Intern: Katharine Beecher Brodock
Essay: Antislavery, Abolitionism, and the Republican Party of the 1800s
Spring 2002
Faculty Advisor: Professor Larry Hudson

Letters used: 22; 30; 117
Transcriptions: 22; 30; 117
Bibliography
Footnotes

Letter 22: (excerpt)

"I was never antislavery because of my color. Had I been I should have been less than half antislavery - but my antislavery being based broadly upon my manhood. I have been thoroughly abolitionist. I am charged all over the country with attacking the decision of the Supreme Court on the Civil Rights Bill. I am not ashamed of that attack. That decision is surrender of the main result of the war and is a shocking departure from the rules of legal interpretation laid down by that court in that days of slavery - and which served to support the Constitutional pretensions of slavery."

- 6 November 1883
Recipient: A.A Hopkins, Esquire

Letter 117: (excerpt)

"I am leaving here for Virginia in a few days to stump for the election of Grant and Wilson. My line of argument will be that Grant's position is pure and simple - while that of Greeley is mixed and ambiguous, I shall admit that I should on personal grounds like to vote for Greeley if I really knew what I am voting for - and which of the many Greeleys my vote would elect. For there are a great many Greeleys. If I could select the right one I would gladly give him my vote. But just here is the trouble….Our country wants certainty and wants the confidence and repose which only certainty can give."

- 18 July 1872
Recipient: Amy Post

Letter 30: (excerpt)

"I find, it is true, a great comfort in the thought that I have had, as you have had, some agency in ridding this country of slavery and in restoring to freedom millions of the human race, but the evils that remain are so multitudinous and so powerful as to dwarf what has already been done and leave little room for complacency. It is sad just now to see the once great and powerful Republican Party, which has done so much for our country, for humanity and civilization, being now literally stabbed to death, assassinated by men who have hitherto been its staunch defenders."

-9 October 1882
Recipient: Sarah Jane Lippincott

Introduction

Frederick Douglass is known as one of the most powerful and influential people associated with abolition and black rights in the period just after the Civil War. His oratory skills were powerful and earnest. He drew peoples' attention at least enough to listen to his speeches on the evils of slavery and the state of the black American, and later about improving conditions for the blacks and facilitate their transition into American society. He was deeply committed to two main altruistic doctrines: manhood and the morality of all men living equally, both of which were violated by the slave system from which he himself had escaped.

He was also closely associated with the Republican Party of the 1800s. He became a member in the 1850s and was unwavering in his support until his death in 1895. During this time, however, there seemed to be a discrepancy between Douglass's abolitionist goals and how he went about them through his support for this decreasingly useful, and sometimes outright detrimental, Republican Party that, after the abolition of slavery in 1861, paid less and less attention to the needs of the former slaves. Nonetheless, Douglass remained a stalwart supporter.

The Beginnings of an Abolitionist

As a boy in the confines of Southern slavery, Frederick Bailey (he later took the surname of Douglass) "was always curious about his world and curious most of all about what it meant to be a slave in that world."¹ In this setting, at the same time Frederick was learning to read and write, he was presented with the word abolition, encouraging his curiosity about his place as a slave to an even greater degree. He gathered enough from overheard conversation to know that, whatever it meant, it sounded advantageous to his position and the position of his fellow slaves, as it was used either in context of an 'escape to freedom' or was hushed by the slaveholders. He made the direct connection between the word and his position one day after reading about the 'abolition of slavery' and from then on took it upon himself to inform those around him of the work of these fine people who called themselves abolitionists.

After his escape to freedom, Douglass internalized the notion of abolitionism and antislavery as his calling in life. This would be his cause, and his popularity increased as a result of his passion and eloquent speaking for the cause.

Within a few years the whole world knew that in Frederick Douglass the abolition cause has found the ideal orator, a fugitive able to describe with the most realistic detail the life of the Negro in slavery, and at the same time a speaker who could demand respect from any audience, not by the display of himself on the platform as a runaway black, but by the clean logic and intellectual vigor of his message.²

It proved to be only the beginning of a lifelong struggle to rid the country of slavery and its evils, and would be carried past the Emancipation Proclamation to his death.

