About the Work
The Slave Struggle in America is a historical work presented in the form of a series of lectures, authored by Hypatia Bradlaugh. The text traces the history of slavery and the anti-slavery movement in the United States from the earliest days of British colonisation through the mid-1830s, with a particular focus on the political, social, and moral conflicts that defined the struggle. The work is structured as a chronological narrative, beginning with the settlement of the American colonies and proceeding through the Revolutionary era, the formation of the Constitution, and the intensifying battles over slavery in the early nineteenth century. The book combines political history with biographical sketches of key figures in the abolitionist movement, accounts of mob violence, and examinations of legislative debates. It is written from an avowedly anti-slavery perspective, treating the abolitionist cause as morally righteous and the slaveholding interests as a powerful and corrupting force in American life.
Context
The book was written in the context of the ongoing transatlantic debate over slavery and abolition. The author references the British experience with emancipation, including the work of George Thompson in achieving West India emancipation, which was acknowledged by Lord Brougham in 1833. The lectures were composed in an era when the American abolitionist movement was gaining momentum, and the text reflects the urgency and moral fervour of that movement. The author draws on earlier historical works, including Mr. Wilson’s history of the “Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America,” to construct the narrative. The book also engages with the religious dimensions of the slavery debate, noting the arguments made by pro-slavery advocates who claimed biblical sanction for the institution. The work appears to have been delivered as public lectures, given the direct address to an audience and the rhetorical style employed throughout.
Structure of the Book
The book is organised as a series of lectures, with the notes covering portions of Lecture I and Lecture IV, along with intervening material that appears to constitute additional lectures or extended sections. The first lecture provides a survey of British colonisation of North America and the establishment of slavery in the colonies. Subsequent sections cover the Revolutionary period and the early national era, including the Continental Congress, the Articles of Confederation, the Northwest Territory, and the Constitutional Convention. The narrative then moves through the early congressional debates on slavery, the Missouri Compromise struggle, and the rise of the organised abolitionist movement in the 1830s. The final sections focus on key figures in the abolitionist movement, acts of mob violence against abolitionists and free coloured people, and the persecution of those who attempted to educate coloured students. The book concludes with a brief reference to the Florida war, which was fought in the interest of Georgia slaveholders.
Detailed Section-by-Section Summary
The book opens with a statement of purpose, indicating that the lecture will sketch the slave struggle in America commencing with the reign of George III, but first reviews the history of British colonisation of North America to understand the diverse material from which the British-American colonies were built. The author notes that a few words on colonial conditions regarding slavery prior to the War of Independence will aid comprehension of the subsequent struggle.
The narrative then turns to the early colonisation of Virginia. The first permanent settlement was established in 1606, during the reign of James I, under a charter granted to Sir Thomas Gates and others for territory then known as Virginia—land that Sir Walter Raleigh had thrice attempted to colonise, naming it after the Virgin Queen Elizabeth. The colony was governed by a local council appointed and removable at the Crown’s will, directed by another council in England, with allegiance to the Crown strictly insisted upon. In 1619, Governor Sir George Yeardley called a general council of representatives from different plantations, exercising legislative functions—noted as the first representative legislature ever to sit in America. In 1624, the Crown obtained surrender of the charters, and the king appointed a governor and twelve councillors with entire direction of colony affairs. From then until the War of Independence, Virginia was a royal province. In 1671, Sir Wm. Berkeley told the Lords Commissioners that the population was about 40,000, and thanked God there were no free schools nor printing, since learning brought disobedience, heresy, and sects, and printing divulged them and libels against the best government.
