny City, Pennsylvania. In 1860, he was ordained both deacon and elder in the A.M.E. Church. In 1858, he married Sarah Elizabeth Miller, and together they had seven children, one of which was Henry Ossawa Turner, who became a well-known painter. During the Civil War, Tanner ministered to freedmen in the U.S. Navy and founded the Alexander Mission in Washington, D.C. He next served as a minister to churches in Georgetown and Baltimore, and then became principal of the A.M.E. school in Frederick, Maryland. In 1868, he was appointed chief secretary of the A.M.E. General Conference and editor of its journal, the Christian Recorder, continuing in the latter role for sixteen years. In 1884, he helped found the AME Church Review quarterly and served as its first editor. The General Conference elected him bishop in 1888, and he traveled to Canada, Bermuda, and the West Indies to oversee A.M.E. activities. Some of his publications include An Apology for African Methodism (1867), The Negro’s Origin; or, Is He Cursed of God? (1869), and Theological Lectures (1894). Seraile, Benjamin Tucker Tanner; DAB, 18:296; ANB (online).
THE COLOR LINE (1881) North American Review, 132:566–77 (1 June 1881).
Founded in Boston in 1815 by William Tudor and members of the Anthology Club, the North American Review was the first literary magazine in the United States and continues to be the longestrunning periodical of its kind. Originally published bimonthly, it later became a quarterly publication and included poetry, fiction, and nonfiction as well as articles regarding social, political, and cultural subjects. Douglass frequently contributed, often writing about racial and political issues. In this 1881 article, he discusses the theory of instinctive racial prejudice as an inherent part of human nature. He presents seven propositions discounting this theory and argues that prejudice is based more on social standing and class discrimination than on color. Responses to the article varied by region. A Kansas newspaper stated the article was “written with dignity” and “indignant eloquence.” Alternatively, a Southern newspaper stated “that [color] line was here before Mr. Douglass and it will remain here after he is gone—unless he carries the colored people away with him.” Topeka Weekly Commonwealth, 9 June 1881; Goldsboro (N.C.) Star, 25 June 1881; “History,” NAR (online).
FEW evils are less accessible to the force of reason, or more tenacious of life and power, than a long-standing prejudice. It is a moral disorder,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 211
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
211
received a license to preach, and then trained at the Western Theological Seminary, in Allegheny City, Pennsylvania. In 1860, he was ordained both deacon and elder in the A.M.E. Church. In 1858, he married Sarah Elizabeth Miller, and together they had seven children, one of which was Henry Ossawa Turner, who became a well-known painter. During the Civil War, Tanner ministered to freedmen in the U.S. Navy and founded the Alexander Mission in Washington, D.C. He next served as a minister to churches in Georgetown and Baltimore, and then became principal of the A.M.E. school in Frederick, Maryland. In 1868, he was appointed chief secretary of the A.M.E. General Conference and editor of its journal, the Christian Recorder, continuing in the latter role for sixteen years. In 1884, he helped found the AME Church Review quarterly and served as its first editor. The General Conference elected him bishop in 1888, and he traveled to Canada, Bermuda, and the West Indies to oversee A.M.E. activities. Some of his publications include An Apology for African Methodism (1867), The Negro’s Origin; or, Is He Cursed of God? (1869), and Theological Lectures (1894). Seraile, Benjamin Tucker Tanner; DAB, 18:296; ANB (online).
THE COLOR LINE (1881) North American Review, 132:566–77 (1 June 1881).
Founded in Boston in 1815 by William Tudor and members of the Anthology Club, the North American Review was the first literary magazine in the United States and continues to be the longestrunning periodical of its kind. Originally published bimonthly, it later became a quarterly publication and included poetry, fiction, and nonfiction as well as articles regarding social, political, and cultural subjects. Douglass frequently contributed, often writing about racial and political issues. In this 1881 article, he discusses the theory of instinctive racial prejudice as an inherent part of human nature. He presents seven propositions discounting this theory and argues that prejudice is based more on social standing and class discrimination than on color. Responses to the article varied by region. A Kansas newspaper stated the article was “written with dignity” and “indignant eloquence.” Alternatively, a Southern newspaper stated “that [color] line was here before Mr. Douglass and it will remain here after he is gone—unless he carries the colored people away with him.” Topeka Weekly Commonwealth, 9 June 1881; Goldsboro (N.C.) Star, 25 June 1881; “History,” NAR (online).
FEW evils are less accessible to the force of reason, or more tenacious of life and power, than a long-standing prejudice. It is a moral disorder,
Y7870-Douglass.indb 211
9/1/21 4:16 PM
212
THE COLOR LINE
which creates the conditions necessary to its own existence, and fortifies itself by refusing all contradiction. It paints a hateful picture according to its own diseased imagination, and distorts the features of the fancied original to suit the portrait. As those who believe in the visibility of ghosts can easily see them, so it is always easy to see repulsive qualities in those we despise and hate. Prejudice of race has at some time in their history afflicted all nations. “I am more holy than thou”1 is the boast of races, as well as that of the Pharisee. Long after the Norman invasion and the decline of Norman power, long after the sturdy Saxon had shaken off the dust of his humiliation and was grandly asserting his great qualities in all directions, the descendants of the invaders continued to regard their Saxon brothers as made of coarser clay than themselves, and were not well pleased when one of the former subject race came between the sun and their nobility. Having seen the Saxon a menial, a hostler, and a common drudge, oppressed and dejected for centuries, it was easy to invest him with all sorts of odious peculiarities, and to deny him all manly predicates.2 Though eight hundred years have passed away since Norman power entered England, and the Saxon has for centuries been giving his learning, his literature, his language, and his laws to the world more successfully than any other people on the globe, men in that country still boast their Norman origin and Norman perfections. This superstition of former greatness serves to fill out the shriveled sides of a meaningless race-pride which holds over after its power has vanished. With a very different lesson from the one this paper is designed to impress, the great Daniel Webster once told the people of Massachusetts (whose prejudices in the particular instance referred to were right) that they “had conquered the seas, and had conquered the land,” but that “it remained for them to conquer their prejudices.”3 At one time we are told that the people in some of the towns of Yorkshire cherished a prejudice so strong and violent against strangers and foreigners that one who ventured to pass through their streets would be pelted with stones.4 Of all the races and varieties of men which have suffered from this feeling, the colored people of this country have endured most. They can resort to no disguises which will enable them to escape its deadly aim. They carry in front the evidence which marks them for persecution. They stand at the extreme point of difference from the Caucasian race, and their African origin can be instantly recognized, though they may be several removes from the typical African race. They may remonstrate like
Y7870-Douglass.indb 212
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
213
Shylock—“Hath not a Jew eyes? hath not a Jew hands, organs, dimensions, senses, affections, passions? fed with the same food, hurt with the same weapons, subject to the same diseases, healed by the same means, warmed and cooled by the same summer and winter, as a Christian is?”5—but such eloquence is unavailing. They are negroes—and that is enough, in the eye of this unreasoning prejudice, to justify indignity and violence. In nearly every department of American life they are confronted by this insidious influence. It fills the air. It meets them at the workshop and factory, when they apply for work. It meets them at the church, at the hotel, at the ballot-box, and worst of all, it meets them in the jury-box. Without crime or offense against law or gospel, the colored man is the Jean Valjean of American society.6 He has escaped from the galleys, and hence all presumptions are against him. The workshop denies him work, and the inn denies him shelter; the ballot-box a fair vote, and the jury-box a fair trial. He has ceased to be the slave of an individual, but has in some sense become the slave of society. He may not now be bought and sold like a beast in the market, but he is the trammeled victim of a prejudice, well calculated to repress his manly ambition, paralyze his energies, and make him a dejected and spiritless man, if not a sullen enemy to society, fit to prey upon life and property and to make trouble generally. When this evil spirit is judge, jury, and prosecutor, nothing less than overwhelming evidence is sufficient to overcome the force of unfavorable presumptions. Everything against the person with the hated color is promptly taken for granted; while everything in his favor is received with suspicion and doubt. A boy of this color is found in his bed tied, mutilated, and bleeding, when forthwith all ordinary experience is set aside, and he is presumed to have been guilty of the outrage upon himself; weeks and months he is kept on trial for the offense, and every effort is made to entangle the poor fellow in the confused meshes of expert testimony (the least trustworthy of all evidence). This same spirit, which promptly assumes everything against us, just as readily denies or explains away everything in our favor. We are not, as a race, even permitted to appropriate the virtues and achievements of our individual representatives. Manliness, capacity, learning, laudable ambition, heroic service, by any of our number, are easily placed to the credit of the superior race. One drop of Teutonic blood is enough to account for all good and great qualities occasionally coupled with a colored skin; and on the other hand, one drop of negro blood, though in the veins
