22. Nash, Race and Revolution, 28–30
23. Finkelman, “Slavery and the Constitutional Convention”
24. Freehling, Road to Disunion, 121–31
25. Leviticus 19:34, 24:22
26. Hubert Humphrey anguished before he made his speech to the Democratic Convention which split the Democratic Party over the race issue. Hubert H. Humphrey, The Education of a Public Man (Doubleday, 1976) 112–13.
27. “Jefferson to John Holmes, April 22, 1820,” in Foner, Basic Writings of Thomas Jefferson, XV 248-50
28. “Jefferson to Roger C. Weightman, June 24, 1826,” Andrew Lipscomb and Albert Bergh, Eds., Writings of Thomas Jefferson Vol. XVI (Washington, DC: Publisher, 1903) 181–82. The source of this phrasing is discussed in Ellis, American Sphinx, 289, and Maier, American Scripture, 125 28. Commager, Documents of American History, 488–9
29. Lincoln’s speech to the Republican Convention in June, 1858. www.nationalcenter.org/HouseDivided.html
The phrase derives from “If a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand” (Mark 3:25).
30. Madison, Federalist 14
31. http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu
32. Metro Broadcasting v. FCC, 497 U.S. 547, 612 (1990)
33. A statistical study of intentional job discrimination found that eight million minorities and women had benefited from the equality principle in employment between 1975–1999, beyond that which would have occurred under the employment patterns of 1975, and that two million minorities and women were affected by intentional job discrimination in 1999. Alfred W. Blumrosen and Ruth G. Blumrosen, The Realities of Intentional Job Discrimination in Metropolitan America. 1999, at EEO1.com and at http://law.newark.rutgers.edu/blumrosen-eeo.html; Alfred W. Blumrosen and Ruth G. Blumrosen, “Intentional Job Discrimination: New Tools for Our Oldest Problem,” 37 University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform (2004) 681–703
* * *
Index
* * *
A
Adams, John
at the First Continental Congress, 74–97, 101–5, 115–8
background, 27, 29, 73
compared to Jefferson in early years, 27–9
correspondence with Jefferson, 88–92, 95–7
defends British troops in Boston Massacre, 20
on colonial rights as Englishmen vs. natural rights concept, 101, 104–6, 109, 118
on history and historians, 95–7
on revolution, 28, 31, 38, 76, 81, 101
on slavery, 85-87, 89, 90–1, 92, 221
taxation without representation, 18
Adams, Samuel, 18, 53, 73
compared to John Adams, 73–4
Affirmative Action
Benjamin Franklin in 1789, 253–4, 261–2
Lyndon Johnson in 1965, 261–2
Andrews, Charles, 63
Articles of Confederation
anti-Somerset clause in, 152–5, 215
Dickinson draft giving general powers, 145–9, 150
powers of Congress limited, 147–9, 164
weakness of, 158–9, 171–2
B
Banning, Lance, 184, 230
Beard, Charles, 217
Blackstone, William, 6
Commentaries on the Law of England, 6
Bland, Richard, 49, 126, 136
Boston Tea Party, 67, 76, 80
Bowen, Catherine Drinker, 226
Breen, T. H., 35
Brookhiser, Richard, 92, 197
Burke, Thomas, 148
Burnett, Edward Cody, 93
C
Civil Rights Act of 1964, 261
Civil War, 245, 250–2
Coercive Acts of 1774, 100-101, 108
Coles, Edward, 246–8
Constitutional Convention of 1787, 172–202, 226–39
compromise conceived in Philadelphia, 203–22
effect of adoption of Northwest Ordinance on, 225–30
Patterson Plan, 174–6
related to Continental Congress in New York, 225
Virginia plan, 172–4
Court of King’s Bench, 6, 31
Cutler, Manasseh, 184, 204, 212, 236-238
D
Dane, Nathan, 203-205, 206-209, 211
Davy, William, 7
Declaration of Independence, 124–5, 131–43, 257, see also Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence
Declaration of the Rights of the Colonies in 1774, 103, 117
Article IV, 104-105, 107-108, 115
independence from Parliament declared in Art IV, 103–9 British reaction, 106–7
Declaratory Act of 1766, 19, 21, 30, 36, 69, 110, 142 Dickinson, John, 20, 82, 145-146, 150
Draper, Theodore, 51, 68-69, 109
Dred Scott decision, 249–50
Dunmore, Lord, 121-123, 141
E
Elkins, Stanley, 43
Ellis, Joseph, 45, 92, 130
Ellsworth, Oliver, 176-177
F
Fehrenbacher, Donald, 94
Ferling, John, 54