The Antislavery Abolitionist

As Douglass professes himself as a staunch and faithful abolitionist in Letter 22, there is no doubt that this was a man devoted to the cause with his whole soul. He was "thoroughly abolitionist."³ For Douglass, he wanted an end to slavery "…not on a basis so narrow as [his] own enslavement, but rather upon the indestructible and unchangeable laws of human nature, every one of which is perpetually and flagrantly violated by the slave system." Abolitionism stood for human brotherhood and universal humanism.⁴ Man should be equal throughout the world, and any act against the rights or freedoms of all humans should be addressed on that basis. The American system of slavery was just such an act against humanity, and therefore needed to be dealt with not necessarily for the individual slave, but for the human race of which the individual slave was a part. Abolition, as Douglass stated, was "based broadly on my manhood."⁵ Kelly Martin states

Douglass lived in the day of moral giants…emphasiz[ing] the rights of man…the age of Douglass acknowledged the sanction of the Golden Rule… The equality of men was constantly dinned into Douglass's ear…[he] insisted upon rights….held up to public scorn the sins of the white man…spoke what he thought the world should hear…Douglass's conduct was actuated by principle…[he] had no limited, copyrighted programme for his race…Douglass was a moralist, insisting upon the application of righteousness to public affairs…⁶

But why only would Douglass "have been less than half antislavery"⁷? He implies that there is an obvious distinction between antislavery on the one hand and abolitionism on the other. It cannot be denied that the two are very closely associated with one another and are often used concurrently, and sometimes hastily, in the same sentence. Taking into account Douglass's previously discussed goals as an abolitionist and taking the letter at face value, it sounds as though the issue is one of intent, almost as if Douglass was not attacking the institution of slavery for whatever reason, but that, by being an abolitionist, he would be able to do something more for man in general. The mention of his color might imply that Douglass saw the issue, from the standpoint of a black person, as much more important than simply an end to slavery for the reasons that many anti-slavery supporters gave.⁸ The distinction between the two was that none of these reasons, in Douglass's eyes, seemed to be centered genuinely around a moral basis such as the one's Douglass was trying to promote, manhood and equality.

The two terms, as it was said, have quite a bit in common. Some historians use them interchangeably to refer to general activism against slavery that surfaced prior to and during the Civil War. Both had to do with ending slavery or halting its spread. Some historians "distinguish abolitionism, a morally grounded and uncompromising social reform movement, from antislavery….which advocated more limited political solutions…and was more amenable to compromise."⁹ Antislavery sentiments seemed to have narrower and more self-interested roots, each group having their own justification for ending or controlling slavery and each having their own agenda to go about it. Because of the wide variety of factions and their general unorganized state, it was hard to combine them to effectively fight slavery, as their differences tended to cause controversy and tension. Abolitionism, however, was taken on by a person who seemed to be wholly committed to ending slavery on the basis of fundamental human interests and there was more of a structured 'program' used by abolitionists. Slavery was a moral evil, according to them, because it reduced a human being to an animal-like existence. It was also illegal "because it violated the right to liberty enshrined in the Declaration of Independence" and economically backward "because slaves were barred from acquiring productive skills and were deprived of any incentive to perform careful and diligent work."¹⁰ To further their cause, abolitionists drew on the support of antislavery groups to widen their appeal and backing in an attempt to embody and use any form of antislavery attitudes - passive, active or radical - towards their general demand for the obliteration of slavery. It was almost as if abolitionists were a group of people who took antislavery to a new, higher and more moral level, and were often, like William Lloyd Garrison, considered radicals of the movement.

Frederick Douglass and the Republican Party

On 28 February 1854, In Ripon, Wisconsin, the name Republican was adopted as the new label for the Jeffersonians¹¹ and their first convention was held later that year on 6 July in Jackson, Michigan. Members of this new party included those who had been previously aligned with the Whigs, the free Democrats, the Free Soilers, and the American Party and later converted members of the Liberty Party. The Republican Party, to start off, didn't hold strong views toward the issue of slavery, and it was only brought up in the context of Jefferson's support for "the idea of a nation of small landholders, radically opposed to the established aristocracy" with its "opposition to slavocracy along with support for new railroads, free homesteads, opening of West by free labor and protective tariffs."¹² Douglass, having been previously allied with the William Lloyd Garrison and his followers (see Essay by Jay Thompson)¹³, found himself appreciating the possible benefits that political action could have towards abolitionism and in 1856 moved from the Liberty Party to the endorsement of the Republican Party, but only after a period throughout the 1850s where "he would align himself primarily with the Liberty Party¹⁴ or Radical Abolitionists in principle, but come election time he would opt for expediency and support the Presidential candidate he deemed the most pragmatic compromise between his radical abolitionism and his growing political activism."¹⁵ This was his way of conveying his radical abolitionism to encourage supporters and those in the main parties, specifically the Republicans, to establish a more concrete stance on abolition and slavery. In an editorial in 1856, he appealed to the masses with the following:

From our political philosophy, we are at liberty to consider the state of the public mind, and look at immediate results, as well as remote consequences. We are liberty to inquire how far our vote, at a given time, will forward what we conceive to be the highest interests of society; and having considered this, we are at liberty, -nay it is our indispensable duty to cast our vote in that direction, which, upon a survey of the whole facts in the case, will best promote that great end.¹⁶

This was a deviance from the philosophy of the Garrisonians, which rejected political maneuvers as a viable device and relying almost exclusively on moral suasion. Political involvement seemed not only like an effective tool to start using, but alignment of some degree also seemed inevitable and it presented the issue of slavery before the whole nation, almost forcing it upon them. Following this pattern, it's not surprising that when the election of 1860 came around, Douglass started out supporting the Radical Abolitionist candidate Gerrit Smith, and then, at the last minute before the election, he threw his support to Republican candidate, Abraham Lincoln, who would prove to prevail.

Part of Douglass's attraction to the Republican Party was it's new found strength and the fact that it seemed the most viable route to take. The other of the two powerful parties, the Democratic Party, was made up in large part of white Southerners and proponents of slavery. Since its establishment in 1854, the Republican Party had become somewhat of "an alliance of antislavery forces…[it] would only limit the expansion of slavery within the existing United States, believing that slavery would gradually die out."¹⁷ He believed that the Republican Party, with at least a basis of antislavery sentiments, had the best chance of winning an election over the smaller (yet more dedicated) parties,¹⁸ and he hoped to build upon this basis when it was put into place, which he and hundreds of black Americans helped by casting their votes. Lincoln was not an Abolitionist president - at best, moderately antislavery - however this option was better than having a Democratic candidate in office, one who would do nothing but hurt the abolitionist cause.

It was at this point that Douglass and fellow politically minded abolitionists started to really put their faith in to the Republican Party. It had become an "umbrella" party for antislavery groups, no matter what their reasoning was, for in some cases the reasoning varied when "different elements within the society perceived the problem of slavery in radically different ways and proposed sometimes contradictory solutions."¹⁹ This interwoven web was, of course, in part due to the persuasion and appeal of people like Douglass. Douglass's oratory skills were incredibly well known (this is precisely the way in which he found himself working closely with Garrison, one who used moral suasion as the primary abolitionist strategy).

The initial calling for the termination of slavery came at the end of the Civil War through the Emancipation Proclamation, signed by Lincoln in 1863, with its official and legal end achieved in 1865 by the passing of the Thirteenth Amendment. However, at the time of this Emancipation, Lincoln had always been a proponent of simply preserving the Union, and it seemed as if the abolition of slavery had come only after much hesitation and as a political and military tool used to win the war. To Lincoln, the war was being fought not over the issue of slavery, but on the grounds that he saw seceding from the Union as illegal. His initial qualms were a result of appeasement and support for the border states, those which could be the most easily convinced to remain loyal to or rejoin the Union, but those that also in large part supported the slave system and profited from it. He promised to them that slavery would remain untouched in their states. This caused great unease for Douglass and fellow abolitionists, but their support was still with Lincoln and his party. His hope was nevertheless to turn the President into an Abolitionist President, and the war into an Abolitionist war, the result of which would bring the country to peace forever:

Liberty to the slave is peace, honor, and prosperity to the country. Until that work is done, all peace is false, all repose is transient, and all national glory is tarnished. The sole condition of safety is the abolition of slavery, the ever pregnant cause of all out national troubles. Who works for the downfall of slavery, works for the salvation of this country and the advancement of mankind to a higher and truer life. It is a vocation fit to live by and to die by.²⁰

Regardless of what Lincoln's motives were, the Emancipation Proclamation was an immediate victory for the abolitionists. One of Douglass's main goals in life, that of an end or the assurance of an end to slavery, had been realized. But his other goal would prove to be the more difficult of the two to obtain. That was the ending of racial prejudice against the blacks and an equal effort to enhance their status in the United States and assure equal rights. This would be the struggle that Douglass would endure for his remaining years. Soon after the end of the Civil War, the effectiveness of the Republican Party as a party that could be counted on to ensure the former slaves an equal place in society would wane, and Douglass's continuing support for the party would prove to be futile in the end.