Y7870-Douglass.indb 213
9/1/21 4:16 PM
214
THE COLOR LINE
of a man of Teutonic whiteness, is enough of which to predicate all offensive and ignoble qualities. In the presence of this spirit, if a crime is committed, and the criminal is not positively known, a suspicious-looking colored man is sure to have been seen in the neighborhood. If an unarmed colored man is shot down and dies in his tracks, a jury, under the influence of this spirit, does not hesitate to find the murdered man the real criminal, and the murderer innocent. Now let us examine this subject a little more closely. It is claimed that this wonder-working prejudice—this moral magic that can change virtue into vice, and innocence to crime; which makes the dead man the murderer, and holds the living homicide harmless—is a natural, instinctive, and invincible attribute of the white race, and one that cannot be eradicated; that even evolution itself cannot carry us beyond or above it. Alas for this poor suffering world (for four-fifths of mankind are colored), if this claim be true! In that case men are forever doomed to injustice, oppression, hate, and strife; and the religious sentiment of the world, with its grand idea of human brotherhood, its “peace on earth and good-will to men,”7 and its golden rule,8 must be voted a dream, a delusion, and a snare. But is this color prejudice the natural and inevitable thing it claims to be? If it is so, then it is utterly idle to write against it, preach, pray, or legislate against it, or pass constitutional amendments against it. Nature will have her course, and one might as well preach and pray to a horse against running, to a fish against swimming, or to a bird against flying. Fortunately, however, there is good ground for calling in question this high pretension of a vulgar and wicked prepossession. If I could talk with all of my white fellow-countrymen on this subject, I would say to them, in the language of Scripture: “Come and let us reason together.”9 Now, without being too elementary and formal, it may be stated here that there are at least seven points which candid men will be likely to admit, but which, if admitted, will prove fatal to the popular thought and practice of the times. First. If what we call prejudice against color be natural, i.e., a part of human nature itself, it follows that it must be co-extensive with human nature, and will and must manifest itself whenever and wherever the two races are brought into contact. It would not vary with either latitude, longitude, or altitude; but like fire and gunpowder, whenever brought together, there would be an explosion of contempt, aversion, and hatred. Secondly. If it can be shown that there is anywhere on the globe any considerable country where the contact of the African and the Caucasian
Y7870-Douglass.indb 214
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
215
is not distinguished by this explosion of race-wrath, there is reason to doubt that the prejudice is an ineradicable part of human nature. Thirdly. If this so-called natural, instinctive prejudice can be satisfactorily accounted for by facts and considerations wholly apart from the color features of the respective races, thus placing it among the things subject to human volition and control, we may venture to deny the claim set up for it in the name of human nature. Fourthly. If any considerable number of white people have overcome this prejudice in themselves, have cast it out as an unworthy sentiment, and have survived the operation, the fact shows that this prejudice is not at any rate a vital part of human nature, and may be eliminated from the race without harm. Fifthly. If this prejudice shall, after all, prove to be, in its essence and in its natural manifestation, simply a prejudice against condition, and not against race or color, and that it disappears when this or that condition is absent, then the argument drawn from the nature of the Caucasian race falls to the ground. Sixthly. If prejudice of race and color is only natural in the sense that ignorance, superstition, bigotry, and vice are natural, then it has no better defense than they, and should be despised and put away from human relations as an enemy to the peace, good order, and happiness of human society. Seventhly. If, still further, this aversion to the negro arises out of the fact that he is as we see him, poor, spiritless, ignorant, and degraded, then whatever is humane, noble, and superior, in the mind of the superior and more fortunate race, will desire that all arbitrary barriers against his manhood, intelligence, and elevation shall be removed, and a fair chance in the race of life be given him. The first of these propositions does not require discussion. It commends itself to the understanding at once. Natural qualities are common and universal, and do not change essentially on the mountain or in the valley. I come therefore to the second point—the existence of countries where this malignant prejudice, as we know it in America, does not prevail; where character, not color, is the passport to consideration; where the right of the black man to be a man, and a man among men, is not questioned; where he may, without offense, even presume to be a gentleman. That there are such countries in the world there is ample evidence. Intelligent and observing travelers, having no theory to support, men whose testimony would be received without question in respect of any
Y7870-Douglass.indb 215
9/1/21 4:16 PM
216
THE COLOR LINE
other matter, and should not be questioned in this, tell us that they find no color prejudice in Europe, except among Americans who reside there. In England and on the Continent, the colored man is no more an object of hate than any other person. He mingles with the multitude unquestioned, without offense given or received. During the two years which the writer spent abroad, though he was much in society, and was sometimes in the company of lords and ladies, he does not remember one word, look, or gesture that indicated the slightest aversion to him on account of color.10 His experience was not in this respect exceptional or singular. Messrs. Remond,11 Ward,12 Garnet,13 Brown,14 Pennington,15 Crummell,16 and Bruce,17 all of them colored, and some of them black, bear the same testimony. If what these gentlemen say (and it can be corroborated by a thousand witnesses) is true there is no prejudice against color in England, save as it is carried there by Americans—carried there as a moral disease from an infected country. It is American, not European; local, not general; limited, not universal, and must be ascribed to artificial conditions, and not to any fixed and universal law of nature. The third point is: Can this prejudice against color, as it is called, be accounted for by circumstances outside and independent of race or color? If it can be thus explained, an incubus may be removed from the breasts of both the white and the black people of this country, as well as from that large intermediate population which has sprung up between these alleged irreconcilable extremes. It will help us to see that it is not necessary that the Ethiopian shall change his skin, nor needful that the white man shall change the essential elements of his nature, in order that mutual respect and consideration may exist between the two races. Now it is easy to explain the conditions outside of race or color from which may spring feelings akin to those which we call prejudice. A man without the ability or the disposition to pay a just debt does not feel at ease in the presence of his creditor. He does not want to meet him on the street, or in the market-place. Such meeting makes him uncomfortable. He would rather find fault with the bill than pay the debt, and the creditor himself will soon develop in the eyes of the debtor qualities not altogether to his taste. Some one has well said, we may easily forgive those who injure us, but it is hard to forgive those whom we injure. The greatest injury this side of death, which one human being can inflict on another, is to enslave him, to blot out his personality, degrade his manhood, and sink him to the condition of a beast of burden; and just this has been done here during more than two centuries. No other people under heaven, of whatever type or
Y7870-Douglass.indb 216
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
217
endowments, could have been so enslaved without falling into contempt and scorn on the part of those enslaving them. Their slavery would itself stamp them with odious features, and give their oppressors arguments in favor of oppression. Besides the long years of wrong and injury inflicted upon the colored race in this country, and the effect of these wrongs upon that race, morally, intellectually, and physically, corrupting their morals, darkening their minds, and twisting their bodies and limbs out of all approach to symmetry, there has been a mountain of gold—uncounted millions of dollars—resting upon them with crushing weight. During all the years of their bondage, the slave master had a direct interest in discrediting the personality of those he held as property. Every man who had a thousand dollars so invested had a thousand reasons for painting the black man as fit only for slavery. Having made him the companion of horses and mules, he naturally sought to justify himself by assuming that the negro was not much better than a mule. The holders of twenty hundred million dollars’ worth of property in human chattels procured the means of influencing press, pulpit, and politician, and through these instrumentalities they belittled our virtues and magnified our vices, and have made us odious in the eyes of the world. Slavery had the power at one time to make and unmake Presidents, to construe the law, dictate the policy, set the fashion in national manners and customs, interpret the Bible, and control the church; and, naturally enough, the old masters set themselves up as much too high as they set the manhood of the negro too low. Out of the depths of slavery has come this prejudice and this color line. It is broad enough and black enough to explain all the malign influences which assail the newly emancipated millions to-day. In reply to this argument it will perhaps be said that the negro has no slavery now to contend with, and that having been free during the last sixteen years, he ought by this time have contradicted the degrading qualities which slavery formerly ascribed to him. All very true as to the letter, but utterly false as to the spirit. Slavery is indeed gone, but its shadow still lingers over the country and poisons more or less the moral atmosphere of all sections of the republic. The money motive for assailing the negro which slavery represented is indeed absent, but love of power and dominion, strengthened by two centuries of irresponsible power, still remains. Having now shown how slavery created and sustained this prejudice against race and color, and the powerful motive for its creation, the other four points made against it need not be discussed in detail and at length, but may only be referred to in a general way.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 217
