The slave trade : $b Slavery and colorJervey, Theodore D. (Theodore Dehon)
History
The slave trade : $b Slavery and color
Jervey, Theodore D. (Theodore Dehon)
African Americans; Slave trade -- United States; Slavery -- United States; United States -- Race relations
“I consider the Tariff, but as the occasion rather than the real cause
of the present unhappy state of things.”[390]
Strange to state, even at that early date, he writes of the South
possibly being compelled to “rebel,” to preserve her “peculiar
institution.”
Fortunately for the Lower South, Lincoln and not Seward was elected
president in 1860; for had Seward been raised to that position of
preeminence, in all human probability the seven States of South
Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and
Texas would have been allowed to secede and attempt the experiment of
government involved therein, with a population of 2,619,116 whites,
36,861 free persons of color, many of whom were slave owners, and
2,312,372 Negro slaves.
That the colored population would have increased rapidly is a
reasonable conclusion. Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and
Tennessee, in all probability, would have speedily divested themselves
of a great proportion of the 1,324,166 slaves they held and, even if
such Southern statesmen as Leonidas Washington Spratt had not been
able to reopen the African slave trade, the smuggling in of slaves on
a greater and greater increasing scale would have been a consequence.
Slavery being the corner stone of the new political structure, it
would have been natural that the view of Governor Seabrook, that slave
holding Negroes should be admitted to the ballot, would have eventually
prevailed. War might have come between the large and small sections
of North America from some frontier incident concerning Arkansas,
the Indian Territory or Mexico; but it could scarcely have been the
pulverizing conflict which the Lower South sustained by the two and
a half million additional whites of Virginia, North Carolina and
Tennessee, maintained for four years of desperate struggle.
Each year that the conflict was delayed would have found the States
which remained in the old Union stronger and whiter, sickling the
seceded States with railroads and quite possibly drawing Canada into
their orbit; for as Sir Charles Dilke has pointed out in his Problems
of Greater Britain, published when the annexation of Canada was still a
debatable question—
“a fact often overlooked in England is that hitherto the western
centres of population of British North America have been more
intimately connected with districts lying South of them across the
American frontier than with places East and West of them, within the
Canadian border.”[391]
The days of the “Little Englanders” were only then passing, when the
colonies had almost been considered a nuisance.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account