The Anti-Slavery Crusade | Page 8

In New York and New Jersey slaves were much more numerous than in
New England. There were still slaves in considerable numbers until
about 1825. The people had a knowledge of the institution from
experience and observation, and there was no break in the continuity of
their organized abolition societies. Chief among the objects of these
societies was the effort to prevent kidnapping and to guard the rights of
free negroes. For both of these purposes there was a continuous call for

activity. Pennsylvania also had freedmen of her own whose rights
called for guardianship, as well as many freedmen from farther south
who had come into the State.
The movement of protest and protection did not stop at Mason and
Dixon's Line, but extended far into the South. In both North Carolina
and Tennessee an active protest against slavery was at all times
maintained. In this great middle section of the country, between New
England and South Carolina, there was no cessation in the conflict
between free and slave labor. Some of these States became free while
others remained slave; but between the people of the two sections there
was continuous communication. Slaveholders came into free States to
liberate their slaves. Non-slaveholders came to get rid of the
competition of slave labor, and free negroes came to avoid
reenslavement. Slaves fled thither on their way to liberty. It was not a
matter of choice; it was an unavoidable condition which compelled the
people of the border States to give continuous attention to the
institution of slavery.
The modern anti-slavery movement had its origin in this great middle
section, and from the same source it derived its chief support. The great
body of active abolitionists were from the slave States or else derived
their inspiration from personal contact with slavery. As compared with
New England abolitionists, the middlestate folk were less extreme in
their views. They had a keener appreciation of the difficulties involved
in emancipation. They were more tolerant towards the idea of letting
the country at large share the burdens involved in the liberation of the
slaves. Border-state abolitionists naturally favored the policy of gradual
emancipation which had been followed in New York, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania. Abolitionists who continued to reside in the slave States
were forced to recognize the fact that emancipation involved serious
questions of race adjustment. From the border States came the
colonization society, a characteristic institution, as well as compromise
of every variety.
The southernmost section, including South Carolina, Georgia, and the
Gulf States, was even more sharply defined in the attitude it assumed
toward the anti-slavery movement. At no time did the cause of
emancipation become formidable in this section. In all these States
there was, of course, a large class of non-slaveholding whites, who

were opposed to slavery and who realized that they were victims of an
injurious system; but they had no effective organ for expression. The
ruling minority gained an early and an easy victory and to the end held
a firm hand. To the inhabitants of this section it appeared to be a
self-evident truth that the white race was born to rule and the black race
was born to serve. Where negroes outnumbered the whites fourfold, the
mere suggestion of emancipation raised a race question which seemed
appalling in its proportions. Either in the Union or out of the Union, the
rulers were determined to perpetuate slavery.
Slavery as an economic institution became dependent upon a few
semitropical plantation crops. When the Constitution was framed, rice
and indigo, produced in South Carolina and Georgia, were the two
most important. Indigo declined in relative importance, and the
production of sugar was developed, especially after the annexation of
the Louisiana Purchase. But by far the most important crop for its
effects upon slavery and upon the entire country was cotton. This single
product finally absorbed the labor of half the slaves of the entire
country. Mr. Rhodes is not at all unreasonable in his surmise that, had it
not been for the unforeseen development of the cotton industry, the
expectation of the founders of the Republic that slavery would soon
disappear would actually have been realized.
It was more difficult to carry out a policy of emancipation when slaves
were quoted in the market at a thousand dollars than when the price
was a few hundred dollars. All slave-owners felt richer; emancipation
appeared to involve a greater sacrifice. Thus the cotton industry went
far towards accounting for the changed attitude of the entire country on
the subject of slavery. The North as well as the South became
financially interested.
It was not generally perceived before it actually happened that the
border States would take the place of Africa in furnishing the required
supply of laborers for Southern plantations. The interstate slave-trade