9/1/21 4:16 PM
218
THE COLOR LINE
If what is called the instinctive aversion of the white race for the colored, when analyzed, is seen to be the same as that which men feel or have felt toward other objects wholly apart from color; if it should be the same as that sometimes exhibited by the haughty and rich to the humble and poor, the same as the Brahmin feels toward the lower caste,18 the same as the Norman felt toward the Saxon, the same as that cherished by the Turk against Christians,19 the same as Christians have felt toward the Jews,20 the same as that which murders a Christian in Wallachia,21 calls him a “dog” in Constantinople, oppresses and persecutes a Jew in Berlin, hunts down a socialist in St. Petersburg, drives a Hebrew from an hotel at Saratoga, that scorns the Irishman in London,22 the same as Catholics once felt for Protestants, the same as that which insults, abuses, and kills the Chinaman on the Pacific slope23—then may we well enough affirm that this prejudice really has nothing whatever to do with race or color, and that it has its motive and mainspring in some other source with which the mere facts of color and race have nothing to do. After all, some very well informed and very well meaning people will read what I have now said, and what seems to me so just and reasonable, and will still insist that the color of the negro has something to do with the feeling entertained toward him; that the white man naturally shudders at the thought of contact with one who is black—that the impulse is one which he can neither resist nor control. Let us see if this conclusion is a sound one. An argument is unsound when it proves too little or too much, or when it proves nothing. If color is an offense, it is so, entirely apart from the manhood it envelops. There must be something in color of itself to kindle rage and inflame hate, and render the white man generally uncomfortable. If the white man were really so constituted that color were, in itself, a torment to him, this grand old earth of ours would be no place for him. Colored objects confront him here at every point of the compass. If he should shrink and shudder every time he sees anything dark, he would have little time for anything else. He would require a colorless world to live in—a world where flowers, fields, and floods should all be of snowy whiteness; where rivers, lakes, and oceans should all be white; where islands, capes, and continents should all be white; where all the men, and women, and children should be white; where all the fish of the sea, all the birds of the air, all the “cattle upon a thousand hills,”24 should be white; where the heavens above and the earth beneath should be white, and where day and night should not be divided by light and darkness, but the world should be one eternal scene of light. In such a white world, the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 218
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
219
entrance of a black man would be hailed with joy by the inhabitants. Anybody or anything would be welcome that would break the oppressive and tormenting monotony of the all-prevailing white. In the abstract, there is no prejudice against color. No man shrinks from another because he is clothed in a suit of black, nor offended with his boots because they are black. We are told by those who have resided there that a white man in Africa comes to think that ebony is about the proper color for man. Good old Thomas Whitson25—a noble old Quaker—a man of rather odd appearance—used to say that even he would be handsome if he could change public opinion. Aside from the curious contrast to himself, the white child feels nothing on the first site of a colored man. Curiosity is the only feeling. The office of color in the color line is a very plain and subordinate one. It simply advertises the objects of oppression, insult, and persecution. It is not the maddening liquor, but the black letters on the sign telling the world where it may be had. It is not the hated Quaker, but the broad brim and the plain coat. It is not the hateful Cain, but the mark by which he was known.26 The color is innocent enough, but things with which it is coupled make it hated. Slavery, ignorance, stupidity, servility, poverty, dependence, are undesirable conditions. When these shall cease to be coupled with color, there will be no color line drawn. It may help in this direction to observe a few of the inconsistencies of the color-line feeling, for it is neither uniform in its operations nor consistent in its principles. Its contradictions in the latter respect would be amusing if the feeling itself were not so deserving of unqualified abhorrence. Our Californian brothers, of Hibernian descent, hate the Chinaman, and kill him, and when asked why they do so, their answer is that a Chinaman is so industrious he will do all the work, and can live by wages upon which other people would starve.27 When the same people and others are asked why they hate the colored people, the answer is that they are indolent and wasteful, and cannot take care of themselves. Statesmen of the South will tell you that the negro is too ignorant and stupid properly to exercise the elective franchise, and yet his greatest offense is that he acts with the only party intelligent enough in the eyes of the nation to legislate for the country. In one breath they tell us that the negro is so weak in intellect, and so destitute of manhood, that he is but the echo of designing white men, and yet in another they will virtually tell you that the negro is so clear in his moral perceptions, so firm in purpose, so steadfast in his convictions, that he cannot be persuaded by arguments or intimidated by threats, and that nothing but the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 219
9/1/21 4:16 PM
220
THE COLOR LINE
shot-gun can restrain him from voting for the men and measures he approves. They shrink back in horror from contact with the negro as a man and a gentleman, but like him very well as a barber, waiter, coachman, or cook. As a slave, he could ride anywhere, side by side with his white master, but as a freeman, he must be thrust into the smoking car. As a slave, he could go into the first cabin; as a freeman, he was not allowed abaft the wheel. Formerly it was said he was incapable of learning, and at the same time it was a crime against the State for any man to teach him to read. To-day he is said to be originally and permanently inferior to the white race and yet wild apprehensions are expressed lest six millions of this inferior race will somehow or other manage to rule over thirty-five millions of the superior race.28 If inconsistency can prove the hollowness of anything, certainly the emptiness of this pretense that color has any terrors is easily shown. The trouble is that most men, and especially mean men, want to have something under them. The rich man would have the poor man, the white would have the black, the Irish would have the negro, and the negro must have a dog, if he can get nothing higher in the scale of intelligence to dominate. This feeling is one of the vanities which enlightenment will dispel. A good but simple-minded Abolitionist said to me that he was not ashamed to walk with me down Broadway arm-in-arm in open daylight, and evidently thought he was saying something that must be very pleasing to my self-importance, but it occurred to me, at the moment, this man does not dream of any reason why I might be ashamed to walk arm-in-arm with him through Broadway in open daylight. Riding in a stage-coach from Concord, New Hampshire, to Vergennes, Vermont, many years ago,29 I found myself on very pleasant terms with all the passengers through the night, but the morning light came to me as it comes to the stars; I was as Dr. Beecher30 says he was at the first fire he witnessed, when a bucket of cold water was poured down his back—“the fire was not put out, but he was.” The fact is, the higher the colored man rises in the scale of society, the less prejudice does he meet. The writer has met and mingled freely with the leading great men of his time,—at home and abroad, in public halls and private houses, on the platform and at the fireside,—and can remember no instance when among such men has he been made to feel himself an object of aversion. Men who are really great are too great to be small. This was gloriously true of the late Abraham Lincoln, William H. Seward, Salmon P. Chase, Henry Wilson, John P. Hale,31 Lewis Tappan,32 Edmund Quincy,33 Joshua R. Giddings,34 Gerrit Smith, and Charles Sumner, and many others among
Y7870-Douglass.indb 220
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
221