The book then describes the settlement of New England. Captain John Smith explored the coast north of Virginia, examining shores from Penobscot Bay to Cape Cod, and named the land New England after giving Prince Charles a glowing account. The Pilgrim Fathers sailed from Southampton in the “Mayflower” and “Speedwell”; the “Speedwell” captain became dismayed, the emigrants put back to Plymouth, and on 6th September 1620 the “Mayflower” set out alone. They intended to settle on Hudson’s River in New York but stress of weather compelled landing on Cape Cod shores. The landing place was called Plymouth—the first permanent settlement in New England. Before landing, the Pilgrims made a voluntary compact, choosing a governor and officers. A House of Representatives was established in 1639, with members chosen annually.
Massachusetts Bay, which extended three miles south of Charles river and three miles north of the Merrimack, was settled in 1628 by Puritans persecuted at home. The charter presupposed business transacted in England, but it was decided management should be carried on by residents. Massachusetts gained ascendancy among New England colonies, forming a House of Representatives with each town sending two members. In 1691, a charter under William and Mary incorporated Massachusetts, New Plymouth, Maine, and Nova Scotia into one province known as Massachusetts Bay in New England, continuing until after the revolution. New Hampshire, Maine, and Connecticut were settled about the same time or shortly after. Rhode Island was settled by men fleeing Massachusetts to escape religious persecution, with Roger Williams honored as founder. Rhode Island was among the earliest colonies declaring liberty of conscience and freedom of worship in fundamental laws, and continues to make the charter granted by Charles II the basis of its laws—the only State not forming a new constitution.
The middle and southern colonies are then described. Maryland was granted by Charles I to Lord Baltimore, named after Queen Henrietta Maria, with 200 gentlemen, chiefly Roman Catholic, of rank and fortune, emigrating with adherents. New York was originally settled by the Dutch; Charles II in 1684 granted a patent to his brother the Duke of York conveying territory from the western bank of Connecticut to the eastern shore of the Delaware, with Long Island. The Duke leased part, New Jersey, to Lord Berkeley and Sir G. Carteret. A British armament surprised the Dutch colony, compelled surrender, and proclaimed government for the Duke of York as New York. The New Netherlands was broken into New Jersey and New York. New Yorkers were discontented; at the Revolution of 1688 they declared for William of Orange, and the colony was governed by Crown-appointed governors assisted by people’s representatives. New Jersey was divided into two parts, ultimately bought by William Penn and others; dissensions between East and West New Jersey and with New York ended with government resumed by the Crown. Pennsylvania was originally settled by Dutch and Swedes, becoming William Penn’s property in 1681. Dr. Story praised Penn’s enlightened policy. During the first twenty years three forms of government were established and abandoned until 1701, when one was established governing until the War of Independence. Penn also bought the three counties of Delaware, inhabited chiefly by Dutch and Swedes.
Carolina and Georgia are then covered. Charles II granted territories between 36° and 31° N. lat. to Lord Clarendon and others as Carolina. Settlements were made with temporary governments—one in the north at Albermarle, one in the south at Cape Fear. The proprietaries signed a constitution drawn up by John Locke containing a clause giving every freeman “absolute power and authority over his negro slaves.” In 1729 the charter was surrendered, government revested in the Crown, and the province divided into North and South Carolina. In 1732, George II granted a charter for colonising the district between the rivers Savannah and Altamaha, to provide refuge for the suffering poor of England, persecuted Protestants of Europe, and to attempt conversion and civilisation of natives. This territory was called Georgia. In 1751 the charter was surrendered, and Georgia became a royal province. The first lecture concludes with a summary of colonial character: Virginia—the “Old Dominion”—was settled by desperate adventurous spirits, while New England was settled by Puritans flying from oppressors.
The narrative then moves to the Revolutionary era and the early anti-slavery pledges. The first Continental Congress in 1774 saw the United Colonies pledge neither to “import nor purchase any slave” and to “wholly discontinue the slave trade.” These articles of association were adopted by the colonies and formed the basis of the American Constitution. North Carolina and Virginia warmly adopted the pledge; Georgia called slavery “an unnatural practice” and promised “utmost endeavors for the manumission” of its slaves. In 1776, Congress decided without opposition that “no slave be imported into any one of the thirteen colonies.”
