Roman Paluch-Machnik

Slavery and Freedom in the Antebellum South

Professor Erin Austin Dwyer

Spring 2014

Slavery and Freedom Final Paper: Emancipation/ Impacts of Freedom

In this paper, it will be argued that the role of Abraham Lincoln is of vital importance

in understanding not only emancipation, but how freedom would take shape in the south, and

the experiences of black populations following the end of the civil war. To gain an

understanding of Lincoln’s presidency and its relationship to the institution of slavery, this

paper will first look at the inaugural address of Lincoln in 1861 and the Emancipation

Proclamation for which he is so commonly associated and celebrated (Dirck, 2007). Through

close analyses of the themes and wording of these speeches, particularly his first inaugural

address given its complexities and tense climate in which it was given, I will argue that

Lincoln very clearly showed himself to prioritize maintenance of the union over calls for

freedom. Emancipation was a subject he sought to avoid, and whether or not he privately

believed in freeing the enslaved population, his public addresses belied any such belief. After

looking at these speeches, and the contradictions and ambiguities evidenced by Lincoln in

America’s relationship with the institution of slavery, I will look at how this hesitation in

bringing emancipation manifested itself in the south, and the period of reconstruction.

In Lincoln’s first inaugural address we see a number of themes reoccur throughout the

speech, which suggest Lincolns penchant for diplomacy rather radicalism, specifically with

regards to slavery. The tone of the speech is immediately set with his first words admitting

that the address would not discuss matters of which, “there is no special anxiety, or

excitement” instead immediately going on to address “apprehensions” of the southern states

(Lincoln, 1861). From this point on, Lincoln’s entire speech seems to almost explicitly be

directed at the south. As such, it seems the sole motivation for the views expressed in his

inaugural address, and context behind which his presidency would be based, were ensuring

the maintenance of the union, rather than freedom for the enslaved population. Many more of

the ideas expressed in this speech seem to support such a bases for Lincoln’s presidency,

making the “great emancipator” role he has often been cast as in the history of slavery, far

more questionable. (Dirck, 2007) His emphasis on unconditionally upholding the

constitution, be it the fugitive slave act, or a lack of provision for states to secede, can be seen

to exemplify Lincoln’s attempts at diplomacy and avoid further confrontation between north

and south. In trying to induce common ground between them, i.e. the constitution and its

sovereignty over the nation, Lincoln sought to mediate peace between the two regions.

It is interesting to see Lincoln in this address invoke the history of America as a means

of defending and ensuring the continuation of the union. It is precisely through his attempts at

inducing nationalist sentiment, that his tacit acceptance of the institution of slavery becomes

clear, seemingly content to leave a large portion of the union enslaved. In his recital of the

history of the constitution, the document which was, “to form a more perfect union”, Lincoln

makes no recognition of the institution to which this history is intrinsically linked (Lincoln,

1861) In the speech, Lincoln clearly prioritizes the union over emancipation, reassuring

southern agitators that his calls for the continuation of the union should, “not be regarded as a

menace.” (Lincoln, 1861) In so doing, he not only fails to make any calls for emancipation,

but also shows no recognition of the immorality of slavery. This lack of acknowledgement is

but one example of Lincoln’s need to frame the entire speech within the context of southern

ideologies of the time.

This perception of Lincoln’s address is not simply based on the language he does not

use, but more importantly in the language, and rhetoric he does use. “Apprehension exists

among the southern states that… their property, peace and security are to be endangered.”

(Lincoln, 1861) While Lincoln goes on to make clear, in no uncertain terms, that he has no

plans to intervene in any way with the institution of slavery where it already exists, it is his

repeated use of the term property, that is most revealing of his publicly held opinions on

slavery. In using such a term we can again clearly see Lincoln catering his address to a

southern audience. By repeatedly referring to the ‘property’ belonging to southerners, a term

used to reiterate slaveholders’ legal right to own a person, Lincoln both acknowledges this

right, and reinforces it, in both using the term, and proposing no change to it. Another

example of how Lincoln’s rhetoric seems to enforce rather than undermine the existence of

slavery in America, comes again when he tries to connect with the south through nationalism,

“Before entering upon so grave a matter as the destruction of national fabric, with all its

benefits, its memories, and its hopes…” (Lincoln, 1861) When Lincoln emotes the idea of the

American nation here as something that should be preserved as much for ‘its memories’ as

anything else, this positive and idealized impression implicitly denies any existence of

slavery in the national history, and the ‘memories’ black Americans would have of the

institution and their imaginings of what America is.

