Frederick Douglass to "A Friend in England," October 9, 1860
FREDERICK DOUGLASS TO “A FRIEND IN ENGLAND”
[n.p., Eng.] [9 October 1860.]
“We are now in the thickest part of our electioneering excitement. Noth-
ing like it has occurred since 1840, when the country was divided be-
tween Van Buren1Martin Van Buren (1782-1862), the eighth president of the United States, began his career as a lawyer in New York. He represented Columbia County in the New York Senate in 1812, where he developed a political rivalry with DeWitt Clinton. In 1815 he was appointed state attorney general, but Clinton supporters removed him in 1819 because he opposed funding the Erie Canal. Van Buren challenged his rivals by building a Democratic-Republican organization known as the Bucktails. During Clinton’s second term as governor, the Bucktails gained control of the state legislature and appointed Van Buren to the U.S. Senate in 1821. Van Buren’s rise to power earned him the nickname “Little Magician” among his admirers. With his own designs on national politics, Van Buren campaigned on behalf of Andrew Jackson in 1828. Elected governor of New York that same year, Van Buren resigned when Jackson appointed him U.S. attorney general in 1829. In his new cabinet post, Van Buren developed an intense rivalry with Vice President John C. Calhoun. In 1832, Van Buren became Jackson’s running mate for vice president as a reward for his loyalty and political skill. He then gained the president’s support to succeed him in the oval office in 1836. Although Van Buren tried to continue Jackson’s policies, he lost popularity following the Panic of 1837; his enemies dubbed him Martin “Van Ruin” and blamed him for the country’s economic woes. Failing to be reelected, Van Buren retired to New York in 1841. In 1848, his opposition to the extension of slavery in the territories gained in the Mexican War returned him to politics as the Free Soil candidate for president, but he received a mere 10 percent of the vote. In the 1850s, once more a Democrat, he endorsed the Compromise of 1850 and gave uneasy support to the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854. He died in 1862, dismayed at the dissolution of the Union. Donald B. Cole, ANB, 22:159—62. and Harrison.2William Henry Harrison (1773-1841), the son of a Virginia planter, gained national prominence as a military leader in the Northwest Territory in the decades after the American Revolution. After resigning his commission in 1798, Harrison embarked on a successful political career in the Old Northwest, first as secretary of the Northwest Territory, then as the territory’s representative to Congress, and finally as governor of Indiana and superintendent of Indian Affairs. Harrison favored the introduction of slavery into Indiana and called a special convention to consider the possibility in 1802. Territorial disputes with Native Americans drew Harrison back into the military, and he attracted national attention after his defeat of the western confederacy led by Tecumseh at the Battle of Tippecanoe Creek in 1811. During the War of 1812, as a brigadier general in charge of the Indiana and Illinois frontier, Harrison won a decisive victory against the British and their Native American allies, for which he was awarded a congressional gold medal. Between 1816 and 1828, Harrison served in Congress and the Ohio state senate. Following a failed bid to become John Quincy Adams’s vice presidential running mate in 1828, Harrison accepted appointment as ambassador to Colombia, a post that he held until 1830. In 1840, Harrison ran for president as a Whig, with John Tyler as his running mate, spawning the slogan “Tippecanoe and Tyler, Too.” His status as a war hero and Indian fighter fueled his “Log Cabin and Hard Cider” campaign, in which Harrison was portrayed as a hero of the common man. Harrison, however, died of pneumonia on 4 April 1841, after serving only one month as president. Norma Lois Peterson, (Lawrence, Kans., 1989), 17-43; , 8:348-51; , 10:223-26. Not even then was the country so deeply
stirred; for then the question of slavery—the great over-shadowing ques-
tion of to-day—was not so fairly before the people as now. Then the coun-
try was divided on questions of finance and commerce. They touched the
pockets, rather than the hearts and the moral convictions of the people.