Commercial interest, however, remained strong, especially in the Southern States. Jefferson’s draft for the Declaration of Independence arraigned George III for forcing the “execrable commerce” upon the colonies, but this clause was struck out by Congress “in complaisance,” Jefferson declared, “to South Carolina and Georgia.” He added that Northern brethren “felt a little tender under these censures”—though their people had few slaves themselves, they had been “considerable carriers of them to others.” In framing the Articles of Confederation, Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina urged that their slaves were property, threatening an end to confederation if this were debated. The States were left free to import whatever they liked, vetoing earlier congressional decisions. The confederation secured inter-citizenship rights, but Georgia and South Carolina wanted this privilege confined to white persons; eight of thirteen states voting against it, their proposition was lost.
Mr. Wilson, in his history of the “Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America,” states that at the Declaration of Independence a general desire prevailed among conscientious and enlightened people—including most revolutionary leaders—to end the African slave trade, believing it inconsistent with their proclaimed doctrines. Yet slavery had “a tenacity of life not dreamed of by friend or foe.”
The book then covers the Northwest Territory. When independence was acknowledged in 1782, a large fertile piece of land was conceded to the new Republic, portions claimed by several states under their charters. In 1784, Virginia ceded all lands claimed by her north-west of the Ohio River. A committee reported a plan providing that “involuntary servitude” should cease after 1800; this clause was opposed by Southern States and struck out. The next year Rufus King moved for immediate prohibition of slavery in the North-West territory, but his motion failed. In 1787, a committee presided over by Nathan Dane of Massachusetts reported an ordinance prohibiting both involuntary servitude and slavery in lands north-west of the Ohio; this passed almost unanimously, with only New York voting against it.
The Constitutional Convention of 1787 is then examined. When the basis of representation came up for discussion, all States were to be equally represented in the Senate. For the House of Representatives, Virginia proposed one representative per 40,000 inhabitants, with slaves counted at three-fifths. The Free States objected that slaves would not use votes themselves—masters would use them for their injury. North Carolina declared she would not confederate unless slaves were counted as three-fifths at least. This “no Union” menace induced the Committee of Detail to make concessions: no prohibition, no tax on slave importation, no tax on products of slave labor such as rice, tobacco, and indigo.
Mr. Ellsworth of the Committee argued with “cold cruelty” that in Maryland and Virginia—both gaining the name of “Slave-breeding States”—it was cheaper to raise than import slaves, but in sickly rice swamps foreign importation was necessary, and it would be unjust to South Carolina and Georgia to prohibit it. He added: “Let us not intermeddle; as population increases, poor laborers will be so plenty as to render slaves useless.” The debate ended in a compromise permitting the slave trade until 1808, subject to a tax determined by Congress. Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Connecticut voted in favor of the slave power. The author asks whether we should blame those New-England States, noting the terrible eight-year war just ended, credit destroyed, the country in confusion—the Colonies could not maintain independence if disunited. This is “the key to the action of the New-England States” in conceding twenty more years of life to slavery. South Carolina demanded fugitive slaves and servants be delivered up like criminals, and an article was inserted enabling masters to recover escaping slaves.
The first Congress under the constitution discussed the tax on imported slaves; ten dollars was proposed then withdrawn under pressure. Memorials lamenting slavery’s evils gave rise to excited discussion. The first debate on anti-slavery petitions concerned a petition from Quakers to the House of Representatives. Quakers were spoken of contemptuously; the representative from Georgia asked “if the whole morality of the world is confined to Quakers?” declaring “The Savior had more benevolence and commiseration than they pretend to have, and he admitted slavery.” Later a memorial signed by Benjamin Franklin urged “that mankind are all formed by the same Almighty Being, alike objects of his care, and equally designed for the enjoyment of happiness.” The South Carolina representative replied that Southern clergy did not condemn slavery or the slave trade. Georgia boasted that “from Genesis to Revelation the current was set strong the other way.”