the dead. Good taste will not permit me now to speak of the living, except to say that the number of those who rise superior to prejudice is great and increasing. Let those who wish to see what is to be the future of America, as relates to races and race relations, attend, as I have intended, during the administration of President Hayes,35 the grand diplomatic receptions at the executive mansion, and see there, as I have seen,36 in its splendid east room with the wealth, culture, refinement, and beauty of the nation assembled, and with it the eminent representatives of other nations,— the swarthy Turk with his “fez,”37 the Englishman shining with gold, the German, the Frenchman, the Spaniard, the Japanese, the Chinaman, the Caucasian, the Mongolian, the Sandwich Islander,38 and the negro,—all moving about freely, each respecting the rights and dignity of the other, and neither receiving not giving offense. “Then let us pray that come it may, As come it will for a’ that, That sense and worth, o’er a’ the earth, May bear the gree, and a’ that; “That man to man, the world o’er, Shall brothers be, for a’ that.”39 FREDERICK DOUGLASS. 1. Douglass quotes Isaiah 65:5 and alludes to Jesus’s description of Pharisees in Matthew 23. In the latter, the Pharisees are described as hypocrites who obey rules outwardly but fail to care for others as God expects. 2. Although the English and the Normans assimilated with relative ease following the Norman Conquest in 1066, prejudice against the Anglo-Saxons remained. Many Normans possessed an “ethnocentric feeling of cultural superiority” and often characterized the English Anglo-Saxons as drunken, cowardly, treacherous, and irreligious. Normans, who spoke French, claimed the English language sounded like dogs barking. Anglo-Saxons were believed to be dreamy and abstract as well as gluttonous. Furthermore, the Normans viewed themselves as the embodiment of a warrior race, while they described the English as depraved weaklings. H. R. Lyon, Anglo-Saxon England and the Norman Conquest (1962; New York, 1963), 315–18; D. J. A. Matthew, The Norman Conquest (New York, 1966), 42, 129; Hugh M. Thomas, The English and the Normans: Ethnic Hostility, Assimilation, and Identity, 1066–c. 1220 (New York, 2003), 83–84, 301; Christopher Daniell, From Norman Conquest to Magna Carta: England, 1066–1215 (New York, 2003), 27. 3. Douglass is referring to a speech that Webster made on 29 April 1850 in front of the Revere House in Boston, Massachusetts. In this address, Webster urged the people of Massachusetts to uphold and obey the Fugitive Slave Act even if they disagreed with the law. Douglass seems to paraphrase this particular section of Webster’s speech. The full quotation reads: “Sir, the question is, whether Massachusetts will stand to the truth, against temptation! Whether she will be just against temptation! Whether she will defend herself against her own prejudices! She has conquered every thing else in her time; she has conquered this ocean which washes her shore; she has conquered her own sterile soil; she has conquered her stern and inflexible climate; she has fought her way to the
Y7870-Douglass.indb 221
9/1/21 4:16 PM
222
THE COLOR LINE
universal respect of the world; she has conquered everybody’s prejudices but her own. The question now is, whether she will conquer her own prejudices!” Philadelphia North American and United States Gazette, 30 April 1850; Lib., 5 July 1850; Daniel Webster, The Writings and Speeches of Daniel Webster, 18 vols. (Boston, 1903), 13:388–89. 4. In the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, residents of some towns in Yorkshire, England, retained a reputation of inhospitality toward strangers or foreigners. For example, John Wesley, an Anglican evangelist and founder of Methodism, traveled to Huddersfield in Yorkshire to preach in May 1757. After his visit, he wrote, “A wilder people I never saw in England. The men, women, and children filled the street as we rode along, and appeared just ready to devour us.” Two years later, he still labeled the people of Huddersfield as “the wildest congregation I have seen in Yorkshire.” In the early 1810s, several incidents occurred in which skilled textile artisans attacked new mechanized looms, since these “Luddites” believed the technology threatened their livelihood. As a result of these riots, hostility against strangers in Yorkshire towns escalated. Residents of Stanningley were known to stone groups of travelers, and the people of Pudsey were often charged with attacking and insulting strangers. In an 1868 article published in London’s Quarterly Review, the prejudice of the people of Yorkshire against strangers was characterized as taking “an unpleasantly active form,” partly because of the physical isolation of many towns within the county. Joseph Lawson, Letters to the Young on Progress in Pudsey during the Last Sixty Years (Stanningley, Eng., 1887), 56, 62; “Yorkshire Life and Character,” Temple Bar: A London Magazine for Town and Country Readers 22:488–89 (March 1868); “Article II,” Quarterly Review 145:329–30 (April 1878); Nehemiah Curnock, ed., The Journal of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M., 8 vols. (New York, 1909) 4:210, 333. 5. The Merchant of Venice, sc. 13, lines 1211–16. 6. Douglass compares “the colored man” to Jean Valjean, protagonist of the French novel Les Misérables, who faces the stigma of being an ex-convict. Valjean changes his identity and repeatedly rises to prominence, but each time a prison guard recognizes him, Valjean is forced to start over in a new location. Through this comparison, Douglass suggests that the African American is capable of great things, but is held back by racism. Victor Hugo, Les Misérables (New York, 1889). 7. Luke 2:14. 8. Matt. 7:12. 9. Douglass quotes Isaiah 1:18. Though the verse seems straightforward, God is appealing to the Israelites to practice mercy and justice so that he might make their sins “as white as snow.” Reason in this instance therefore refers not only to the humans’ ability to think logically, but also to their obligation to obey God’s law by protecting the weak and “relieving the oppressed” (Isa. 1:17). 10. Douglass toured the British Isles from August 1845 to April 1847. He made observations similar to those in this article in his second and third autobiographies about the lack of racism he encountered there. Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 2:224–25; 3:181–82, 188–91. 11. The noted black antislavery lecturer Charles Lenox Remond (1810–73) was born to free parents in Salem, Massachusetts, where, like his father, he worked as a barber. Remond became active in reform movements at an early age. He served as a member of the Colored Association of Massachusetts, and when it merged with the New England Anti-Slavery Society in 1833, he became an officer in that organization. By 1838, Remond had begun his career as a lecturer under the auspices of the American Anti-Slavery Society. A delegate to the 1840 World’s Anti-Slavery Convention in London, Remond traveled and lectured in the British Isles for sixteen months. Upon his return, Remond was employed as a lecture agent by the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society, and he and Douglass frequently traveled together on lecture tours. Their close association was troubled by a growing rift between Douglass and Garrison, and in 1852, Remond announced his intention to cancel his subscription to Frederick Douglass’ Paper in protest of Douglass’s adoption of nonGarrisonian views of the U.S. Constitution. During the Civil War, Remond was a recruiting officer for the black Fifty-fourth Massachusetts Infantry. Illness curtailed his reform activities after the war. FDP, 20 May 1852; New York Daily Times, 26 December 1873; NNE, 8 January 1874; Jane H. Pease
Y7870-Douglass.indb 222
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
223
and William H. Pease, They Who Would Be Free: Blacks’ Search for Freedom, 1830–1861 (New York, 1974), 46; Les Wallace, “Charles Lenox Remond: The Lost Prince of Abolitionism,” NHB, 40:696–701 (May–June 1977); NCAB, 2:303; DAB, 15:499–500. 12. The parents of Samuel Ringgold Ward (1817–c. 1866) carried him along in their escape from slavery on Maryland’s Eastern Shore around 1820. The family settled six years later in New York City, where young Ward received an elementary education. He embraced religion in 1833 and was ordained in 1839. His two New York congregations, at South Butler (1841–43) and Courtland (1846–51), consisted mostly of whites, but Ward vigorously agitated for the rights of both slaves and free blacks. The American Anti-Slavery Society appointed Ward a lecturing agent in 1839. As one of the earliest black supporters of political abolitionism, Ward acted as a spokesman for the Liberty party after 1844. Ward studied law and medicine briefly, and also tried his hand at editing during the late 1840s. His Impartial Citizen, published from Syracuse, failed financially, as did a second newspaper venture. In 1851, Ward’s leading role in the Jerry Rescue caused him to fear arrest, and he immigrated to Canada. While there, he launched the Provincial Freeman in 1853 and acted as an agent for the Anti-Slavery Society of Canada. In the latter capacity, Ward journeyed to Britain on a fund-raising tour. In 1855, he published Autobiography of a Fugitive Negro and accepted a British Quaker’s gift of fifty acres of land in Jamaica. He lived his last decade on the island, farming, writing, and ministering to a small Baptist congregation. NS, 2 February 1849; Robin W. Winks, The Blacks in Canada: A History, 2d ed. (New Haven, Conn., 1997), 206–08, 227, 265–66, 361, 395; Benjamin Quarles, Black Abolitionists (New York, 1969), 79, 98, 133, 138, 210. 13. Born a slave in Kent County, Maryland, Henry Highland Garnet (1815–82) fled north with his parents in 1824. He attended the African Free School in New York City, the Noyes Academy in Canaan, New Hampshire, and the Oneida Institute in Whitesboro, New York. Garnet was one of the founders of the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society and a stump speaker for the Liberty party. Licensed to preach by the Presbytery of Troy in 1842, Garnet went to Jamaica in 1852 as a missionary of the United Presbyterian Church of Scotland after spending two years lecturing in Great Britain on behalf of the free-labor movement. An early proponent of black immigration to Africa, he founded the African Civilization Society. Garnet, in his appeal sanctioning slave uprisings before the National Negro Convention in Buffalo, New York, in August 1843, praised Madison Washington. After the Civil War, Garnet was president of Avery College in Pittsburgh and U.S. minister to Liberia (1881–82). Schor, Henry Highland Garnet; Dorothy Sterling, ed., Speak Out in Thunder Tones: Letters and Other Writings by Black Northerners, 1787–1865 (Garden City, N.Y., 1973), 376; Quarles, Black Abolitionists, 68, 185, 216–17, 226–27; ANB (online). 14. William Wells Brown (c. 1816–84) was born a slave in Lexington, Kentucky, but spent much of his youth near St. Louis, Missouri. He fled slavery in 1834, taking the name Wells Brown from a Quaker man who aided his escape. Brown was employed as a lecturer for the Western New York and Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Societies between 1843 and 1849, and was active in universal reform movements advocating temperance, women’s rights, and prison reform. He lectured in Great Britain from 1849 to 1855, to moderate acclaim. Brown studied medicine informally, but chose to remain active in reforms instead of committing to professional medical practice. He published a number of historical books concerning blacks and slavery, beginning in 1847 with his autobiography, Narrative of William W. Brown, A Fugitive Slave. His first history, The Black Man, His Antecedents, His Genius, and His Achievements, appeared in 1863 and ran through ten editions in three years. His best-known literary production was the novel Clotel, written while he toured Great Britain in the early 1850s. R. J. M. Blackett, Beating against the Barriers: The Lives of Six Nineteenth-Century Afro-Americans (Ithaca, N.Y., 1986), 45, 48, 95–96, 101–02; Pease and Pease, They Who Would Be Free, 35, 42, 50–51; DAB, 3:161. 15. Born Jim Pembroke, James William Charles Pennington (1809–71) was born a slave on the Eastern Shore of Maryland and was trained as a blacksmith. His flight north at the age of twenty-one led him to the home of a Pennsylvania Quaker who taught him to read and write. Later, Pennington
