Magazine of Western History. VOL. IV. SEPTEMBER, 1886. No. 5. SLAVERY IN AMERICA. On a certain day in August, 1620, some Dutch traders brought twenty negroes to Jamestown, Virginia and sold them as slaves to the settlers. On the twentyOn the twentyfirst day of December, in the same year, the Pilgrim Fathers landed at Plymouth Rock, Massachusetts. The one date witnessed the planting in America of the seeds of slavery. The other saw a people gain foothold in the new world, who were destined to greatly enlarge the boundaries of liberty. Thus occurred almost simultaneously two events, with results so great and final outcome so different, but whose less remote consequences were fated to come in direct conflict. The first was the beginning of a pernicious system, doomed to perish in the tragedy of civil war, after nearly two hundred and fifty years of growth and power. The other was the landing of a hundred pilgrims in an unknown wilderness, destined to be the home of liberty, peopled with the uncompromising foes of African slavery. These events, so nearly coincident, contained the germs of two antagonistic civilizations that were to have place in the New World. The one starting at Plymouth-so insignificant at first and apparently of little moment, even after the lapse of years-has finally grown in volume and increased in momentum till a whole continent seems about to come under its influence. The other having its origin at Jamestown in what seemed a mere incident, but from which grew an institution that so reacted upon the people of its section as to change their habits, thoughts and instincts, and after a time make them representatives of another and opposite type of civilization—a civilization that was destined to gather strength with the flight of years, and bring under its sway all the region. of country south of the Ohio, then pass westward beyond the Mississippi, next sweep north across the Missouri, and finally contend for empire in all the western territory. Thus were developed two great social forces that, though diametrically opposite in character, rested side by side in a quiescent state for one hundred and fifty years, while under monarchical rule. But the moment kingly authority was thrown off, and a Democratic form of government assumed, these forces became active, grew aggressive towards each other, and for more than threequarters of a century contended for the mastery, till finally, like two mighty giants, they grappled in a life and death struggle. The Portuguese were pioneers in the practice of trading in negro slaves. But in due time they were followed by the Dutch, Spanish and English. As labor was very cheap in England, that country did not afford a market to the slave traffic. But in America the Spanish and Portuguese colonists, also the English settlers in Virginia and Maryland, after the introduction of tobacco culture, became steady purchasers of negroes. After a time, by importation and natural increase, the colored race became numerous and slavery existed in all the English colonies. About forty years after the system of slavery was introduced, laws began to be enacted for its control. Throughout Europe it was held that Christians could not be enslaved. In the course of time many negroes in the colonies became converts to Christianity; but laws were enacted, notwithstanding the European precedent to the contrary, to keep these Christian people and their children in bondage. In relation to serfdom in Europe, the English courts had decided that the condition of the father, whether bond or free, determined that of his offspring. In the colonies many female slaves had children whose fathers were freemen, but again the rigor of the law came in and consigned these children, like their mothers, to everlasting slavery. But so zealous were the law-makers for the spread of slavery, that a law was even passed declaring that the offspring of a free white woman by a slave should inherit the father's bondage. An owner of slaves could punish them to the extent of death and the law declared it no crime. In 1671, Maryland passed an act to encourage the importation of slaves. In 1660 South Carolina was first settled, and in a scheme of goverment drawn up for the colony by the celebrated John Locke, it was provided that "every freeman of South Carolina shall have absolute power and authority over his slaves of what opinion and religion whatsoever." Slaves could be set free only for meritorious conduct, and then a special permit had to be obtained from the governor. They were forbidden by law to raise or own horses, cows, hogs or any other domestic animals. They were also prohibited from learning to read, write or engage in any trade on their own account. Thus it will be seen that the tendency of all early legislation concerning the slave, was to make his condition one of absolute degredation and draw more and more of his race into the iron bonds of slavery and keep them there forever. After the beginning of the eighteenth century, however, the laws began to assume a more lenient form towards the negro and some effort was even made to ameliorate his condition. Finally, towards the middle of the eighteenth century the evils of slavery came to be recognized and its abolition found advocates. The centres of anti-slavery sentiment were found among the Puritans of Massachusetts and Quakers of Pennsylvania, while pro-slavery advocates were residents mainly of the south. An exAn exception, however, was found in the early history of Georgia. This colony was settled in 1732, under the auspices of General Oglethorpe. Its government was vested in a board of trustees, who were anxious to secure a virtuous and thrifty population. To further this end, the holding of slaves was forbidden and the use of rum prohibited. This, by the way, is perhaps the earliest prohibitory liquor law on record. In about twenty years after its first settlement, however, slavery became prevalent in Georgia and afterwards some of its warmest advocates were citizens of that locality. When the convention to revise the constitution met in 1787, among the delegates from the north were many opponents of slavery. The delegates from South Carolina and Georgia were zealous upholders of this institution, those from Maryland, Virginia and North Carolina were more conservative in its support, while a few from the latter states took their places in the ranks of the opposition. In fixing the basis of representation, it was provided that each state should have one representative in congress for each thirty thousand inhabitants. The delegates from the south urged that as the north was more populous than their section, they would not have due representation unless their slaves were enumerated. To this, members from the north replied that if slaves were to be enumerated and have representation like freemen, then they were entitled to liberty and other rights of freemen. If, on the other hand, they were property, and as property were to have representation, then property from