Men, more than principles, gave interest and force to that contest. Now
the question is between two types of civilisation, and is a contest between
fundamental ideas and sentiments, as to which class shall give laws to the
republic, and direct its course, and determine its destiny. For more than
sixty years slavery has absolutely controlled the Federal Government, in
all its departments and appliances. Its friends, for the first time during this
long term of years, have reason to fear that their power is about to pass
from their hands. For years abolitionists have laboured here to arouse the
slumbering North to the duty of arresting the spread of slavery, and of dis-
lodging and breaking down the slave power, as a means to the final aboli-
tion of slavery; but, until now, they have contemplated victory only in the
far off future. Now, however, the divisions of their enemies—the growth
of anti-slavery sentiment—the general enlightenment of the people—the
aggressions of the slave power—the virtual revival of the African slave-
trade3Although the African slave trade was officially prohibited on 2 March 1807, there were recurring calls by some Southern leaders for its revival. Increasing slave prices intensified the desire for a new means to obtain cheap labor. The illegal importation of slaves into the region grew throughout the 1850s. The push to reopen the international slave trade grew in strength during the decade as the slavery issue continued to dominate Southern politics. While the governments of states such as South Carolina supported legislation to revive the slave trade, a significant number of other Southerners, mainly wealthy slaveholders, rejected the idea. They feared that an increase in availability of new Africans would decrease the value of the slaves they currently owned. Some regional political leaders viewed the issue as divisive at a time when the South needed unity, since secession was on the horizon. Following secession, the debate over this issue subsided. The Confederate States Constitution, drafted in 1861, included a clause forbidding the importation of slaves, thus ending the agitation to revive the African slave trade. , 1:115 (August 1859); Harvey Wish, “The Revival of the African Slave Trade in the United States, 1856-1860,” , 27:569-72, 582, 588 (March 1941); Barton J. Bernstein, “Southern Politics and Attempts to Reopen the African Slave Trade,—the repeal of the law restricting slavery to the south of thirty deg.
thirty min.4he Missouri Compromise of 1820, dividing the Louisiana Territory into free and slave territories, was effectively repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.—the Dred Scott decision—the arrogant and defiant attempt
to legalise slavery by decisions of courts and party doctrines in all the
States of the Union, north as well as south—have aroused a hostile spirit
so strong and so general that there is the highest probability of a decided
and lasting victory for freedom in the election to take place four weeks
hence. One of the most favourable indications of this result is the fact that
the foreign population—the German and the Irish5
5. In the mid-1800s, not all Irish immigrants fully embraced the ideology of white supremacy, and in cities such as Philadelphia and Worcester, they coexisted peacefully with blacks. In 1842 over 70,000 antislavery Irish men and women petitioned Irish Americans to work with abolitionists to end slavery as well as racial discrimination. But most Irish immigrants living in the United States did not embrace the antislavery views of their European brethren. William Lloyd Garrison and his followers attempted to convince the Irish to join the antislavery forces, but to no avail. Irish Americans believed their “whiteness” entitled them to political rights and jobs, and so they overwhelmingly voted Democratic. A majority of German immigrants also voted Democratic in the 1850s, influenced by the party’s rejection of temperance legislation and nativism. Unlike the Irish, some German Americans eventually linked immigrant rights with the antislavery cause. More Germans joined the Republican party after 1854 in order to stop the spread of slavery into the western territories, an area they deemed a harbor for Europe’s displaced. Douglass recognized the differences between the Irish and German immigrants in their attitudes toward slavery in 1859. Douglass labeled the Irish “deaf, dumb and blind to the claims of liberty” and declared that they strictly adhered to Democrats’ claims that a Republican president in 1860 would free the slaves, sending them North to compete for wages. According to Douglass, the German immigrants were more “enlightened,” believing that “they are and always will be adverse to slavery.” By adopting an antinativist platform in 1860 and continuing to promote antislavery extension, the Republican party appealed to more German Americans than their Irish counterparts. , 2:116 (August 1859); David R. Roediger, (New York, 2007), 134, 136, 151; Alison Clark Efford, (Cambridge, 2013), 53-54, 71; Foner, , 257, 259.—which have been the
right arm of the slave power, voting steadily with the Democratic party of
the country, have now, in the free States, east and west, where they are far
more numerous than in the Southern States of the American Union, largely
separated themselves from that contradictory and stupendous sham, the
democratic party, and will, this Fall, in all the likelihoods of the case, vote
with the .Republican party. The German vote has been
given hitherto to the Democratic party because they came to this country
democrats in the true sense of the word, and supposed that that party in
some measure represented the idea of liberty which the name imparted.
They now see the contrary, and are acting in view of the fact. The Irish
population, being mainly Roman Catholics, have been easily won to the
side of the Democratic party, because that party represented power. They
now see that the power of the party is broken, and that the place for them
is on the side of victory. From whatever motive they may act, the fact is
significant and cheering. The election of Lincoln6Abraham Lincoln will ensure, I think,
the election of Seward7William H. Seward four years hence; and, notwithstanding that he
has said some things which I hate, and some things quite equivocal and
unworthy of him, I still recognise him as among the most formidable
foes that we can marshal against the slave system, for he is a man who so
manages as always to have a strong party to support his measures. He has
recently made a tour through the Western States,8After his defeat at the 1860 Republican National Convention, William H. Seward embarked on a stump campaign throughout the northwestern states during summer and fall of 1860 to support Lincoln. Seward visited Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, traveling by steamboat for most of the campaign; Charles Francis Adams accompanied Seward for much of it. Seward’s speeches focused on the increasing importance of resources from the Northwest and emphasized the growing political power of the region. The New York Times reported that Seward was welcomed throughout his journey in areas that had been hostile to his message in previous years. New York , 29 September 1860; Theodore C. Blegen, “Campaigning with Seward in 1860,” 8:150-71
(June 1927).
and his progress has
been more like that of a prince than that of an humble citizen or a senator.”