Y7870-Douglass.indb 223
9/1/21 4:16 PM
224
THE COLOR LINE
found work and began teaching black children in Newtown, Long Island, and then in New Haven, Connecticut, where he also studied theology. Pennington’s ministerial career began in 1838 in Newtown, and in 1840 he entered the Congregational ministry in Hartford, Connecticut, where he preached until 1847, later serving as a pastor (1848–55) of Shiloh Presbyterian Church in New York City. In 1843, Pennington traveled to England as a delegate-at-large to the World’s Anti-Slavery Conference in London and then lectured in London, France, and Belgium. He so impressed his European audiences that the University of Heidelberg awarded him an honorary doctor of divinity degree. Fearing recapture after passage of the Fugitive Slave Law, Pennington again traveled abroad, but abolitionist friends bought his freedom in 1851 for $150. He was an active member of both abolitionist and black self-improvement organizations. In addition to many sermons, addresses, and regular contributions to the Anglo-African Magazine, Pennington wrote A Text Book of the Origins and History, etc., etc., of the Colored People (1841), a query, based on biblical references, into the Negro’s ancestry and character, and an autobiography, The Fugitive Blacksmith (1849). Carter G. Woodson, ed., The Mind of the Negro as Reflected in Letters Written during the Crisis, 1800–1860 (Washington, D.C., 1926), 642–51; Martin Robison Delany, The Condition, Elevation, Emigration, and Destiny of the Colored People of the United States, Politically Considered (1852; New York, 1968), 113; William Wells Brown, The Rising Son; or, The Antecedents and Advancement of the Colored Race (Boston, 1874), 461–63; Rhoda G. Freeman, “The Free Negro in New York City in the Era before the Civil War” (Ph.D. diss., Columbia University, 1966), 49–51, 53, 88–89, 108–10, 418; NCAB, 14:307; DAB, 14:441–42. 16. Alexander Crummell (1819–98) was born in New York City to Charity Hicks, a freeborn woman, and Boston Crummell, an African. He attended the Oneida Institute in upstate New York. In 1844, Crummell was ordained an Episcopal priest, and following an attempt to establish a congregation in Philadelphia, he moved back to New York with his wife and children in 1845. He participated in the antislavery movement by working in the New York offices of the American Anti-Slavery Society and serving as the New England correspondent for the Colored American. In 1847, Crummell traveled to England to raise money for a new church by delivering antislavery lectures around the country. He not only raised funds for his church but also began studying at Queens’ College, Cambridge, and soon made arrangements for his family to join him abroad. After receiving his bachelor’s degree in 1853, he journeyed to Liberia as a missionary of the Episcopal Church of the United States. With the exception of a brief lecturing tour of the United States from April 1861 to October 1862, Crummell lived in Liberia, working as a missionary and an English professor, until he fled the country following a coup in 1871. While Crummell initially opposed the American Colonization Society, he advocated black immigration after his time in Liberia. He also supported separate organizations for the races, specifically with the aim of advancing the interests of people of African descent. Back in the United States, Crummell established a congregation at St. Luke’s in Washington, D.C., and served there until 1894. He also continued to travel and lecture, and in 1897 he founded the American Negro Academy. Gregory U. Rigsby, Alexander Crummell: Pioneer in Nineteenth-Century PanAfrican Thought (New York, 1987); Wilson Jeremiah Moses, Alexander Crummell: A Study of Civilization and Discontent (New York, 1989); William H. Ferris, Alexander Crummell: An Apostle of Negro Culture (1920; New York, 1969); DANB, 145–47; ANB (online). 17. Blanche Kelso Bruce (1841–98) was born a slave near Farmville, Virginia. In early adulthood, he escaped to the free state of Kansas, where he established and taught in the first elementary school for blacks. In February 1869, Bruce, convinced that there were greater opportunities in the South, moved to Mississippi, where he was made supervisor of elections in Tallahatchie County. In 1870, Bruce moved to Jackson, where he was elected sergeant at arms of the state senate. Later, having moved to Bolivar County, he was elected sheriff and tax assessor. In 1874, the state legislature elected Bruce to the U.S. Senate, making him the second black man to represent Mississippi in that office. During his single Senate term, Bruce championed pensions for black war veterans, the protection of Indian lands, and federal intervention to safeguard voting rights. The Senate chose him to head a
Y7870-Douglass.indb 224
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
225
committee to conclude the business of the bankrupt Freedman’s Bank, which succeeded in refunding 62 percent of the depositors’ money. Remaining a power in the Mississippi Republican party, Bruce received federal appointments as register of the treasury (1881–85, 1897–98) and recorder of deeds for the District of Columbia (1889–93). Douglass and Bruce frequently appeared together at political events in Washington, D.C., and consulted on political strategy. On 24 June 1878, Bruce married Josephine Beal Wilson of Cleveland, Ohio. Douglass alludes to the couple’s four-month honeymoon tour of Europe. Lawrence Otis Graham, The Senator and the Socialite: The True Story of America’s First Black Dynasty (New York, 2006); Maurine Christopher, Black Americans in Congress (New York, 1976), 15–24; DANB, 74–76. 18. A Brahmin, often spelled “Brahman,” is a member of the highest-ranking Hindu caste in India. Traditionally believed to have originated in the mouth of Purusha (God), the majority of Brahmins were priests, scholars, religious leaders, and philosophers. The Brahmins dominated Indian society in the nineteenth century, and some scholars attribute this to British rule in the country during this time period. Brahmins, traditionally aligned with education, entered postprimary schools in disproportionate numbers. Once graduated, they had access to newly created professions within the British administration, further enhancing their position within Indian society. In the late nineteenth century, seeds of dissatisfaction among the lower castes began to grow as a direct response to the Brahmins’ close relationship to the British, their occupation of high positions within the government, and their discrimination toward non-Brahmins. The anti-Brahmin movement in India gained ground in the twentieth century. André Béteille, Caste, Class and Power: Changing Patterns of Stratification in a Tanjore Village (1965; Berkeley, Calif., 1971), 45, 48–9, 61–2; Marguerite Ross Barnett, The Politics of Cultural Nationalism in South India (Princeton, N.J., 1976), 15–17; James Heitzman and Robert L. Worden, eds., India: A Country Study, 5th ed. (Washington, D.C., 1996), xxxvii, 7, 270, 282–83, 787; S. H. Patil, Community Dominance and Political Modernisation: The Lingayats (New Delhi, 2002), 113–16. 19. On 29 May 1453, the Ottoman Turks conquered the city of Constantinople, ending the Byzantine Empire and solidifying their own. During the early nineteenth century, non-Muslims within the Ottoman Empire were organized into millets, or religious bodies with a decidedly political function. The three millets—Greek Orthodox, Armenian, and Jewish—were headed by a sultan-appointed cleric who resided in Istanbul and conducted the affairs of the community freely as long as he remained loyal to the sultan. While these non-Muslims groups were tolerated and enjoyed a relatively symbiotic relationship with the Muslim Turks, they were also classified as second-class subjects. Often, Christians were forced to pay higher taxes and were unable to testify in court. Through the seventeenth century, Christian boys were conscripted into the military or placed in administrative positions, where they were required to convert to Islam and to learn the Turkish language. The relationship between Christians and Muslims began to dramatically shift in the late nineteenth century with the increase of European economic, political, and ideological influence in the empire. Many Muslims, fearing Christian uprisings, initiated violent attacks against the non-Muslim population in Ottoman cities throughout the latter half of the nineteenth century. William Denton, The Christians in Turkey (London, 1863), 14, 51, 58; Philip Walters, “Eastern Europe since the Fifteenth Century,” in A World History of Christianity, ed. Adrian Hastings (London, 1999), 284–85; Bruce Alan Masters, Christians and Jews in the Ottoman Arab World: The Roots of Sectarianism (New York, 2001), 3, 61, 130; Caroline Finkel, Osman’s Dream: The Story of the Ottoman Empire, 1300–1923 (2005; New York, 2007), 213; Mehrdad Kia, Daily Life in the Ottoman Empire (Santa Barbara, Calif., 2011), 4, 111–12. 20. Christian anti-Jewish sentiments became intense during the High Middle Ages, roughly the period between the eleventh and thirteenth centuries, when Jews became increasingly viewed as a threat to Christian societies. Characterized as “dangerous outsiders,” Jews were tortured, murdered, and often expelled from areas they had resided in for centuries. Christianity, born of Judaism, accepted Jesus of Nazareth as the messiah, while Jews claimed he was a prophet but not the savior.
