The Civil War and the Role of Slavery

 

2011 commemorates the 150^th anniversary of the outbreak of the Civil War. On April 12, 1861, Fort Sumter was bombarded by Confederate cannons in Charleston, South Carolina; the fort’s commander, Major Robert Anderson, surrendered the next day. What caused the disunity between North and South? President Lincoln provided the answer in his March 4, 1865 Second Inaugural Address: “One-eighth of the whole population were colored slaves…localized in the [South]…These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was somehow the cause of the war.” Slavery, according to Lincoln, was an “American” problem.

 

Further Clues to Slavery in Lincoln’s Second Inaugural Address

 

In his third paragraph, Lincoln links the “bondsman’s two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil” with the blood drawn by the sword. This was his explanation for the Civil War, tied to the judgment of a just God. American slavery was an offense, a stumbling block that “He now wills to remove…”

 

Slavery Identified as the Chief Separation between North and South

 

That slavery was intricately tied to the conflict was always known. In 1858, New York Senator William Henry Seward, in a speech delivered in Rochester, New York, stated that, “…the United States must and will, sooner or later, become either entirely a slave-holding nation or entirely a free labor nation.” This was Seward’s “irrepressible conflict” speech.

 

Lincoln himself spoke of a “house divided” in Springfield, Illinois June 16, 1858. Lincoln proclaimed that, “I believe this government cannot endure, permanently half slave and half free.” When southern states began to leave the Union, Lincoln reread the opinions of Chief Justice John Marshall, determining that “states’ rights” did not abrogate the Constitution or the doctrine of federal supremacy.

 

Lincoln and the Legality of American Slavery

 

In the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson asserted that, “…all men are created equal…” During the 1858 Lincoln-Douglas debates, Lincoln, in response to Douglas’ interpretation that Jefferson never meant to include non-whites, rebutted that the statement represented a “promise” for future generations.

 

Although Lincoln rejected Southern justifications based on biblical passages that appeared to condone slavery, he also maintained that as long as slavery was the law of the land, he would not touch it. This was one of the points Lincoln made in his First Inaugural Address.

 

In a March 6, 1860 speech given in New Haven, Connecticut, Lincoln concurred with Seward’s notion of an “irrepressible conflict” and stated, “Does anything in any way endanger the perpetuity of the Union but that single thing, slavery?” Yet Lincoln also supported efforts to resettle emancipated slaves.

 

In 1862, slaves in the District of Columbia were finally emancipated by Congress, the final bill signed by Lincoln. Lincoln applauded the fund that had been set up to relocate the former slaves outside of the United States.

 

Lincoln and the Biblical Foundation of a Civil Theology

 

Political Science professor Joseph Fornieri identifies several key elements of Lincoln’s biblical opposition to slavery. He includes Lincoln’s “…affirmation of a common humanity created in the image of God…” as well as the “Golden Rule,” and the “Great Commandment.”

 

In many of his writings, including the 2^nd Inaugural, Lincoln refers to Genesis 3.19 in which man was to earn his bread by the sweat of his brow, not another man’s. His writings also show displeasure with Southern proslavery arguments as seen in a May 30, 1864 letter to Baptists in which he compared the Christian acceptance of slavery to Satan’s temptation of Christ.

 

Lincoln’s Views on Slavery as Perceived in the South

 

When Lincoln won the 1860 presidential election, the Charleston Mercury predicted that the Underground Railroad would become the “Over ground Railroad” and that the individual value of slaves would drop dramatically. Referring to the gathering “storm,” historian David Detzer writes that, “…at its core lay the fear white Southerners had about the possibility of slavery’s demise…that Lincoln…might attempt to free the slaves.”

 

Lincoln’s Republican rival at the national convention was New York Senator William Henry Seward. Seward was far blunter in his views on slavery, denying any there was any Constitutional recognition of property in man. On another occasion, Seward stated that, “…there is no Christian nation, thus free to choose as we are, which would establish slavery.” In 1850, as a freshman Senator involved in the Compromise debates, he declared that “there is a higher law than the Constitution…”

 

All Knew that the Slavery Interest was the Cause of the War

 

Lincoln managed to portray the “offense” of slavery both as a secular and a theological issue. Slavery violated the “just” nature of God as well as the supposed Enlightenment “republicanism” of Jefferson’s Declaration.

 

The 150^th anniversary of Ft. Sumter will produce many writings on Lincoln, slavery, Republicans, Southern Democrats, and reignite a fierce debate as to the role of the “peculiar” institution in the coming of war. Despite these debate differences, the discussions will be worthwhile, forcing Americans to reread Lincoln, Seward, and other leaders for clues and explanations.

 

Sources:

 

Gabor S. Boritt, editor, Why The Civil War Came (Oxford University Press, 1996)

David Detzer, Dissonance: The Turbulent Days Between Fort Sumter and Bull Run (Harcourt, Inc., 2006)

The Language of Liberty: The Political Speeches and Writings of Abraham Lincoln, Joseph R. Fornieri, editor (Regenery, 2003)

Ray Raphael, Founding Myths: Stories That Hide Our Patriotic Past (The New Press, 2004)

Page Smith, The Nation Comes of Age: A People’s History of the Ante-Bellum Years (McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1981)

Published 12/14/2010 M.Streich copyright, Suite101