In this analysis of Lincoln’s inaugural address, there is one more quote that best

exemplifies the contradictions of Lincoln’s speech, between the rhetoric of the union

expressed and its realities. In posing the rhetorical question of when a “plainly written

provision of the Constitution has ever been denied” Lincoln surmises that, “If, by the mere

force of numbers, a majority should ever deprive a minority of any clearly written

constitutional right, it might, in a moral point of view, justify revolution.” (Lincoln, 1861)

Was this not the entire bases upon which the existence of black people in America was

predicated. It is hard to believe that Lincoln made such a statement without any consideration

for the institution of slavery. As such this is perhaps the most damning indictment of

Lincoln’s attitudes toward slavery, and his unwillingness to challenge the deep-rooted nature

of the institution. This quote also best illustrates the contradictions evidenced throughout the

speech. On numerous occasions claiming his presidency would be one of upholding every

letter of the constitution, he simultaneously ignores any attempts to make black people free

and equal. Giving them the opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness that he

claimed had never been denied to any of the population.

Although the very enactment of the Emancipation Proclamation, by Lincoln, could be

cited as a counter argument to the above analysis of his attitudes toward slavery, when

looking at the proclamation, it can arguably still be read as supporting the idea of Lincoln’s

lack of conviction in undergoing the process of emancipating slaves. Despite the subject of

the proclamation, and the effects it would have, Lincoln’s speech is still very clearly pursuing

the path of diplomacy, and avoids any inflammatory language. While his speech does

necessarily make clear the legal ramifications of the declaration, it is an extremely technical

speech, devoid of any personal attachment to passing such a piece of landmark legislation.

The only recognition for the morality of the proclamation comes at the end of the speech,

“And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution,

upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind…” (Lincoln, 1863)

Even in this quote we see Lincoln qualify the ‘act of justice’ with the constitutional right to

enact it, as well as undermining the legal freedom of black people as a measure of ‘military

necessity’. Such a lack of recognition of the deserved nature of this law in the face of the

centuries of black oppression that America practiced, can again be seen, with Lincoln

suggesting the Emancipation Proclamation, “as a fit and necessary war measure for

suppressing said rebellion…” (Lincoln, 1863) Rarely addressing the very people who this

proclamation would be directly influencing, this speech makes clear, as the above quotes

suggest, that the proclamation was introduced within the wider military context of 1863. A

means to help end the war, and defeat the rebels seeking to split from, and destroy the union.

As such, despite its effects, this proclamation seems to very clearly continue Lincoln’s public

attitude of prioritizing the union over emancipation, which was so prevalent in his inaugural

address. At no point does Lincoln make any claim for the freedom brought about by

emancipation, to be a right that should have been fundamentally enjoyed by the black

population. Furthermore, the very date of the proclamation, enacted over a year into the civil

war, can be seen as tangible evidence of Lincoln’s hesitation in passing it. The lack of gravity

with which the law was received in the south, with fifty thousand of the possible four million

enslaved people emancipated upon its enactment, could be said to reflect Lincoln’s delay in

enacting the Emancipation Proclamation (Dwyer lecture, 04/09). This figure is not being

stated to undermine the importance of the enactment of the emancipation proclamation

however, but given the preliminary proclamation that was given one hundred days prior to its

actual enforcement on January 1st, slaveholders were informed in advance that this was the

day they were to emancipate their slaves. In this respect, the fifty thousand of a possible four

million, can be seen as a reflection of the hegemonies of white supremacy that endured in the

south, which this paper, through the analysis of his first inaugural address and emancipation

proclamation, showed Lincoln to do very little to confront.

In analysing Lincoln’s presidency through these two key speeches we clearly see the

ideologies upon which his presidency was predicated. In failing to attempt to tackle the

extremely racialised nature of southern society, even catering to those ideologies in his

inaugural address, Lincoln, while he can’t be solely blamed for the continuation of white

supremacist attitudes in the south, made little attempt to dispel those attitudes. Such an

approach could be revealing of Lincoln’s own views towards the black population, and is

certainly evidence of his ambivalence toward equality between white and black Americans.