Fielding, Sir John, 3-4
Finkelman, Paul, 214, 216, 255
First Continental Congress, 73–119
Adams-Rutledge draft claiming independence from Parliament, 103–6
Galloway Plan, 111–15, 118
Franklin, Benjamin, 18, 175-176, 182-183, 189-192, 243, 253, 262
Thomas Hutchinson’s letters to Massachusetts, 52–4, 81
at Constitutional Convention, 175–6, 182–3, 189–92
minimizes Somerset decision as too limited, 12–3
on affirmative action, 253–4
Freehling, William W., 255
G
Gadsden, Christopher, 84-85, 101
Galloway, Joseph, 77, 81-82, 101, 111-118, 146-147
Gaspee affair, 61-63
George III, King of Great Britian
blamed for abuse in Declaration, 136, 140–2
upset over 1774 Declaration of Independence from Parliment, 106–7
Gipson, Lawrence Henry, 109
Greene, Jack, 21, 194, 219
Grigsby, Hugh Blair, 84
H
Hamilton, Alexander, 197
Henderson, H. J., 169
Henretta, James, 25-26, 47
Henry, Patrick, 43, 49, 50, 113-114, 121
Higginbotham, A. Leon, 142-143
Hildreth, Richard, 21
Historians
identify calm or pause in revolutionary feeling in colonies between 1770 and 1773, 20
minimize role of Somerset decision, 35
minimize importance of Gaspee incident, 63
minimize John Adams’s statement of concurrence with “southern gentlemen,” 92
say slavery unimportant 1770–74 period, 94–5
minimize role of declaration of independence from Parliament, 109
view of “tacit” approval of southern slavery in prohibition of slavery in the northwest, 163, 212
Adams’s and Jefferson’s views on history and historians, 95–6
differing views of historians on the role of slavery in the Constitutional Convention, 187
Hutchinson, Thomas, 18, 29–30, 52–4, 80–1
I
Isaac, Rhys, 270
Isaacson, Walter, 175, 189, 192
J
Jay, John, 113, 147
Jefferson, Thomas
ambiguity used to avoid negative reactions against “born free” language in Mason’s draft of the Virginia declaration of rights, 132–43
background, 27, 29-30
Declaration of Independence, 124-125, 128, 131-133, 138-139, 142
on revolution, 28, 31, 49
on slavery, 42, 90-91, 136-137, 139-141, 161-163, 246-248, 257
refusal to condemn slavery when prompted by Edward Coles letter, 247
Summary View, 40, 44, 136
support for ending of international slave trade as distinct from slavery itself, 44
taxation without representation, 18
Jensen, Merrill, 109
K
King, Rufus, 163, 165-167, 177, 195, 200, 206
L
Lafayette, Marquis de, 97
Laurens, Henry, 149
criticism of Somerset decision, 22–4
views of slavery, 23–4, 150–1
Lee, Richard Henry, 18, 41, 212
at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, 192–7
at the First Continental Congress, 113–4
early opposition to slavery, 42–3
forms friendship with John Adams, 83
moves the Declaration of Independence, 124
on slavery, 42, 127
supports call for committees of correspondence, 49
votes on land ordinances of 1784, 1785, and the Northwest Ordinance, 161, 204–7, 209, 210
Lincoln, Abraham, 221, 246, 258
Lindsey, Dido Elizabeth, 8
Lynd, Staughton, 94, 213
M
MacLeod, Duncan, 212
Madison, James
acknowledges at Constitutional Convention that two houses of Congress might have different principles of representation, 181–2
concludes that differences between states are based on slavery, not size, 178–82
organizes “Virginia Plan” featuring strong central government, 172
participation in development of three-fifths rule, 172–3
records of the Convention, 178-182, 185-187, 198-202, 229, 233
Maier, Pauline, 139, 195-196
Mansfield, Lord 7-12, 21, 30, 35, 106
cases of runaway slaves prior to Somerset, 7–8
decision in Somerset case, 11-12, 142
later denial that he freed slaves, 35
reacts to 1774 Declaration of Independence from Parliment, 106
Mason, George, 130-131, 172
proposes Virginia Constitutional provision that all men are born free, 125–6
McCullough, David, 92
McGaughy, J. Kent, 192, 193
McKitrick, Eric, 43
Miller, John C., 122
Monroe, James and the northwest territory, 167-168, 188, 239
Morgan, Edmund, 46
Morris, Gouverneur, 232
vigorous opponent of slavery in Constitutional Convention, 198–9
N
Natural law, 118, 125-126
John Locke, 118
Nicholas, Robert Carter, 49
opposition to Mason’s “born free” resolution language, 126, 128
