Founding Father's on Slavery

It has been alleged that Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is ignorant of history because she has stated that our Founding Fathers fought against slavery, and that this is just not true.

Here are the facts.

Benjamin Franklin was very outspoken and active in his opposition to the practice of slavery. In addition to countless public and private expressions of his opposition to human slavery, Benjamin Franklin founded the Pennsylvania Abolition Society in 1789.

In 1786, just prior to the constitutional convention in 1787, Hamilton and others signed a petition to the New York state legislature urging an end to the slave trade, which he identified as “a commerce so repugnant to humanity, and so inconsistent with the liberality and justice which should distinguish a free and enlightened people.” This petition was widely circulated in the press and otherwise. Hamilton, along with John Jay, its first President, was instrumental in organizing the “New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves and Protecting Such of Them as Have been or may be liberated.” Hamilton served as its second President, succeeding John Jay. He held this position, throughout the whole of his term as secretary of the treasury, and up until his death in 1804.

John Jay wrote in 1780:

“An excellent law might be made out of the Pennsylvania one for the gradual abolition of slavery. Till America comes into this measure, her prayers to Heaven for liberty will be impious. This is a strong expression, but it is just. Were I in your Legislature, I would prepare a bill for the purpose with great care; and I would never cease moving it till it became a law, or I ceased to be a member. I believe God governs the world; and I believe it to be a maxim in his as in our court, that those who ask for equity ought to do it.”

Jay would write again in 1785, on the eve of the effort to create the Constitutional form of government ultimately adopted:

”It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honor of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused.”

A year later, Jay would draft a memorial to the New York Legislature on the abolition of slavery, signed by Jay, Alexander Hamilton, Robert Livingstone, among others, addressing the issue of slavery, which opened with the following declaration:

”Your memorialists, being deeply affected by the situation of those who, although free by the laws of God, are held in slavery by the laws of this State, view with pain and regret the additional miseries which these people experience from the practice of exporting them, like cattle, to the West Indies and the Southern States.”

You can also go HERE to get more on this fiction that Bachmann was wrong on this point.

When we talk about "the Founding Fathers," we are talking about maybe 50 or so different individuals involved in the signing of the Declaration of Independence and/or the framing of the Constitution, of whom about 7 are household names (Adams, Franklin, Hamilton, Jay, Jefferson, Madison, Washington). They were a pretty heterogeneous lot in terms of background, religion, and political ideology; blanket statements about the Founding Fathers collectively tend to miss this fact.

They were as divided on slavery as on anything; this is precisely why the Constitutional Convention did not address slavery and indeed why the Constitution has provisions explicitly recognizing slavery (which were of course made null and void later by the 13th Amendment).

Ms. Bachmann would be closer to the truth if she said that some of the Founding Fathers fought to abolish slavery, while others fought for it.

You've got Jefferson in your avatar. Jefferson owned hundreds of slaves, most of whom were not freed after his death. He was 'anti-slavery', though, in a rather half-assed way, believing it should be eventually phased out rather than ended immediately. John Adams on the other hand was a fierce opponent of slavery all his life. Ms. Bachmann was probably thinking of him when she referred to John Quincy Adams--who was 9 in 1776.

kronos wrote:When we talk about "the Founding Fathers," we are talking about maybe 50 or so different individuals involved in the signing of the Declaration of Independence and/or the framing of the Constitution, of whom about 7 are household names (Adams, Franklin, Hamilton, Jay, Jefferson, Madison, Washington). They were a pretty heterogeneous lot in terms of background, religion, and political ideology; blanket statements about the Founding Fathers collectively tend to miss this fact.

They were as divided on slavery as on anything; this is precisely why the Constitutional Convention did not address slavery and indeed why the Constitution has provisions explicitly recognizing slavery (which were of course made null and void later by the 13th Amendment).

Quite true, and I would submit that 50 might be low, but it is certainly many more than those well known figures you cite. And were indeed divided on the issue of slavery, and many other issues.

kronos wrote:Ms. Bachmann would be closer to the truth if she said that some of the Founding Fathers fought to abolish slavery, while others fought for it.

I agree, that would have been a truer statement.

kronos wrote:You've got Jefferson in your avatar. Jefferson owned hundreds of slaves, most of whom were not freed after his death. He was 'anti-slavery', though, in a rather half-assed way, believing it should be eventually phased out rather than ended immediately.

Almost all of this is spot on. The only miss is that Jefferson's will called for freeing his slaves after his death with the proviso that this be effected only after his wife's death. But after his death, his wife felt that this provision of his will would give too much of a motive to her slaves to hasten her departure from this world, so she freed them immediately after his death.

kronos wrote:John Adams on the other hand was a fierce opponent of slavery all his life. Ms. Bachmann was probably thinking of him when she referred to John Quincy Adams--who was 9 in 1776.

Yes, I'm sure she meant John, not John Quincy (our 6th President). And John Adams was not only a fierce opponent of slavery, it was his Declaration of Rights, which he wrote into the Massachusetts Constitution that abolished slavery in that state.

Abe Lincoln freed some slaves with the "emancipation proclamation" then got shot in the head.
I wonder if he ever thought to himself "wow that wasn't that great of an idea that slave freeing thing..." as he was on the bed bleeding from a gunshot wound to the head.
Hey if he stuck around long enough he could have seen his party lose seats in congress due to the slave freeing issue.