Given that his presidency was filled with such turmoil and decisive moments in the history of

America, the lack of precedent in changing race relations, despite the emancipation

proclamation, allowed reconstruction to develop on the bases of pre-existing racial

hegemonies, “And so the patterns of racial violence and reprisals, echoes from the days of

slavery, continued after emancipation.” (Clinton, 1992, p.318) In describing the patterns of

white on black violence, and continuation of antebellum era racialised practices that

persevered during reconstruction, this quote by Catherine Clinton exemplifies the argument

put forward in this paper. While the article is not a commentary on Lincoln or his presidency,

in framing reconstruction within the context of emancipation, she emphasizes its

shortcomings in establishing equality between races. Not only this, but her analysis of

continued white violence during reconstruction, with former slaves recognizing the

limitations to federal support, rarely resorting to calls for union troops to aid them, doing so,

“only in utter desperation” showed an understanding of the role that union troops played in

south during reconstruction. (Clinton, 1992, p.319) For the emancipated, an acceptance of the

limited time and presence of their emancipators in the south after the war, can be seen as

problematic in understanding Lincoln’s role in the freedom that would follow emancipation.

This seems clear evidence of the nature of Union presence in the south. One predicated on

defeating the confederate rebellion and maintenance of the union. With little emphasis upon

emancipation, or in light of the union victory, equality, clear vestiges of the rhetoric upon

which Lincoln’s presidency was based.

In a speech given by Frederick Douglass by the name of ‘what the black man wants’,

while never making any direct mention of Lincoln, it is clear the failings he perceived of the

presidency, specifically in the nature behind calls to maintain the union. Racial hegemonies

of the antebellum era, and sentiments upon which the confederacy fought, were continued

under reconstruction (Clinton, 1992, Harcourt, 2002) Yet in this speech, delivered in 1865,

Douglass accurately predicts that such a process would manifest itself in the south, “You will

see those traitors, handing down, from sire to son, the same malignant spirit which they have

manifested and which they are now exhibiting…” (Douglass, 1865) Douglass in going on to

explain these beliefs, while never mentioning Lincoln’s name, directly criticizes the union

and its role in reinforcing racist ideologies which would continue to reduce the position of the

black man in society. “[war] …was begun, I say, in the interest of slavery on both sides. The

South was fighting to take slavery out of the Union, and the North was fighting to keep it in

the Union…the South fighting for new guarantees, and the North fighting for the old

guarantees;--both despising the Negro, both insulting the Negro.” (Douglass, 1865) Such

condemnation of the union, and its motivations, seem to be a direct criticism of Lincoln’s

administration. In a speech given the same month of Lincoln’s assassination, April 1865,

making no mention of the man who introduced the emancipation proclamation, Douglass’

speech can be interpreted as a direct criticism of Lincoln, and his failings in asserting and

creating provisions for the application of equality between black and white people after

freedom was given. In Douglass’ assertion of the north’s motivations for war as ‘fighting for

old guarantees’, the understanding of Lincoln’s presidency put forward by this paper,

particularly in the reading of his inaugural address, bare similarities to the sentiments of

Douglass’ speech and his criticisms of the motivations behind maintenance of the union. At

the core of Douglass’ argument is his belief that the only way to ensure equality for black

people is through, “the "immediate, unconditional, and universal" enfranchisement of the

black man… Without this, his liberty is a mockery… he is the slave of society.” (Douglass,

1865) In this quote, Douglass’ speech can again be interpreted as a fairly direct criticism of

the Lincoln administration. In not giving the black population complete enfranchisement, for

the emancipated, ‘his liberty is a mockery’. Douglass not only argues that full equality had

not been realized for black people, and would be reproduced as such throughout the south,

but specifically cites how he believed to ensure equality for black people. In all of these

ideas, we see Douglass undermine the importance of recent emancipation and more

importantly, how the union, or Lincoln, was culpable for these shortcomings.

In accordance with the views expressed by Douglass, practices that continued to

enforce the ideologies of white supremacy across the south, could be said to be a symptom of

the failings in condoning, and attempting to enforce measures for black equality, such as the

vote, by Lincoln. In Carl Schurz analysis of the south after the war, he observes of white

southerners who supported the confederacy an insistence, “plainly that they would submit

only to what they could not resist and as long as they could not resist it.” (Schurz, 1865, p.4)

This quote encapsulates much of the sentiment of the south during reconstruction, as much of

white society strived to live in as close a proximity to the conditions of the antebellum era as

possible. Where possible, conditions of the antebellum era were continued. We again see in

his report, the impotent nature of the Emancipation Proclamation, with the rural areas of the

south, “where union soldiers had never been seen and none were near, people were at first

hardly aware of the catastrophe, and strove to continue in their old ways of living.” (Schurz,