PLf: London , 3 November 1860.
fighter fueled his "Log Cabin and Hard Cider" campaign, in which Harrison was portrayed as a hero
of the common man. Harrison, however, died of pneumonia on 4 April 1841, after serving only one
month as president, Norma Lois Peterson, (Lawrence, Kans., 1989), 17-43; , 8:348-51; , 10:223-26.
3. Although the African slave trade was officially prohibited on 2 March 1807, there were recur-
ring calls by some Southern leaders for its revival. Increasing slave prices intensified the desire for a
new means to obtain cheap labor. The illegal importation of slaves into the region grew throughout
the 1850s. The push to reopen the international slave trade grew in strength during the decade as the
slavery issue continued to dominate Southern politics. While the governments of states such as South
Carolina supported legislation to revive the slave trade, a significant number of other Southerners,
mainly wealthy slaveholders, rejected the idea. They feared that an increase in availability of new
Africans would decrease the value of the slaves they currently owned. Some regionaly political lead-
ers viewed the issue as divisive at a time when the South needed unity, since secession was on the
horizon. Following secession, the debate over this issue subsided. The Confederate States Constitu-
tion, drafted in 1861, included a clause forbidding the importation of slaves, thus ending the agita-
tion to revive the African slave trade. , 1:115 (August 1859); Harvey Wish, "The Revival of the
African Slave Trade in the United States, 1856-1860," , 27:569-72, 582, 588 (March 1941);
Barton J. Bernstein, "Southern Politics and Attempts to Reopen the African Slave Trade," ,
51:16, 35 (January 1966).
4. The Missouri Compromise of 1820, dividing the Louisiana Territory into free and slave ter-
ritories, was effectively repealed by the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854.
5. In the mid-1800s, not all Irish immigrants fully embraced the ideology of white supremacy,
and in cities such as Philadelphia and Worcester, they coexisted peacefully with blacks. In 1842 over
70,000 antislavery Irish men and women petitioned Irish Americans to work with abolitionists to end
slavery as well as racial discrimination. But most Irish immigrants living in the United States did
not embrace the antislavery views of their European brethren. William Lloyd Garrison and his fol-
lowers attempted to convince the Irish to join the antislavery forcesm but to no avail. Itish Americans
believed their "whiteness" entitled them to political rights and jobs, and so they overwhelmingly
voted Democratic. A majority of German immigrants also voted Democratic in the 1850s, influ-
enced by the party's rejection of temperance legislation and nativism. Unlike the Irish, some German
Americans eventually linked immigrant rights with the antislavery cause. More Germans joined the
Republican party after 1854 in order to stop the spread of slavery into the western territories, an area
they deemed a harbor for Europe's displaced. Douglass recognized the differences between the Irish
and German immigrants in their attitudes towards slavery in 1859. Douglass labeled the Irish "deaf,
dumb and blind to the claims of liberty" and declared that they strictly adhered to Democrats' claims
that a Republican president in 1860 would free the slaves, sending them North to compete for wages.
According to Douglass, the German immigrants were more "enlightened," believing that "they are
and always will be adverse to slavery." By adopting an antinativist platform in 1860 and continuing
to promote antislavery extension, the Republican party appealed to more German Americans than
their Irish counterparts. , 2:116 (August 1859); David R. Roediger, (New York, 2007), 134, 136, 151; Alison Clark Ef-
ford, (Cambridge, 2013), 53-54, 71;
Foner, , 257, 259.
6. Abraham Lincoln.
7. William H. Seward.
8. Afrer his defeat at the 1860 Republican National Convention, William H. Seward embarked
on a stump campaign throughout the northwestern states during summer and fall of 1860 to support
Lincoln. Seward visited Michigan, Wisconsinm and Minnesota, traveling by steamboat for most of the
campaign; Charles Francis Adams accompanied Seward for much of it. Seward's speeches focused
on the increasing importance of resources from the Northwest and emphasized the frowing politi-