(Just another case of politicians not considering ALL sides of an issue and only doing the popular thing)

TheNextPrez2012 wrote:Hey if he stuck around long enough he could have seen his party lose seats in congress due to the slave freeing issue.

I don't know where you get that.

Repubs took control of the Senate in 1861 and held it till 1879.
From 1861 to 1863, they lost 2 seats (and held control).

In the House, the Repubs held it from 1859 to 1875. The Dems lost 59 seats in the House after the Emancipation (from 101 to 42). The Dems lost 27 seats in the Senate after the Emancipation (from 38 to 11).

So, who's party lost a shit load of seats? Democrats. Again, it was the Democrats who were against the release of slaves. Yet, history revisionists (not you in particular) always call Repubs the racists over the years. It doesn't matter that most Dems were in the south at the time. It doesn't make a shit. The party was pro-slavery, pure and simple.

TheNextPrez2012 wrote:\Hey if he stuck around long enough he could have seen his party lose seats in congress due to the slave freeing issue.

On what evidence do you base such conjecture?

TheNextPrez2012 wrote:Abe Lincoln freed some slaves with the "emancipation proclamation" then got shot in the head.

Abe Lincoln was not a *Founding Father.*

I wonder if he ever thought to himself "wow that wasn't that great of an idea that slave freeing thing..." as he was on the bed bleeding from a gunshot wound to the head.

He was in a coma, so no, he was not thinking that. If he were capable of thought at all after the bullet entered his brain, he probably would've died with a smile on his face, because his whole 'thing' was keeping the Union intact, and he accomplished exactly that.

Hey if he stuck around long enough he could have seen his party lose seats in congress due to the slave freeing issue.

As Tex points out, this simply didn't happen.

(Just another case of politicians not considering ALL sides of an issue and only doing the popular thing)

I don't know where you get this idea that he did it because he thought it would be "popular."

It was a military strategy. He did it to win the war, plain and simple.

dblboggie wrote:It has been alleged that Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is ignorant of history because she has stated that our Founding Fathers fought against slavery, and that this is just not true.

Here are the facts.

Benjamin Franklin was very outspoken and active in his opposition to the practice of slavery. In addition to countless public and private expressions of his opposition to human slavery, Benjamin Franklin founded the Pennsylvania Abolition Society in 1789.

In 1786, just prior to the constitutional convention in 1787, Hamilton and others signed a petition to the New York state legislature urging an end to the slave trade, which he identified as “a commerce so repugnant to humanity, and so inconsistent with the liberality and justice which should distinguish a free and enlightened people.” This petition was widely circulated in the press and otherwise. Hamilton, along with John Jay, its first President, was instrumental in organizing the “New York Society for Promoting the Manumission of Slaves and Protecting Such of Them as Have been or may be liberated.” Hamilton served as its second President, succeeding John Jay. He held this position, throughout the whole of his term as secretary of the treasury, and up until his death in 1804.

John Jay wrote in 1780:

“An excellent law might be made out of the Pennsylvania one for the gradual abolition of slavery. Till America comes into this measure, her prayers to Heaven for liberty will be impious. This is a strong expression, but it is just. Were I in your Legislature, I would prepare a bill for the purpose with great care; and I would never cease moving it till it became a law, or I ceased to be a member. I believe God governs the world; and I believe it to be a maxim in his as in our court, that those who ask for equity ought to do it.”

Jay would write again in 1785, on the eve of the effort to create the Constitutional form of government ultimately adopted:

”It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honor of the States, as well as justice and humanity, in my opinion, loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused.”

A year later, Jay would draft a memorial to the New York Legislature on the abolition of slavery, signed by Jay, Alexander Hamilton, Robert Livingstone, among others, addressing the issue of slavery, which opened with the following declaration:

”Your memorialists, being deeply affected by the situation of those who, although free by the laws of God, are held in slavery by the laws of this State, view with pain and regret the additional miseries which these people experience from the practice of exporting them, like cattle, to the West Indies and the Southern States.”

You can also go HERE to get more on this fiction that Bachmann was wrong on this point.

I think the argument is that there was NO slavery in this nation at the time of its inception. Isn't that what Bachmann said, that they ABOLISHED it? I think so.

And your avatar proves that wrong. Tom had slaves during his presidency, as did all others. The constitution even only gave them 3/5ths of being human.

Cookie Parker wrote:I think the argument is that there was NO slavery in this nation at the time of its inception. Isn't that what Bachmann said, that they ABOLISHED it? I think so.

My good-faith effort to reproduce her exact words turned up this:

We know there was slavery that was still tolerated when the nation began. We know that it was an evil, and a scourge, and a blot, and a stain upon our history. But we also know that the very founders who wrote those documents worked tirelessly until slavery was no more in the United States and I think it is high time we recognize the contribution of our forebearers who worked tirelessly; men like John Quincy Adams who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country.

So, she is saying there was slavery at the time of inception, but that the Founders worked tirelessly to eliminate it, and she implies that John Quincy Adams lived to see the end of slavery.

It's simply not true.

Cookie Parker wrote:Tom had slaves during his presidency, as did all others.

All?

That's just as false. c.f. John Adams.