Y7870-Douglass.indb 225
9/1/21 4:16 PM
226
THE COLOR LINE
Christians believed that Jesus was crucified at the hands of the Jews and therefore called Jews by the epithet “Christ-killers.” Christians also accused Jews of poisoning wells, killing Christian children in order to use their blood for religious rituals, and desecrating the consecrated host designated for Mass. By the end of the Middle Ages, Christian contempt for Jews no longer stemmed exclusively from Judaism itself; rather, it took on a racial characteristic. Even if a Jew converted to Christianity, he still possessed “Jewishness,” and this new, racially based belief directly influenced anti-Semitism in the nineteenth century. Gavin Langmuir, Toward a Defi nition of Antisemitism (1990; Berkeley, Calif., 1996), 57, 311; William Nicholls, Christian Antisemitism: A History of Hate (1993; New York, 2004), xix, 225–26; Edward Kessler, An Introduction to Jewish-Christian Relations (New York, 2010), 5–6; Phyllis Goldstein, A Convenient Hatred: The History of Antisemitism (Brookline, Mass., 2012), 58, 65–70, 81–86, 127. 21. Located north of the Danube River and south of the Southern Carpathians, Wallachia was founded as a principality in the early fourteenth century by Basarab I after a rebellion against Charles I of Hungary. The Ottoman Empire ruled over Wallachia from the early fifteenth century until the mid-nineteenth century, interrupted by brief periods of Russian control. Wallachia then united with Moldavia to form the United Principalities in 1859, renamed Romania in 1866, and then officially became the Kingdom of Romania in 1881. Slavery—primarily of those of Roma (Gypsy) ethnicity— existed in the region from before the founding of the Principality of Wallachia until its gradual abolition during the 1840s and 1850s. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 2053–54; EAA, 2:575–80. 22. Although the 1800 Act of Union merged Ireland with Great Britain as the United Kingdom, the relationship between these two nationalities remained strained. While union offered political and strategic advantages to England, the British maintained a racial prejudice against their new compatriots. Many English believed that the Irish were not fit to have a government of their own, and the “Irish question” evolved into a question of how Ireland could become less Irish and more British. Throughout the nineteenth century, the British upheld common stereotypes of the Irish, based mainly on race, religion, and class. These stereotypes caricatured the Irish as inferior, perpetually lazy peasants whose Catholic religion was based on superstition and loyalty to a foreign ruler. Following the devastating potato famine in the late 1840s, thousands of Irish immigrated to England. While Irish immigration into English cities was nothing new, the rapid arrival of these impoverished people, coupled with growing sentiments of intolerance toward the Irish, manifested into a “perception of the Irish that was based less and less on goodwill and more on fear.” By the end of the 1850s, England had come to treat Ireland more as a colony than a constituent part of the kingdom. Edward G. Lengel, The Irish through British Eyes: Perceptions of Ireland in the Famine Era (Westport, Conn., 2002), 3, 6, 130, 142, 145, 152; Nick Pelling, Anglo-Irish Relations, 1798–1922 (New York, 2003), 12; Michael de Nie, The Eternal Paddy: Irish Identity and the British Press, 1798–1882 (Madison, Wisc., 2004), 3–6, 11, 13–18, 100, 267, 269. 23. The first Chinese immigrants are thought to have entered California in the late 1840s with the discovery of gold. Along the West Coast, the Chinese were welcomed into frontier communities, since they helped meet the need for labor. Generally, these immigrants were employed in fields that few Americans found desirable, such as mining and railroad construction. Chinese laborers worked for cheaper wages than whites did, and they were valued for their hard work. But as more Chinese immigrants poured into California, they were met with economic, moral, and political resistance. One recurring complaint was the belief that the Chinese entered the United States under labor contracts from the Chinese government as part of a system similar to slavery. Though there was no evidence to support this claim, many considered the Chinese too similar to slaves—whites on the West Coast could not compete with their willingness to work for cheap wages, just as free labor could not survive in the American South during the antebellum period, because of slavery. While the Chinese were not the only immigrant group in the United States to work for low wages, they were arguably the most despised because of the perceived peculiarity of their culture. They were labeled as opium smokers and accused of introducing foreign diseases into the white population. In the 1850s, officials in
Y7870-Douglass.indb 226
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
227
California passed laws prohibiting the Chinese from testifying for or against whites in court, and in the 1870s they were denied access to naturalization. Several mobs attacked Chinese immigrants in California, the first large-scale attack occurring in October 1872 in Los Angeles, in which eighteen people were killed. The Chinese were not only subject to prejudice and physical violence, but also to legal discrimination and, eventually, exclusion from the country. Mary Roberts Coolidge, Chinese Immigration (New York, 1909), 21–22, 46–47, 59–60, 75, 80; Sandmeyer, Anti-Chinese Movement in California, 11–15, 28–29, 34, 37, 48, 50; Saxton, Indispensable Enemy, 2, 6, 18; Pyong Gap Min, “Asian Immigration: History and Contemporary Trends,” in Asian Americans: Contemporary Trends and Issues, ed. Pyong Gap Min (New York, 2006), 9–10. 24. Ps. 50:10. 25. Thomas Whitson (1796–1864) was a veteran abolitionist and Underground Railroad agent. Born in West Fallowfield, Pennsylvania, of Hicksite Quaker parentage, Whitson received little formal education and enlivened many antislavery meetings with his forceful, yet ungrammatical, speeches. He attended the 1833 convention that founded the American Anti-Slavery Society and was the first to sign its declaration of principles. Whitson sided with the Garrisonians in the abolition schism of 1840 and strongly supported nonresistant principles. Robert C. Smedley, History of the Underground Railroad in Chester and Neighboring Counties of Pennsylvania (Lancaster, Pa., 1883), 67–70, 131; NASS, 3 December 1864. 26. Gen. 4:15. 27. Many Irish immigrants first encountered the Chinese as they traveled to California during the Gold Rush in the 1850s. Finding themselves in direct competition with the Chinese for jobs, the Irish resented the Chinese for working at lower wages and replacing white immigrant laborers, often in unskilled trades. While the relationship between Irish and black workers in the late nineteenth century was anything but harmonious, the most intense form of Irish prejudice against a minority group was directed toward the Chinese. They attacked Chinese workers both politically and physically, and as anti-Chinese sentiment gained ground in the late 1870s, the Irish emerged as the movement’s strongest supporters in areas of California. Denis Kearney (1847–1907), an Irish political leader in San Francisco, helped form the Workingmen’s party, which used the slogan “And whatever happens, the Chinese must go.” While the Workingmen’s party enjoyed limited success in 1878 and 1880, Kearney’s anti-Chinese campaign, supported by the Irish workers in California, aided in the passage of the 1882 Exclusion Act, which prohibited Chinese immigration to the United States. Joseph Lee and Marion R. Casey, Making the Irish American: History and Heritage of the Irish in the United States (New York, 2006), 360; Jay P. Dolan, The Irish Americans: A History (New York, 2008), 179–80; Scott D. Seligman, The First Chinese American: The Remarkable Life of Wong Chin Foo (Hong Kong, 2013), 111–13. 28. The 1880 U.S. Census reported the following racial statistics: 6,580,703 “Colored” and 43,402,970 “White” Americans. The census took special note of the fact that African Americans outnumbered whites in three states: Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina. U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistics of the Population of the United States at the Tenth Census (June 1, 1880) (Washington, D.C., 1880), xxvii–xxviii. 29. Douglass recounted this incident in a speech in Cork, Ireland, delivered on 14 October 1845. Before then, the only confirmed connection of Douglass with Concord, New Hampshire, was a series of speeches he delivered there on 11–18 February 1844. Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 1:xcii, 45. 30. Henry Ward Beecher (1813–87), the fourth son of the Presbyterian clergyman Lyman Beecher and brother of the antislavery novelist Harriet Beecher Stowe, was the noted pastor of Brooklyn’s Plymouth Church for forty years. After graduating from Amherst College in 1834, Beecher studied at Lane Theological Seminary and served as the pastor of Presbyterian churches in Lawrenceburg and Indianapolis, Indiana, before becoming minister at Plymouth Church in 1847. Committed to making the church an active instrument of social reform, Beecher, in his sermons, addressed the major social and political issues of his time with a force and drama that established him as one of the century’s
Y7870-Douglass.indb 227
9/1/21 4:16 PM
228
THE COLOR LINE