In 1792, Southern representatives demanded an anti-slavery petition be sent back to petitioners; the House consented—not the only time it agreed to this violation of the right of petition regarding abolitionists. In January 1793, by forty-eight votes to seven, an Act passed giving slaveholders the right to seize and return fugitive bondmen; under color of this Act, free colored persons were also kidnapped.
The narrative then turns to William Lloyd Garrison and the rise of militant abolitionism. The passage opens with Garrison’s response to criticism that his language was vituperative and denunciatory. He argues there is cause for severity, declaring he will be “as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice.” He refuses moderation, using analogies: telling a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm, or a mother to gradually extricate her babe from fire. He states: “I am in earnest—I will not equivocate—I will not excuse—I will not retreat a single inch—and I will be heard.” The passage notes his pen was “if possible, more severe, caustic, and exasperating than his speech.” Slaveholders were stung to madness. In South Carolina, a reward of 1,500 dollars was offered for apprehending anyone circulating the Liberator. In the district of Columbia, free colored persons taking the paper from the post faced twenty dollars’ fine or thirty days’ imprisonment, and if unable to pay, could be sold into slavery. Georgia offered 5,000 dollars for the editor’s arrest. Garrison remained undaunted, saying “I am not discouraged… but bolder and more confident than ever.”
The American Colonisation Society is then examined. The Society, while pretending to exist for the slave’s interest, was hostile to abolition. Garrison was initially favorable but, after examining its claims, found in its publications “little else than sinful palliations, fatal concessions, vain expectations, exaggerated statements, unfriendly representations, glaring contradictions, naked terrors, deceptive assurances, unrelenting prejudices, and unchristian denunciations.” He was “urged by an irresistible impulse to attempt its removal.” The scheme involved taking all colored people to Africa. Dr. Hopkins and others had proposed this earlier, supported by those against emancipation who wished to rid the country of free negroes. In 1806, Virginia decreed emancipated slaves must leave the state within a year or be re-enslaved. Henry Clay said colonisationists would “rid our country of a useless and pernicious, if not a dangerous portion of the population.” John Randolph said the scheme would “secure the property of every master.” Free colored people protested everywhere against the scheme’s cruelty.
The Missouri Struggle is then detailed. In 1818, Missouri territory sought admission as a State. An amendment was proposed providing that persons born after admission should be free, with gradual emancipation for existing slaves. The House sustained it by seventy-nine to sixty-seven votes. Southerners became violent; a Virginia representative accused Mr. Livermore of New Hampshire of attempting to excite a servile war. Dissolution of the Union was threatened. A Georgia representative declared Abolitionists were kindling a fire that “could be extinguished only in blood.” The House passed the clause, but the Senate struck it out. The Bill was lost. In December, Arkansas Territory was proposed; Henry Clay accused supporters of slavery prohibition of “Negrophobia.” Arkansas was delivered to slaveholders. The Missouri Bill again caused disagreement, resulting in a disastrous compromise: the Senate yielded on Maine if the House struck out the prohibition, inserting inhibition in territories north of the 36°30′ parallel. Jefferson was alarmed, the strife falling on his ear “like the fire-bell at midnight.” Pennsylvania’s legislature unanimously supported prohibition, saying it would “spread the crimes and cruelties of slavery from the banks of the Mississipi to the shores of the Pacific.” Missouri formed a Constitution establishing slavery and preventing free negroes or mulattoes from entering. A motion regarding citizens’ privileges was lost. Henry Clay moved for a joint special committee; the Bill passed the House by six votes, the Senate by two to one. The struggle ended in triumph for the slave power.