The first blow for Douglass was the stance that several abolitionists took after the slaves had been free. For many, this was the end of their movement, they had reached their goal, and there was no longer a need to continue the fight. These were the people who weren't necessarily concerned with how the freed slaves were to live and what place they would hold in society. For Douglass, emancipation was only half the battle. He persisted with his faithful support for the Republican Party and campaigned relentlessly for the reelection of Lincoln, with Vice-president Andrew Johnson, in 1864, under the assumption that the party would keep aiding the blacks in their new struggle and offer them the support needed from a strong government. After Lincoln's assassination, Vice President Johnson became President, and his main political agenda was to unify the country, North and South, in some sort of peaceful manner. The Radical Republicans "didn't think Johnson was a Republican, and his efforts to reconcile with the South led to his impeachment."²¹ The Reconstruction policies, according to them, needed attention, and emphasis was placed on militarizing the South and according no slack when it came to dealing with the formerly seceded states (these strict policies drove the Southern Whigs to join the Democratic Party, thus producing a 'solid South'). What happened in the coming years was the nomination of former Union generals (Ulysses S Grant, Rutherford B Hayes, James A Garfield, William McKinley, Benjamin Harrison) and the occupation of the White House for all but eight of the next thirty two years by the Republicans. And Douglass rallied support for them for every one of the elections.

However, it was at this time that not only were other former abolitionists beginning to realize their disillusionment with the party regarding its agenda towards the blacks, but a good many blacks were realizing this as well. They were unsatisfied by the actions of the Republican Party, by its failure to uphold its promises and by the moderation of their representatives towards the issues of black rights:

One of the goals of many of the southern delegates was to organize black laborers into a national union, which could then exert pressure on the government by threatening to withhold the members votes from the Republicans. A good many working class black Americans, particularly in Georgia and South Carolina,….made it known that if the Republicans did not give more believably promises of protecting their rights they would withhold their support.²²

They felt that their votes would be more effective if they went to someone who would keep his promises, who had a definite and major concern about the livelihood of the black Americans, someone who took a more radical stance when addressing black rights. Someone like Horace Greeley.²³ It should be said that Douglass had supported Greeley's stance as an abolitionist working hard for blacks, however he had invested so much faith in the ability of political parties and influence in matters such as abolition, that he saw the deviance in voting patterns as a big mistake. "I shall admit that I should on personal grounds like to vote for Greeley if I really knew what I was voting for."²⁴ Yes, Greeley's motives and antislavery credentials were certainly well noted, however the Republican Party was one of the two strongest parties of the nation, next to the Democratic Party, and it is with them that Douglass thought his votes and the votes of his fellow black Americans would be most useful, in a party that had much more of a chance of winning. "Our country wants certainty and wants the confidence and repose which only certainty can give."²⁵ So Douglass campaigned hard in 1872 for Ulysses S Grant, who won the election. Unfortunately, no profound moves were made in the next four years and the spotlight on black rights was slowly dimming. It seemed to be more of a personal victory for Grant rather than any big step for the black rights movement. The Reconstruction policies were becoming ineffective, with the Southern state governments making its own laws to 'get around' those set by the federal government; laws that segregated the blacks, discouraged their vote severely, and in a lot of ways resembled the harsh slave codes that had been in place during the time of slavery. Blacks had little place in the society and many still worked for their old masters under like conditions. The presence of racism and prejudice could not be ignored. Blacks often worked for their former masters in condition similar to those of slavery, and the living conditions were paltry with scant and rundown housing. It was a sorry state for the freedmen in the South, unbeknownst to Douglass. The election of 1876 would prove to be a point at which many blacks and those fighting with them would turn their backs on the Republicans, whose party interests were diverging with black interests. But not Douglass.

The election of 1876, between Rutherford B Hayes and Samuel J Tilden, was in a stalemate after election day and some sort of compromise had to be made in order to determine the Presidency. A special commission was set up made of five Senators, five Representatives and five Justices of the Supreme Court. During this commission, the Republican Senate leaders met secretly with the Southern Democrats to come up with terms that the Democrats would agree to, while also allowing Hayes to be elected. Accordingly, the Republicans (or those making the decision) decided that the status of the blacks was a concern that could be set aside as a 'less important' issue and setting it aside would gain the support needed from the South to ensure another term in power. And so they bargained: if the Southerners agreed to give up their filibuster, the Northern troops that had been occupying the South since Reconstruction would be removed, a clear abandonment of federal support for the guarantee of the rights of black people in the South. "The fate of these people, who formed the largest segment of the South's non-independent laboring class, was to be left in the hands of white people committed to white supremacy. The Redeemers, as the white leaders liked to think of themselves, had quickly regained control of the Southern state and local governments."²⁶ In addition to this, at least one Southerner would be appointed to a cabinet position under Hayes and there would be Federal aid to the area for internal improvements and the extent of the Texas & Pacific Railroad.