1865) Scholars have also emphasized this observation by Schurz, in the southern attempts at

perpetuating ideologies from the slave era in the wake of the civil war. Events such as the

whipping of Richard Moore, a black man questionably accused of assaulting a white woman,

is described by John Harcourt as an event that was, “in many ways an unexceptional event in

the context of reconstruction.” (Harcourt, 2002, p.261) Clearly hegemonies of the south had

not been overcome by the war, or emancipation. As Schurz’s analysis of the south suggests,

the only reason for any southern practices that existed before the war, to be changed after it,

was through an inability to resist the change. Any practices over which southerners had

agency, therefore, were to attempted to be maintained. The introduction of the black codes

across the south, in this regard, is of vital importance to the maintenance of racialized

southern society.

In Lincoln’s failure to introduce more meaningful and legally enforced conditions for

the equality of black people, the Mississippi black code for example, sought to fill these

ambiguous voids created by emancipation, with no provisions provided to enforce equality

that should have been an inherent aspect of the freedom granted to black people. As such,

among the numerous provisions introduced by the Mississippi black code, black people could

not, “rent or lease any land or tenaments”, legally carry a weapon and faced imprisonment for

the numerous technicalities of so called “vagrancy” (MS Black Code, 1865). “All sheriffs,

justices of the peace, and other civil officers” could “indenture” children who were orphaned,

or whose parents were deemed to “have not the means” to support a child, and provided the

legal right to “pursue or recapture” indentured children or adults (MS Black Code, 1865). As

well as discouraging any interaction between white and black people, including the provision

“that it shall not be lawful” for any non-white person, to marry a white person (MS Black

Code, 1865). In the introduction of such laws, we see the fears expressed in Douglass’ speech

fulfilled. Without further reform introduced in a time that seemed optimal for the fulfillment

of black equality, in the face of union success, confederacy defeat and slaves’ emancipation,

a lack of conviction showed by Lincoln to pursue such reforms, allowed the space for

southern society to continue practice and policy that would subject black people to further

oppression, and prolonged the wait for full equality.

Whether Lincoln himself believed in the inferiority of black people or not is

unimportant. In his inaugural address, supposedly addressing the nation, although clearly

directed at the south, Lincoln showed his willingness to avoid the subject of freedom and

inequalities of the south. While it is true to say he never explicitly condones the institution of

slavery, he neither chastises it in his inaugural address, or Emancipation Proclamation. In a

time fraught with opposing views on the nature of slavery, preceded by years of public and

political debate on the subject, Lincoln’s avoidance of a position on the subject had a

resounding message. For a man whose memory in American history is held in the highest

regard, and whose name is almost intrinsically associated with emancipation, the realities of

his presidency and its legacy are far more complex. In assessing his speeches as exemplifying

Lincoln’s lack of conviction and commitment to emancipation as well equality, the formative

years of reconstruction, I have argued, reflected the ambiguities of his Presidency.

Bibliography:

Clinton, Catherine. (1992). Bloody terrain: Freedwomen, sexuality and violence during

reconstruction. The Georgia Historical Quarterly, 313-332.

Dirck, Brian. (2007). Changing Perspectives on Lincoln, Race, and Slavery. OAH Magazine

of History, 21(4), 9-12.

Douglass, Frederick. (1865). What the Black Man Wants. April, 1865. Available at:

http://www.frederickdouglass.org/speeches/

Dwyer, Erin. Austin. (2014). Lecture: Debating Slavery on the Eve of War. April 9th, 2014

Harcourt, Edward. John. (2003). The whipping of Richard Moore: reading emotion in

reconstruction America. Journal of Social History, 36(2), 261-282.

Lincoln, Abraham. (1861). First Inaugural Address. March 4th, 1861. Available at:

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/1861lincoln-aug1.asp

Lincoln, Abraham. (1863). The Emancipation Proclamation. January 1st, 1863. Available at:

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/emancipation_proclamation/

transcript.html

Schurz, Carl. (1865). Report on the Condition of the South, 39th Congress, 1st Session. December, 1865. Available at: http://books.google.com/books?id=x_bPFPZRoMAC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Carl+Schurz+report+on+the+condition+of+the+south&source=bl&ots=lFt_gJIcnM&sig=LqAIq9xYZMfinsZVcyFjYFUFD4M&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eOIqUNyyG8bg2AWoroGYAQ&ved=0CEEQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Carl%20Schurz%20report%20on%20the%20condition%20of%20the%20south&f=false