major orators. Though he denounced the evil of slavery, he denied that a constitutional basis existed for interfering with the institution in states where it was already in practice. Instead, Beecher urged that its exclusion from the territories would achieve abolition gradually and peacefully. His theology minimized doctrinal differences and stressed the religious worth of personal loyalty to Christ. In 1882, he led his church out of the Congregational denomination. In addition to writing extensively for the secular press, Beecher edited two widely read religious journals: the New York Independent (1861–63) and the Christian Union (1870–81). His reputation survived the five years of public discussion that preceded both civil and church trials stemming from the journalist Theodore Tilton’s charge that adulterous relations existed between Tilton’s wife and Beecher. Marie Caskey, Chariot of Fire: Religion and the Beecher Family (New Haven, Conn., 1978), 208–48; NCAB, 3:129–30; DAB, 2:129–35. 31. Born in Rochester, New Hampshire, John Parker Hale (1806–73) graduated from Bowdoin College and went on to practice law in Dover in his native state. After serving briefly in the state house of representatives, he held the appointed office of U.S. Attorney for the District of New Hampshire from 1834 to 1841. The next year, Hale won election as a Democrat to the U.S. House of Representatives, where his opposition to the “gag rule” and the annexation of Texas cost him renomination. In 1846, however, a coalition of Liberty party and antislavery Democrats elected him to the U.S. Senate. The Liberty party nominated him for president in 1848, but he withdrew, supporting the formation of the Free Soil party and its candidate, Martin Van Buren. In 1852, as the presidential candidate of the Free Democrats, Hale attracted almost 160,000 votes. In 1855, the new Republican party returned him to the Senate, where he served a decade before holding the post of U.S. ambassador to Spain until 1869. Richard H. Sewell, John P. Hale and the Politics of Abolition (Cambridge, Mass., 1965); EAA, 1:31–18. 32. Lewis Tappan (1788–1873), a wealthy New York merchant and abolitionist, devoted much of his career to religious and benevolent enterprises. Before the Panic of 1837, he achieved considerable financial success as a partner in and credit manager of his brother Arthur’s silk company. In 1841, Tappan founded the first U.S. commercial credit rating agency, and eight years later he retired to devote his time to philanthropic projects. Strongly influenced by the revivalist Charles G. Finney during the 1830s, Tappan was an early supporter of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions and the American Bible Society, a founder of the New York Evangelist, a sometime patron of Oberlin College, and a chief financial backer of the Broadway Tabernacle Church. Converted to the cause of immediate emancipation by Theodore D. Weld, Tappan helped organize the New York Anti-Slavery Society and the American Anti-Slavery Society in 1833. Mob attacks in 1834 and 1835 only deepened his antislavery convictions. Committed to racial equality, Tappan worked unsuccessfully to end segregation in churches and to increase black involvement in the American Anti-Slavery Society’s internal affairs. In 1840, he broke with William Lloyd Garrison over the issue of political action and the advisability of linking abolitionism with other reforms. Tappan was active from 1839 to 1841 in securing freedom for the African captives of the slave ship Amistad and also maintained close ties with British abolitionists, especially leaders of the British and Foreign AntiSlavery Society. During the mid-1840s, Tappan joined Frederick Douglass and other Garrisonians in attacking the Free Church of Scotland for accepting donations from American slaveholders. In 1846, he abandoned efforts to convert older benevolent associations to abolitionism and helped found the American Missionary Association, an agency distinguished for its work among the freedmen during and after the Civil War. A founder and dominant figure in the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, Tappan supported the Liberty party in 1844, but shunned the Free Soilers in 1848. Following passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Tappan gave lukewarm support to the newly created American Abolition Society, a radical yet ephemeral successor to the defunct American and Foreign AntiSlavery Society. Douglass was also active in the new group, but differed with Tappan over the use of violence in attacking slavery. Although Tappan voted for John C. Frémont in 1856, he did not support the Republicans enthusiastically until the election of 1864. The principal postwar accomplishment of
Y7870-Douglass.indb 228
9/1/21 4:16 PM
THE COLOR LINE
229
the elderly Tappan was the completion of a biography of his brother Arthur in 1870. Bertram WyattBrown, Lewis Tappan and the Evangelical War against Slavery (Cleveland, 1969); DAB, 18:303–04. 33. Son of Josiah Quincy, a Boston Federalist leader and president of Harvard University, Edmund Quincy (1807–77) joined the abolitionists in reaction to the murder of Elijah Lovejoy in 1837. A close associate of William Lloyd Garrison, Quincy was the corresponding secretary of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society from 1844 to 1853. He served on many other abolitionist committees, contributed frequently to Garrisonian publications, and often edited the Liberator during Garrison’s absences. NS, 21 January 1848; Massachusetts Historical Society, Tribute of the Massachusetts Historical Society to the Memory of Edmund Quincy and John Lothrop Motley (Boston, 1877), 6; NCAB, 6:93–94; DAB, 15:306–07. 34. Joshua Reed Giddings (1795–1864), a radical abolitionist and congressman from Ohio, was first elected to the House of Representatives as a Whig in 1838. He vigorously opposed the “gag rule,” the annexation of Texas, and the Mexican War. In 1842, Giddings received a congressional sanction for his actions during negotiations with Great Britain over the Creole affair. While negotiations were under way, he introduced resolutions supporting the slaves’ right to mutiny. In 1848, Giddings left the Whig party to join the Free Soilers and then allied himself with the Republicans after passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. In late October 1852, Giddings came to New York, where he joined Douglass in the campaign to elect Gerrit Smith to Congress. One of the founders of the Ohio Republican party, he lost his congressional seat after failing to be renominated in 1858. Giddings had been a strong supporter of John Brown, writing encouraging letters to him in Kansas. Lincoln appointed Giddings U.S. consul general to Canada, a post he held in Montreal until his death. FDP, 29 October 1852; Stewart, Joshua R. Giddings; ACAB, 4:478; BDUSC (online). 35. Rutherford Birchard Hayes (1822–93), nineteenth president of the United States, had served as governor of his home state of Ohio (1867–71) and as a Republican congressman (1865–67). Although Hayes had supported the Radical Reconstruction program while in Congress, events during Grant’s administration convinced him that the remaining Southern Republican state governments, led by carpetbaggers and blacks, could no longer sustain themselves, even with federal military intervention. As president, Hayes attempted to rejuvenate the Southern Republican party through a program of sectional reconciliation aimed at attracting former Whigs and Douglas Democrats to the party. He believed that the goodwill of Southern whites was better protection for the political and civil rights of blacks than a federal military force. Soon after his inauguration, Hayes ordered U.S. troops in Charleston and New Orleans away from the statehouses and back to their garrisons, causing the Republican governments in South Carolina and Louisiana to collapse in the face of armed threats from their Democratic opponents. Hayes appointed numerous Southern Democrats to federal office, including the former Confederate general David M. Key, who became his postmaster general. Despite Hayes’s hope, few new Southern white voters joined the Republican party, and it shrank into a powerless minority in most of the region for the remainder of the nineteenth century. Kenneth E. Davison, The Presidency of Rutherford B. Hayes (Westport, Conn., 1972); Keith Dan Polakoff, The Politics of Inertia: The Election of 1876 and the End of Reconstruction (Baton Rouge, La., 1973), 246–51, 317–21; Vincent P. DeSantis, Republicans Face the Southern Question: The New Departure Years, 1877–1897 (1959; New York, 1969), 66–132; Gillette, Retreat from Reconstruction, 335–52. 36. President Rutherford B. Hayes appointed Douglass marshal of the District of Columbia in 1877. While it was customary for the marshal to attend state functions at the White House and introduce guests of the president, Douglass was not offered this duty. Douglass did not enjoy a particularly close relationship with Hayes, although it seemed the president did value his opinion on certain topics. For instance, Hayes met with Douglass in February 1877, before taking office, to discuss the issue of Reconstruction and the condition of blacks in the South. He concluded that Douglass gave him “many useful hints about the whole subject.” While Douglass did not serve in a formal capacity during receptions and state dinners at the White House, there is evidence that he attended some important events during Hayes’s administration. For example, in 1879, 1880, and 1881, he attended the New
Y7870-Douglass.indb 229
9/1/21 4:16 PM
230
MY ESCAPE FROM SLAVERY
Year’s reception at the White House. He also attended, along with his wife, Anna, the Diplomatic Corps Reception held at the Executive Mansion on 24 February 1881. Douglass stated that he was a “welcome visitor at the Executive Mansion on state occasions and all others, while Rutherford B. Hayes was President of the United States.” Philadelphia North American, 2 January 1879; Little Rock Daily Arkansas Gazette, 12 May 1880; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, 2 January 1881; Boston Daily Advertiser, 25 February 1881; Rutherford B. Hayes, Hayes: The Diary of a President, 1875–1881, ed. T. Harry Williams (New York, 1964), 74–75, 83–84, 311; McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 291; Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 3:518. 37. A fez is a brimless hat in the shape of a straight cylinder or a tapered cone, made of felt or cloth. Typically red in color, it is usually topped with a black or dark blue tassel. The fez comes in a variety of styles, from stiff and tall to soft, shorter, and rounded. While the fez may have originated in ancient Greece, it is most commonly associated with Turkey and the Ottoman Empire. Sultan Selim III made the fez part of military uniforms in the late 1790s, and it was made an official part of military dress in 1827. During this time, the fez was also popular in Egypt and was worn by the Zouaves, French soldiers stationed in North Africa. According to one author, the fez was the most enduring piece of military garb in European history. In the United States, the fez is best known as the signature headpiece of the Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine—now known as Shriners International—a fraternity founded by two New York Masons, William Fleming and William “Billy” Florence, in 1870. Beverly Chico, Hats and Headwear around the World: A Cultural Encyclopedia (Santa Barbara, Calif., 2013), 175, 177; Alexander Maxwell, Patriots against Fashion: Clothing and Nationalism in Europe’s Age of Revolution (New York, 2014), 140–45, 150; Tracy Jenkins, “Fez,” in Ethnic Dress in the United States: A Cultural Encyclopedia, ed. Annette Lynch and Mitchell D. Strauss (Lanham, Md., 2015), 121. 38. The Sandwich Islands was the name given to the Hawaiian Islands by Captain James Cook of the Royal Navy in 1778, chosen in honor of one of his sponsors, First Lord of the Admiralty John Montagu, fourth Earl of Sandwich. The contemporary name, which began to replace “Sandwich Islands” in the 1840s, is derived from that of the main island, Hawaii. The Hawaiian Islands consist of the exposed archipelago of eight major islands, several atolls, numerous smaller islets, and an undersea mountain range known as the Hawaiian-Emperor chain, formed by volcanic activity in the North Pacific Ocean. It was governed by a sovereign monarchy until the monarchy was overthrown in 1893, and in 1898 the islands were annexed by the United States. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 767. 39. An excerpt from Robert Burns’s 1795 poem “A Man’s a Man For A’ That.” Burns, Poems and Songs, 256.