Illinois’s battle is then described. Illinois had been settled by Southerners and affirmed “inhuman black laws.” Slaves could be compelled to serve for years exceeding natural life. Governor Edward Coles, who had emancipated his own slaves, opposed the slave power. Slavery advocates tried to call a Convention; trickery included admitting one candidate, then expelling him for another. The Convention was rejected by a majority of over 2,000. Mr. Wilson said: “The victory was complete and final… Illinois had been saved to freedom.”
Elijah P. Lovejoy’s martyrdom is then covered. In 1837, Lovejoy gave his life. A native of Maine, he established a religious paper in St. Louis in 1832. He asserted his right to discuss slavery: “We have slaves, it is true, but I am not one.” A mulatto was burned by a mob; Judge Lawless said participants were absolved if acting under “mysterious, metaphysical, and almost electric frenzy.” Lovejoy’s office was destroyed; his press was broken at Alton. He was no Abolitionist, opposed to immediate emancipation. His press was repeatedly destroyed, thrown into the Mississippi. He was “hunted up and down like a partridge on a mountain.” He refused to leave Alton: “If I die I am determined to make my grave in Alton.” The building was attacked, the roof fired. Lovejoy received five balls—three in his breast—and expired instantly. His body was taken home “amid the heartless rejoicing and scoffings.”
Colored education is then addressed. In 1831, free colored people held a convention in Philadelphia, resolving to establish a collegiate school at New Haven. The Mayor summoned a meeting resolving to resist by any lawful means; only one person opposed. The Noyes Academy in Canaan, New Hampshire, opened to colored students, but in 1835, three hundred persons with 100 yoke of oxen took the building away.
The narrative continues with Miss Crandall’s school conflict. White parents objected to their daughters attending school with a “nigger,” demanding Miss Crandall dismiss a colored girl or lose white pupils. She instead advertised the school as open to “young ladies, little misses of color, and others.” Andrew Judson—Miss Crandall’s next-door neighbor, later a member of Congress and judge of the District Court of the United States—was “much shocked” at negro girls being educated near his dwelling and led a “cowardly persecution” against her. The school opened with fifteen or twenty colored pupils. Miss Crandall was “Boycotted,” her house assailed, she and pupils insulted. Attempts were made to apply the Vagrant Act for summary imprisonment; Dr. Samuel J. May and others gave bonds for 10,000 dollars, breaking that plan. Judson and town authorities secured a state law prohibiting schools for colored persons not inhabitants of the state without selectmen’s permission, which was then impossible to obtain. Canterbury residents celebrated with cannon fire, bells, and rejoicing. Miss Crandall was arrested, committed for trial, placed in a cell recently occupied by a murderer who left for the scaffold, and bailed next morning. Physicians refused to visit her sick family; church trustees forbade her attendance. At trial, Judson prosecuted. The judge held the new law constitutional, but the jury refused to convict, with seven for conviction and five for acquittal. A new trial convicted her; friends appealed to the highest tribunal, which quashed the case on a technical objection without ruling on constitutionality. Despite persecution, Miss Crandall tried again; her house was assailed at night and made almost uninhabitable. She finally yielded, acting on friends’ advice, and broke up her school.
In 1833, the American Anti-slavery Society was organised, with a “declaration of sentiments” drawn up by Garrison and adopted with slight alterations. Arthur Tappan served as President; Elizur Wright, William Lloyd Garrison, and Dr. Cox as secretaries; Dr. Samuel J. May as Vice-president; and the Board of Managers included John G. Whittier and Benjamin Lundy. Garrison found women willing to aid immediate emancipation: Mrs. Lydia Maria Child, Miss Abby Kelley, Mrs. Ernestine L. Rose. In 1837, Quaker ladies Sarah and Angelina Grimke—former South Carolina slaveholders who liberated their slaves—came North to work for emancipation. Many Abolitionists disapproved of women publicly advocating abolition; more objected to women holding official positions. This and other dissensions caused many members to leave and form the Foreign and American Anti-Slavery Society, including John G. Whittier.