Northwest Ordinance, 195, 208-209, 211-224, 225, 227, 234, 235-236, 237, 238-244, 245, 251
draft of July 9, 1787, 203–5
concepts developed during Constitutional Convention in New York, 190–3, 204–5
O
Oakes, James, 33
Ohio Company, 168, 189, 204, 208, 236
Otis, James, 39, 84
P
Parliment, British
adopst Declaratory Act of 1766, 19
Galloway plan to include colonies rejected, 114
imposes Stamp Act in 1765, 17–18
repeals Stamp Act, 19
Pendleton, Edmund, 49-50, 129
Pickering, Timothy, 159, 163-164, 183, 184, 211
Pinckney, Charles, 173, 231, 232
Q
Quarles, Benjamin, 286
R
Rakove, Jack, 94, 99
Randolph, Edmund, 172-173, 186, 227-228
Randolph, Peyton, 49, 87
Reid, John Phillip, 110
Repugnancy clauses in colonial charters, 21, 58, 70
Robinson, Donald, 40, 88, 94
Rush, Dr. Benjamin, 76, 89, 117
Rutledge, John, 81, 102-104, 147-149, 228-229, 230, 236
S
Sharp, Granville, 5, 7
Shays’s Rebellion, 160, 171-172, 187, 218
Slavery
declared “odious” by Lord Mansfield, See Mansfield distinguished from slave trade, 44, 46–8
former slaves in Union army in Civil War, 251–2
impact on white wages, 26, 158, 160, 183–4, 213, 226–7
lawful in colonies until legislative or judicial change, 163–4
legality confused in England before Somerset, 6–8
unlawful in Northwest Ordinance, 207–8
Smith, Melancton, 204
Somerset decision, 12
in colonial papers, 15-16
colonial slaves’ awareness, 24
impact on the colonies, 27, 48, 142, 151-155
London papers, 12
prohibited under Articles of Confederation, 145–155
see Lord Mansfield
viewed as freeing slaves in England, 12–14
Somerset, James, 1-14
Stamp Act, 17, 30, 48, 50
Stewart, Charles, 1-3, 5-6, 9
Strong, Jonathan, 5
Sutton, Robert, 194
T
Territorial ordinances, 1784,1785, 160–3, 165–9
Three-fifths formula of representation, 173-174, 188, 213, 225, 227-230
Townshend taxes, 19
Treaty of Paris, 1783, 155, 157–9
V
Virginia
committees of correspondence, 57, 63, 66, 69
reaction against George Mason’s draft declaration of rights, 126–7 reaction to Somerset decision, 33, 35, 37-38
response to Lord Dunmore’s call for slaves to help put down
rebellion, 123–4
slave trade, 46-48, 141
validates Northwest Ordinance, including antislavery clause, 239–40
Virginia Resolution of 1773, 57-58, 64
W
Washington, George, 115-117, 172, 197
West Indian planters, 9
Whately, Thomas, 52
Wills, Gary, 273
Wages of white workers as affected by slavery, 26, 158, 160, 183–4, 213, 226–7
Wood, Gordon, 192
Chapter 1. Leading Figures in the Somerset Case
Courtesy Dickinson College
While slave owners may not have wanted their slaves to hear about the Somerset decision, it was impossible for them to keep it secret. Slaves learning of it may have sought to take ships to freedom in England, or their masters might have thought that this is what they would do. In either case, the masters blamed Britain for encouraging slaves to escape as a result of the Somerset decision. Slave owner Gabriel Jones thought that Bacchus, who ran away, had been motivated by the Somerset decision, as the bottom of his ad makes clear.
Chapter 8. Writing the Articles of Confederation, 1776–77
John Dickinson, author of the famous “Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania,” was asked to prepare a draft for Articles of Confederation of the colonies. His draft proposed a powerful central government, with states required to follow federal policies. His proposal ran into stiff opposition and was rejected in favor of a much more limited federal authority.
Thomas Burke opposed Dickinson’s proposed strong central government. Burke prevailed; the Articles created a weak government with no taxing power and no chief executive.
Henry Laurens, a leading South Carolina slave holder, stated in 1776 that “I abhor slavery.” He was president of the Continental Congress in 1777, which ensured that slaves could not gain their freedom by being taken into a “free” state, as had Somerset. As a commissioner at the Paris Peace Treaty ending the Revolutionary War, Laurens insisted that Britain return the slaves who had joined the British forces.
Slave Nation Page 31