the north should likewise have representation. Finally, as a sort of compromise, it was agreed that three-fifths of the whole number of slaves should be added to the total white population, and upon the aggregate thus formed, representation was to be based. After the subject had been disposed of in this manner, the northern delegates complained that this would be an incentive to the south to import more slaves, as the more slaves, the greater would be the southern representation in congress. They further urged that as the slave trade had been prohibited by all the states except North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, it was the duty of these to fall in line and do likewise. After much discussion it was ultimately arranged that the importation of slaves. should continue till 1808 and then cease. A clause was put in the constitution providing that slaves escaping from their masters and finding their way into other states should be returned to their owners. This provision, called the fugitive slave law, afterwards became specially odious to the opponents of slavery. Three-fifths representation-the provision by which the slave trade was not abolished till 1808, thus allowing it to continue twenty years-and the fugitive slave law are frequently called the compromises of the constitution, as they were mainly opposed by anti-slavery members of the convention, while the delegates from South Carolina and Georgia stated plainly that their states would not become members of the Federal Union unless these provisions became part of the constitution. But notwithstanding the three measures in the constitution regarding slavery, the word slave does not occur in that instrument; the phrases," all other persons," "importation of such persons," persons held to service," etc., are used instead. It is said that the majority of the framers of the constitution believed slavery would become extinct in the United States, soon after the termination of the slave trade in 1808, and hence avoided direct reference to the terms slave and slavery. 99.66 But in this opinion they were greatly mistaken. As in less than five years after the ratification of the constitution, the demand for more and more slaves in the south, and the probability of the slave system taking firm root in all the southern section of the Union became apparent. And strange to say, these results were brought about, largely, by a Yankee inventor. Previous to this time, slave labor had been mainly used in the cultivation of tobacco, rice, indigo and cotton. But toward the close of the last century, cotton came rapidly to the front as the main production of the south. The cotton gin was invented in 1793 by Eli Whitney, a native of Massachusetts. This invention revolutionized the cotton-producing industry in Americain fact virtually created it, as up to this time, the separation of the fibre from the cotton seeds was an exceedingly tedious process, and done only by hand. The cotton plant was introduced in America as early as 1536, but for more than two hundred and fifty years afterwards, the amount produced was very limited. A glance at the statistics of cotton exportation will show the change wrought by the cotton gin. In 1791, two years before Whitney's invention, the number of pounds exported was 189,316. In 1800, only seven years after the gin first came in use, the aggregate of pounds exported had risen to nearly 17,000,000. In 1821 the export of cotton had increased to over 124,000ooo pounds, and in 1860 reached the enormous total of 2,163,000,000 pounds. At the beginning of the present century slavery was either done away with or in process of extinction in all the states north of Maryland, and thirteen years before had been prohibited in the territory north of the Ohio river. But among the things which the young and vigorous slave-power of the south could at this period count in its favor were: The recognition by the national constitution of at least some of its claims; greatly increased importance of the cotton-growing interest; eight states in which slavery was firmly established and sustained by both the interest and sentiment of the people. With all this in his favor, it was but natural that the slave-owner should look about him for more territory in which his favorite system could expand almost indefinitely. In a short time circumstances came up by which the area of the United States was nearly doubled. When independence was achieved, the boundaries of the national government extended from the Atlantic on the east to the Mississippi river on the west, and on the north from the great lakes, and a line eastward to the ocean, to the thirty-first parallel on the south. Spain was in possession of all south and west of our borders. But in 1800 Spain ceded the Lousiana territory to France, from whom it was purchased in 1803 by the United States for fifteen million dollars-probably the most profitable real estate investment on record. The inhabitants of the Mississippi valley had for some time been subjected to many vexations because the mouth of their great river was in possession of a foreign power. As the river was the only outlet for the commerce of the interior, many complications necessarily arose. To put an end to these was one of the objects of purchase. But President Jefferson, with whom the acquisition of Louisiana was a favorite scheme, was far-seeing and believed that in the course of time this vast region would contain a dense population and teem with untold millions of wealth. In outline the Louisiana territory, as ultimately defined, may not inaptly be compared to an inverted triangle, having for its base so much of the southern boundary of the British possession as lies between the Rocky mountains and Lake Superior; for its perpendicular the Mississippi river; for its apex the southern border of the present state of Louisiana; and for its irregular hypothenuse a zigzag line stretching from the mouth of the Sabine river northwest to the Rocky mountains, thence along this mountain chain, in the same general direction, to the British boundary. Some idea of the magnitude of Jefferson's purchase may be formed by calling to mind that this vast territory today embraces the states of Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, and large portions of Colorado and Minnesota and the territories of Dakota, Wyoming, Montana and Indian Territory; that its population perhaps exceeds ten millions-nearly twice the number of people in the whole Union when Jefferson was first inauguratedand that there are counties in Kansasone of the newer states in which the farming lands alone would perhaps sell for more than the first cost of the Louisiana territory. In 1812 Lousiana, from the southern portion of this territory, applied for admission as a slave state, and on this account received considerable opposition. But in the end no real obstacle was put in the way of her taking position in the family of states. But eight years later when Missouri sought to become a |