John G. Whittier was appointed Secretary to the National Anti-slavery Convention in 1833. A Convention member noted his “broad, square forehead and well-cut features” and incipient poetic reputation. Thirty years after signing the Declaration, Whittier valued his name on that document above the title page of any book. Mr. Wilson praised Whittier’s sagacity and practicality, his lyrics “rang out their notes of warning and appeal.” His works include “Massachusetts to Virginia,” “Stanzas for the Times,” and a Virginia slave-mother’s farewell. The passage quotes lines from “Stanzas” urging action in Freedom’s cause.
Wendell Phillips, “the silver-tongued Demosthenes,” made his first speech in Faneuil Hall at a meeting expressing Boston’s horror at the murder of Lovejoy, amidst outcries from slavery partisans; this placed him high among American orators.
Violence and riots are then described. In May 1836, J. G. Birney—a former Kentucky slaveholder who liberated his slaves—brought out the Philanthropist in Cincinnati. In July a mob destroyed his press and types; later a crowd pillaged the office, then attacked Birney’s house, and wreaked vengeance on poor colored people’s homes. The mob was organised by wealthy influential men, including ministers and Church members. In 1834 Lewis Tappan’s house was sacked. In August 1834, a Philadelphia riot lasted three nights: forty-four colored-occupied houses were damaged, many destroyed; “Many blacks were brutally beaten, one was killed outright, and another drowned in attempting to swim the Schuylkill.” A Methodist minister speaking against slavery in Massachusetts was mobbed, his notes torn; another in New Hampshire was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment as a “common rioter and brawler.” Churches and halls closed to Abolitionists; 125 Boston citizens were refused Faneuil Hall for an anti-slavery meeting, though 1,500 later got it for pro-slavery purposes.
The Boston Female Anti-slavery Society meeting in October 1835 saw conveners menaced; posters called Thompson “the infamous foreign scoundrel,” offering one hundred dollars to the first to lay hands on him “so that he could be brought to the tar kettle.” George Thompson’s advocacy of West India emancipation was acknowledged by Lord Brougham in 1833: “He has done more than any other man to achieve it.” The mayor entreated the women to dissolve the meeting; the building was surrounded by a mob. The meeting adjourned; rioters seized Garrison, put a rope round him, knocked off his hat, tore his clothes; he was rescued by the mayor and put into Leverett Street jail to save him. This mob also was organised by wealthy, influential, reputedly pious men. The book concludes with a reference to the Florida war, which lasted eight years in the interest of Georgia slaveholders, costing nearly forty million dollars and hundreds of lives.
Main Arguments
The book argues that slavery was deeply embedded in the American colonies from their founding, with the institution present in varying degrees across all regions. The author contends that the American Revolution, despite its professed ideals of liberty, failed to address slavery due to commercial interests and political expediency. The striking out of Jefferson’s clause against the slave trade from the Declaration of Independence is presented as a pivotal moment when revolutionary principles were sacrificed to Southern pressure. The book argues that the Constitutional Convention of 1787 represented a series of concessions to the slave power, including the three-fifths compromise, the extension of the slave trade until 1808, and the fugitive slave clause. The author suggests that the New England states’ support for these concessions can be understood in light of the recent war and the fragility of the new nation, though this is presented as an explanation rather than a justification.
The book further argues that the Missouri Compromise was a disastrous triumph for the slave power, extending slavery into new territories and setting a precedent for future conflicts. The author presents the organised abolitionist movement, particularly the American Anti-slavery Society and the work of William Lloyd Garrison, as a necessary and righteous response to the evils of slavery. Garrison’s refusal to moderate his language is defended as appropriate to the gravity of the evil he opposed. The book argues that the American Colonisation Society was a hostile force disguised as benevolence, seeking to rid the country of free negroes rather than to end slavery. The persecution of abolitionists, the destruction of their presses, the mob violence against free coloured people, and the punishment of those who attempted to educate coloured students are all presented as evidence of the slave power’s grip on American society. The book argues that women played a vital role in the abolitionist movement, despite opposition from within the movement itself.
