SLAVERY AND THE CONSTITUTION How did the United States government respond to slavery?

THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION  Slavery existed BEFORE the United States was an independent country.  Slavery was a problem for the founding fathers.  The Declaration of Independence (think “ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL”) was written by a slave owner. Slave owners had power, and the new government needed their support.  Many Northerners were morally opposed to slavery and believed that equality was a natural law.  So what did the founding fathers do?

THEY (MOSTLY) IGNORED SLAVERY.

THE SLAVE OWNER’S VIEW  The South was the economic powerhouse of the colonies.  Growing cotton, indigo, tobacco, and other crops required slave labor to make money.  Plantation owners were important to the government because they were rich.  Slaves made up 1/5 of the total population of the colonies, mostly in the South.  Counting those slaves in the population would give the South more representatives in Congress.  Some Southern states were still dependent on the Atlantic Slave trade.

“WE HAVE SEEN THE MERE DISTINCTION OF COLOUR MADE IN THE MOST ENLIGHTENED PERIOD OF TIME, A GROUND OF THE MOST OPPRESSIVE DOMINION EVER EXERCISED BY MAN OVER MAN.” James Madison, in 1787…

THE ABOLITIONIST’S VIEW  Slavery was morally wrong and violated the “natural rights” of men.  The political philosophy behind the Revolution was all about independence and equality.  Free blacks petitioned their colonial governments for freedom.  Black Americans were essential to winning the Revolutionary War.  Most blacks were Patriots and believed the war would lead to an end to slavery.  Crispus Attucks, a black man, died for the Patriot cause.  Black soldiers fought in the war, sometimes leading to their freedom.

THE GOVERNMENT’S SOLUTION The terms “slave” and “slavery” DID NOT APPEAR in the Constitution.  What DID appear?  The 3/5 Compromise  Each slave would count as 3/5 of a person in determining population.

THE GOVERNMENT’S SOLUTION The terms “slave” and “slavery” DID NOT APPEAR in the Constitution.  What DID appear?  The 3/5 Compromise  Each slave would count as 3/5 of a person in determining population.  The Slave Trade Clause  Congress could ban the Atlantic Slave Trade, but not until 1808.

THE GOVERNMENT’S SOLUTION The terms “slave” and “slavery” DID NOT APPEAR in the Constitution.  What DID appear?  The 3/5 Compromise  Each slave would count as 3/5 of a person in determining population.  The Slave Trade Clause  Congress could ban the Atlantic Slave Trade, but not until  The Fugitive Slave Law  Escaped slaves in the North could be returned to their owners in the South.

LET’S PUT THE LAW TO THE TEST. Investigate a real court case from 1854 that deals with the Fugitive Slave Clause.

COLONEL CHARLES F. SUTTLE V. ANTHONY BURNS (1854) Plaintiff: Suttle (Slave Owner)Defendant: Burns (Slave)  Claims that Burns is his slave, that Burns escaped from Virginia to Massachusetts, and that Burns owes him labor under the Fugitive Slave Clause and the Fugitive Slave Act of  Asking the court to force Burns to return to Virginia as a slave.  Claims that the Fugitive Slave Clause and Fugitive Slave Acts deny him his rights to a trial by jury, unreasonable search and seizure, and liberty.  Asking the court to dismiss the case, as there is no allowable evidence to prove he is the slave in question.

EVIDENCE Evidence 1BUT…  Virginia court record of ownership stating that Burns was the slave of Suttle, that he escaped, and that his identity is confirmed.  The document is not an original.  The Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 required that state documents of ownership have an official seal. Documents without an official seal could not be used as evidence in court.

EVIDENCE Evidence 2BUT…  A description of Anthony Burns from the Virginia record which meets the appearance of the defendant. It states that he is of dark complexion, is approximately six feet tall, and has a scar on his cheek and one on his hand.  The description is vague.  Anthony Burns was a free man working in Massachusetts at the time of his alleged escape.

EVIDENCE Evidence 3BUT…  Testimony of William Brent of Virginia, who said:  Burns belonged to Suttle for years and to the Suttle family for longer.  He (Brent) had leased Burns from Suttle in the past and Burns was leased to another man last year.  He saw Burns, the same man in court beside him, on the escape date in question.  If Burns was leased to another man, Suttle cannot reclaim him.  Burns presented three witnesses that testified to seeing him working as a free man in Massachusetts prior to the date in question.

EVIDENCE Evidence 4BUT…  An overheard conversation between Burns and Suttle in which…  Burns recognized and named Suttle.  Burns admitted to accidentally fleeing to Boston on a boat.  Burns agrees to return to Virginia.  The conversation was forced by a powerful slave owner and was false. It should not be allowed in court.  If it was true that Burns fled by accident, he is not an escaped slave and cannot be considered a fugitive.

SHOULD BURNS REMAIN FREE, OR SHOULD HE RETURN TO SLAVERY? What would you rule?

THE COURT SAID… Burns is the same slave in question and owes Suttle service and labor. He must be returned to bondage in Virginia.  Why?  William Brent’s testimony was “more convincing”  The court record was acceptable evidence.  The court was fully convinced of Burns’s identity.

WAS THE CONSTITUTION PRO- SLAVERY OR ANTI-SLAVERY? DID THE LIVES OF BLACK AMERICANS GET BETTER OR WORSE UNDER THE CONSTITUTION? What do you think?