The Republicans had hoped "to build up a 'new Republican' organization in the South drawn from Whiggish conservative white groups and committed to some modest acceptance of African-American rights. But all such efforts failed. Southern leaders agreed with Republican economic policies but resented Reconstruction…. Withdrawal of the troops signaled that the government was giving up its attempts to control Southern politics and to improve the lot of blacks in Southern society."²⁷ Everyone saw this, Southerners and blacks alike. Reconstruction was failing, and the egalitarian line that had been strived for was breaking. According to historian McFeely, Douglass had somehow missed the gravity of the situation, his

beloved Republicans held the White House. And its new occupant appeared to be most respectful of Douglass's position and personal dignity. Douglass seemed comfortable about Rutherford B Hayes and almost totally oblivious to the concessions to white supremacists in the South that had put him into office. Hayes's election spelled the end of federal responsibility for the rights of black people in the South, a responsibility that Douglass had committed his like to furthering. But he did not see what was happening - did not allow himself to see it. And he accepted with great pride the presidential appointment that had so long eluded him."²⁸

He seemed to be less sensitive to the actual condition of southern blacks. He rationalized that "the way of an oppressed people from bondage to freedom is never smooth…. Suffering and hardships made the Saxons strong and suffering and hardships will make the Anglo-African strong… It may be well enough said that the Negro question is not so desperate as the advocates of this Exodus would have the public believe."²⁹

It seems to have taken Douglass a few years to get out of his euphoria surrounding the Republican Party, and at last he realized that it's lines were shifting and its support dwindling. "It is sad just now to see the once great and powerful Republican Party, which has done so much for out country, for humanity and civilization, being now literally stabbed to death, assassinated by men who have hitherto been its staunch defenders."³⁰ His faith in the party was still there, but he was beginning to see that it was continually straying from the "old" lines of support for black Americans, and that, inside the party, the terms were changing, and the focus was being taken away from the "Negro question."

Conclusion

Why, then, did Douglass offer the party his continued support?

One answer lies in Douglass's persistence with the political mechanism, which he felt was one of the most viable tools to use for his cause. However, in Douglass's mind, at the point in question, there was no where else to turn. No other party could both ensure their assertive commitment to blacks and have the strength to win elections and actually get the job accomplished. For him, the Republican Party, despite its defections, had done so much for the abolition of slavery and, having been strong member for twenty years, he felt he could not desert because there was no other route. He was "a Republican to the death…aware of the party's defection from commitments to black Americans, but blind to the energy of the up-and-coming Populist movement that some courageous, hopeful blacks risked entering…"³¹ The Populist Party³² was formed in the 1890s, a decade that Douglass would only make halfway through. He was simply unaware of its possible strength and commitment, and it was foolish for him to give up his vote with the risk of having the power fall into the hands of the Democrats.

Another answer lay directly in how Douglass perceived the power of the black vote. He constantly urged black voters to "stick to the Republican Party. Tell your wants, hold the party up to its professions, but do your utmost to keep it in power in state and nation."³³ He expressed his disappointment with some of the actions of the party, such as the Supreme Court decision on the Civil Rights Cases in 1883 (Letter 22), which Douglass criticized and attacked in editorials and speeches. This particular bill had stated that the owner of a place of public accommodation was not to be required to allow blacks a place, as it was a violation of the privacy laws put down in the 14th amendment. This, in effect, nullified any higher standing blacks may have had under the amendment and it was now useless to them. He called for new commitment by party leaders and recognition of the blacks as a part of the American people. But to keep some attentive to the political system, he assured many in his speeches that "third party activity would only play into the hands of the Democrats…he also contended that black people would be in great jeopardy if, following the departure of those among them who insisted on independence, the Republicans were to discover that they could win without black votes…he still believed a properly chastened Republican Party could be counted on."³⁴ If the Republicans thought that the black vote was a major prong in the elections (Douglass's influence was one of the main reasons for his repeated appointment to positions within the government, as Grant and Harrison appreciated the fact that it helped draw a good many black votes), then perhaps it could be used to the advantage of Douglass and the cause he was following, black rights, and they could use persuasion to get what they wanted. He didn't see this as a possibility with any other party that would simply be put out of the running by the two stronger parties.

By the end of his life, Douglass had become frustrated, but there was no way out that he could see. In Rochester in 1893, Douglass gave a speech where he was:

a ghost of old commitments, he pleaded futilely for a renewal of his party's assistance to black Americans…he wanted strong commitment to federal protection of the lives and civil rights of blacks in the South…and…disappointed that the Republicans gave no assurances of a federal program to stop the lynching, Douglass nevertheless campaigned for his old boss Benjamin Harrison. ³⁵

He tried and tried, but to no avail. The party was starting to turn outward in scope, on the possibilities for the US in world politics, rather than replenishing its support for black Americans. Where was he to go? Was he to just cast down his bucket, throw away his life achievements and goals?