Key Concepts
The book develops the concept of the “slave power” as a dominant political and social force in American life, capable of shaping legislation, intimidating opponents, and mobilising mob violence. The term is used throughout to describe the coordinated interests of slaveholders and their allies. The book also explores the idea of “slave-breeding states,” referring to Maryland and Virginia, where it was cheaper to raise slaves than to import them. The concept of the “no Union” menace is introduced, describing the threat by Southern states to leave the confederation if their slave interests were challenged. The book presents the right of petition as a key battleground, with Southern representatives repeatedly violating this right by demanding anti-slavery petitions be rejected. The concept of “immediate emancipation” is contrasted with gradual emancipation and with colonisation schemes. The book also examines the idea of “mysterious, metaphysical, and almost electric frenzy” as a legal defence used to absolve mob participants of responsibility for their violence.
Themes
A central theme is the tension between American revolutionary ideals of liberty and the reality of slavery. The book repeatedly shows how the language of freedom was compromised by the institution of slavery, from the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution. Another theme is the corrupting influence of commercial interest, which led Northern states to support the slave trade and Southern states to defend slavery as property. The theme of religious hypocrisy runs throughout, with pro-slavery advocates citing scripture to defend the institution while abolitionists drew on religious convictions to oppose it. The book also explores the theme of mob violence as a tool of social control, showing how wealthy and influential men organised riots against abolitionists and free coloured people. The persecution of those who sought to educate coloured people is a recurring theme, from the New Haven college scheme to the Noyes Academy to Miss Crandall’s school. The theme of women’s participation in the abolitionist movement is also present, with the book noting both the contributions of women and the opposition they faced from within the movement. The theme of martyrdom is developed through the story of Elijah P. Lovejoy, whose death is presented as a turning point in the struggle. The book can be read as a form of moral history, presenting the abolitionist movement as a righteous cause battling against a powerful and corrupting institution.
The Author’s Conclusions
The author concludes that the slave power was deeply entrenched in American political and social life, having shaped the Constitution, dominated congressional debates, and suppressed dissent through violence and intimidation. The book suggests that the compromises made at the founding of the nation, particularly the extension of the slave trade until 1808 and the three-fifths clause, were disastrous concessions that allowed slavery to expand and strengthen. The author presents the abolitionist movement as the necessary response to this evil, with figures like Garrison, Whittier, Phillips, and the Grimke sisters emerging as heroes in the struggle. The book concludes that the persecution of abolitionists and free coloured people, including mob violence, legal discrimination, and the destruction of schools, demonstrated the moral bankruptcy of the slave power. The final reference to the Florida war, fought in the interest of Georgia slaveholders at tremendous cost in money and lives, serves as a concluding illustration of the lengths to which the slave power would go to protect and extend its interests.
Significance
The book is significant as a contemporary account of the American abolitionist movement written from within the struggle itself. It preserves detailed accounts of events and figures that might otherwise be forgotten, including the persecution of Miss Crandall, the destruction of the Noyes Academy, and the mob violence against abolitionists in various cities. The book provides a record of the arguments made by both sides in the slavery debate, including the biblical defences of slavery offered by Southern representatives and the moral appeals of abolitionists. The work also documents the role of women in the abolitionist movement, noting the contributions of figures like the Grimke sisters, Lydia Maria Child, Abby Kelley, and Ernestine L. Rose. The book’s account of the Missouri Compromise and the Constitutional Convention offers insight into how the slave power operated in American politics. The author’s treatment of Garrison’s philosophy and methods provides a contemporary perspective on one of the most important figures in American reform history. The book stands as a testament to the moral fervour of the abolitionist movement and as a historical record of the struggle against slavery in the years leading up to the Civil War.