MY ESCAPE FROM SLAVERY (1881) Century Magazine, 23:125–31 (November 1881). Other texts in Chicago Tribune, 27 November 1881; Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:153–56.
Douglass wrote three autobiographies that recounted his birth into and escape from slavery, as well as his life up until the time of each publication. The first two, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave (1845) and My Bondage and My Freedom (1855), withheld details of his escape in order to protect
Y7870-Douglass.indb 230
9/1/21 4:16 PM
230
MY ESCAPE FROM SLAVERY
Year’s reception at the White House. He also attended, along with his wife, Anna, the Diplomatic Corps Reception held at the Executive Mansion on 24 February 1881. Douglass stated that he was a “welcome visitor at the Executive Mansion on state occasions and all others, while Rutherford B. Hayes was President of the United States.” Philadelphia North American, 2 January 1879; Little Rock Daily Arkansas Gazette, 12 May 1880; St. Louis Globe-Democrat, 2 January 1881; Boston Daily Advertiser, 25 February 1881; Rutherford B. Hayes, Hayes: The Diary of a President, 1875–1881, ed. T. Harry Williams (New York, 1964), 74–75, 83–84, 311; McFeely, Frederick Douglass, 291; Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 3:518. 37. A fez is a brimless hat in the shape of a straight cylinder or a tapered cone, made of felt or cloth. Typically red in color, it is usually topped with a black or dark blue tassel. The fez comes in a variety of styles, from stiff and tall to soft, shorter, and rounded. While the fez may have originated in ancient Greece, it is most commonly associated with Turkey and the Ottoman Empire. Sultan Selim III made the fez part of military uniforms in the late 1790s, and it was made an official part of military dress in 1827. During this time, the fez was also popular in Egypt and was worn by the Zouaves, French soldiers stationed in North Africa. According to one author, the fez was the most enduring piece of military garb in European history. In the United States, the fez is best known as the signature headpiece of the Ancient Arabic Order of the Nobles of the Mystic Shrine—now known as Shriners International—a fraternity founded by two New York Masons, William Fleming and William “Billy” Florence, in 1870. Beverly Chico, Hats and Headwear around the World: A Cultural Encyclopedia (Santa Barbara, Calif., 2013), 175, 177; Alexander Maxwell, Patriots against Fashion: Clothing and Nationalism in Europe’s Age of Revolution (New York, 2014), 140–45, 150; Tracy Jenkins, “Fez,” in Ethnic Dress in the United States: A Cultural Encyclopedia, ed. Annette Lynch and Mitchell D. Strauss (Lanham, Md., 2015), 121. 38. The Sandwich Islands was the name given to the Hawaiian Islands by Captain James Cook of the Royal Navy in 1778, chosen in honor of one of his sponsors, First Lord of the Admiralty John Montagu, fourth Earl of Sandwich. The contemporary name, which began to replace “Sandwich Islands” in the 1840s, is derived from that of the main island, Hawaii. The Hawaiian Islands consist of the exposed archipelago of eight major islands, several atolls, numerous smaller islets, and an undersea mountain range known as the Hawaiian-Emperor chain, formed by volcanic activity in the North Pacific Ocean. It was governed by a sovereign monarchy until the monarchy was overthrown in 1893, and in 1898 the islands were annexed by the United States. Seltzer, Columbia Lippincott Gazetteer, 767. 39. An excerpt from Robert Burns’s 1795 poem “A Man’s a Man For A’ That.” Burns, Poems and Songs, 256.
MY ESCAPE FROM SLAVERY (1881) Century Magazine, 23:125–31 (November 1881). Other texts in Chicago Tribune, 27 November 1881; Douglass Papers, ser. 2, 3:153–56.
Douglass wrote three autobiographies that recounted his birth into and escape from slavery, as well as his life up until the time of each publication. The first two, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave (1845) and My Bondage and My Freedom (1855), withheld details of his escape in order to protect
Y7870-Douglass.indb 230
9/1/21 4:16 PM
MY ESCAPE FROM SLAVERY
231
those who aided him and to avoid divulging details that could harm others attempting to escape. It was not until his third autobiography, Life and Times of Frederick Douglass (1881), that he published the specific details of his escape. The following excerpt from Life and Times was published in one of the first issues of the Century Magazine, which had just succeeded Scribner’s Monthly Magazine. The associate editor, Robert Underwood Johnson, had suggested it in a letter to Douglass: “It is very common . . . for portions of a volume to appear first in a magazine and we believe it is generally agreed that the sale of the book is thus increased.” Douglass was paid $100 for the rights to publish the first chapter of the second part of Life and Times. Underwood informed Douglass that this text had to be condensed to fit within the pages of the November issue. Century Magazine was published from 1881 to 1930. It featured both fiction and nonfiction, and at the height of the magazine’s popularity, subscriptions reached a quarter of a million. Robert Underwood Johnson to Douglass, 16 May, 29 September 1881, Douglass Collection, General Correspondence, reel 3, frames 459–60, 505R–506L, FD Papers, DLC; Arthur J. Bond, The Best Years of the Century (Urbana, Ill., 1981); ACAB (online).
In the first narrative of my experience in slavery, written nearly forty years ago, and in various writings since, I have given the public what I considered very good reasons for withholding the manner of my escape. In substance these reasons were, first, that such publication at any time during the existence of slavery might be used by the master against the slave, and prevent the future escape of any who might adopt the same means that I did. The second reason was, if possible, still more binding to silence: the publication of details would certainly have put in peril the persons and property of those who assisted. Murder itself was not more sternly and certainly punished in the State of Maryland than that of aiding and abetting the escape of a slave.1 Many colored men, for no other crime than that of giving aid to a fugitive slave, have, like Charles T. Torrey,2 perished in prison. The abolition of slavery in my native State and throughout the country, and the lapse of time, render the caution hitherto observed no longer necessary. But even since the abolition of slavery, I have sometimes thought it well enough to baffle curiosity by saying that
Y7870-Douglass.indb 231
9/1/21 4:16 PM
232
MY ESCAPE FROM SLAVERY
while slavery existed there were good reasons for not telling the manner of my escape, and since slavery had ceased to exist, there was no reason for telling it. I shall now, however, cease to avail myself of this formula, and, as far as I can, endeavor to satisfy this very natural curiosity. I should, perhaps, have yielded to that feeling sooner, had there been anything very heroic or thrilling in the incidents connected with my escape, for I am sorry to say I have nothing of that sort to tell; and yet the courage that could risk betrayal and the bravery which was ready to encounter death, if need be, in pursuit of freedom, were essential features in the undertaking. My success was due to address rather than courage, to good luck rather than bravery. My means of escape were provided for me by the very men who were making laws to hold and bind me more securely in slavery. It was the custom in the State of Maryland to require the free colored people to have what were called free papers. These instruments they were required to renew very often, and by charging a fee for this writing, considerable sums from time to time were collected by the State. In these papers the name, age, color, height, and form of the freeman were described, together with any scars or other marks upon his person which could assist in his identification. This device in some measure defeated itself—since more than one man could be found to answer the same general description. Hence many slaves could escape by personating the owner of one set of papers; and this was often done as follows: A slave, nearly or sufficiently answering the description set forth in the papers, would borrow or hire them till by means of them he could escape to a free State, and then, by mail or otherwise, would return them to the owner. The operation was a hazardous one for the lender as well as for the borrower. A failure on the part of the fugitive to send back the papers would imperil his benefactor, and the discovery of the papers in possession of the wrong man would imperil both the fugitive and his friend. It was, therefore, an act of supreme trust on the part of a freeman of color thus to put in jeopardy his own liberty that another might be free. It was, however, not unfrequently bravely done, and was seldom discovered. I was not so fortunate as to resemble any of my free acquaintances sufficiently to answer the description of their papers. But I had one friend—a sailor—who owned a sailor’s protection, which answered