Today,
the current political climate of the United States is charged,
with citizens, municipalities, and states, along with federal
representatives, ardently calling for all forms of public recognition tied
to the Confederate States of America (CSA) to be removed from public
lands and buildings. As statues and other forms of CSA recognition are
cast off, the statutory icons of those that would have made
institutionalized slavery invulnerable to all interference by the federal government stand tall.
Immune
from public scrutiny, nonetheless, are the journalists, community leaders,
presidents, vice presidents, congressional and state officials who drafted
and/or supported the most egregious pro-slavery resolution in U.S.
History: the Corwin Amendment. This proposed 13th amendment, approved with
a ⅔ majority of the 36th Congress on March 2, 1861, forbid the passing of any federal law or constitutional amendment interfering with “the domestic institution of the
states...including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of
said State.” In other words, it would have prevented Congress and the U.S. Constitution from banning slavery. Moreover, had this proposed amendment been
ratified, the current Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments would not
have been permissible, as they abolish or interfere with the domestic institution
of the states.
It
is my hope, especially if you are not a resident of the south, that you
take a few minutes to review this blog. The information, drawn from
historic documents such as the Congressional records, laws, speeches and
nineteenth-century newspaper accounts, is factual and should challenge your
perspective on who should or should not be honored in the long-standing
controversy over slavery and states' rights that resulted in the American Civil
War.
The
original Thirteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, passed by the 36th
Congress on March 2, 1861:
After
the presidential election of Abraham Lincoln on November 6, 1860, southern
states, beginning with South Carolina on December 20, 1860, began to secede
from the United States of America. In the midst of this constitutional crisis,
President James Buchanan (D) tried to persuade the southern states that state domestic
institutions, including slavery would remain legal, even under the incoming
Republican Lincoln administration. Buchanan asked Congress to draw up
what he called an “explanatory amendment” to the Constitution that would
explicitly recognize the right of states to sanction human bondage and allow
slaveholders to retain their human property in perpetuity under federal law. In
response, the House of Representatives established a "Committee of
Thirty-three," consisting of one member from each state, under the
leadership of Representative Thomas Corwin (OH-R), to prepare a plan for reconciling
the secessionist crisis.
Within
weeks, the committee delivered a constitutional amendment to the House that they
hoped would end the secession crisis. Prematurely called the thirteenth amendment,
the proposed joint resolution -- without using the words “slave” or “slavery”
-- denied “to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any
State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held
to labor or service by the laws of said State.” The full text affirmed:
No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.
The
amendment's words were crafted to shield "domestic institutions" of
the states from the constitutional amendment process and from abolition or
interference by Congress. Such “institutions” notably included slavery
and indentured servitude. Officially designated as HR Resolution No. 80,
the proposed amendment passed the House of Representatives on February 28th, by
the convincing vote of 133 to 65.
U.S.
House Journals: Thursday, February 28, 1861:
Shall the resolution Pass and it was decided in the affirmative, Yeas ... 133 Nays ... 65, Two-thirds voting in favor thereof. The yeas and nays being desired by one-fifth of the members present, Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Charles F. Adams (MA –
R)
|
James T. Hale (PA - R)
|
John W. Noell - (MS -
D)
|
Green Adams (KT – O)
|
Chapin Hall (PA - R)
|
Abraham B. Olin (NY -
R)
|
Garnett B. Adrain (NJ
- ALD)
|
Andrew J. Hamilton (TX
- ID)
|
George W. Palmer (NY -
R)
|
Cyrus Aldrich (MIN -
R)
|
J. Morrison Harris (
MD - A)
|
George H. Pendleton
(OH - D)
|
William C. Anderson
(KT – O)
|
John T. Harris (VA -
ID)
|
Samuel O. Peyton (KT -
D)
|
William T. Avery (TN -
D)
|
John B. Haskin (NY -
ALD)
|
John S. Phelps (MS -
D)
|
Elijah Babbitt (PA -
R)
|
Robert Hatton (TN - O)
|
Albert G. Porter (IN -
R)
|
Thomas J. Barr (NY -
ID)
|
William Helmick (OH -
R)
|
Roger A. Pryor (VA -
D)
|
J. R. Barrett
(Missouri - D)
|
Charles B. Hoard (NY -
R)
|
James M. Quarles (TN -
O)
|
Thomas S. Bocock (VA -
D)
|
William S. Holman (IN
- D)
|
John H. Reynolds (NY - ALD)
|
Alexander R. Boteler
(VA - O)
|
William Howard (Ohio - D)
|
Alexander H. Rice (MA
- R)
|
John E. Bouligny (LA -
A)
|
William A. Howard (MI
- R)
|
Jetur R. Riggs (NJ -
ALD)
|
Reese B. Brabson ( TN
- O)
|
George W. Hughes (MD -
D)
|
Christopher Robinson
(RI - R)
|
Lawrence O'Bryan Branch (NC-D)
|
James Humphrey (NY -
R)
|
James C. Robinson (IL
- D)
|
George Briggs (NY - R)
|
Albert G. Jenkins (VA
- D)
|
Thomas Ruffin (NC - D)
|
Francis M. Bristow (KT
- O)
|
Benjamin F. Junkin (PA
- R)
|
Albert Rust (AK - D)
|
John Y. Brown (KT - D)
|
William Kellogg (Ill -
R)
|
Charles L. Scott (CA -
D)
|
John C. Burch (CA - D)
|
William S. Kenyon (NY
- R)
|
George W. Scranton (PA
- R)
|
Henry C. Burnett (KT -
D)
|
David Kilgore (IN - R)
|
John Sherman (OH - R)
|
Martin Butterfield (NY
- R)
|
John W. Killinger (PA
- (R)
|
Daniel E. Sickles (NY
- D)
|
James H. Campbell (PA
- R)
|
Jacob M. Kunkel (MD -
D)
|
William E. Simms (KT -
D)
|
Horace F. Clark (NY -
ALD)
|
Charles H. Larrabee
(WI - D)
|
William N. H. Smith
(NC - O)
|
John B. Clark
(Missouri - D)
|
James M. Leach (MI -
R)
|
Elbridge G. Spaulding
(NY - R)
|
Sherrard Clemens (VA -
D)
|
Shelton F. Leake (VA -
ID)
|
Benjamin Stanton (OH -
R)
|
Clark B. Cochrane (NY
- R)
|
John A. Logan (IL - D)
|
John W. Stevenson (KT
- D)
|
John Cochrane (NY - D)
|
William B. Maclay (NY
- D)
|
James A. Stewart (MD -
D)
|
Robert Mallory (KT -
O)
|
William B. Stokes (TN
- O)
|
|
Thomas Corwin (OH - R)
|
Charles D. Martin (OH
- D)
|
Lansing Stout (OR - D)
|
Samuel S. Cox (OH - D)
|
Elbert S. Martin (VT -
ID)
|
John L. N. Stratton
(NJ - R)
|
James Craig (Missouri
- D)
|
Horace Maynard (TN -
O)
|
Eli Thayer (MA - R)
|
Burton Craige (NC - D)
|
John A. McClernand (IL
– D)
|
Thomas C. Theaker (OH
- R)
|
H. Winter Davis (MD -
A)
|
Jacob K. McKenty (PA -
D)
|
James H. Thomas (TN -
D)
|
John G. Davis (IN -
ALD)
|
Robert McKnight (PA -
R)
|
Carey A. Trimble (OH -
R)
|
Daniel C. De Jarnette
(VA - ID)
|
Edward McPherson (PA -
R)
|
Clement L.Vallandigham (OH - D)
|
Charles Delano (MA -
R)
|
John S. Millson (VA -
D)
|
Zebulon B. Vance (NC -
D)
|
William H. Dimmick (PA
- D)
|
William Montgomery (PA
- D)
|
John P. Verree (PA -
R)
|
W. McKee Dunn (IN - R)
|
Laban T. Moore (KT -
O)
|
Edwin H. Webster (MD -
A)
|
Henry A. Edmundson (VA
- D)
|
James K. Moorhead (VT
- R)
|
William G. Whiteley
(DE - D)
|
William H. English (IL
- D)
|
William Windom (MN -
R)
|
|
Emerson Etheridge (TN
- O)
|
Edward Joy Morris (PA
- R)
|
Warren Winslow (NC -
D)
|
Thomas B. Florence (PA
- D)
|
Isaac N. Morris (ILL -
D)
|
John Wood (PA - R)
|
Philip B. Fouke (IL -
D)
|
Freeman H. Morse (ME -
R)
|
Samuel H. Woodson (MS
- A)
|
Ezra B. French (ME -
R)
|
Thomas A. R. Nelson
(TN - O)
|
John V. Wright (TN -
D)
|
Muscoe R H Garnett (NJ - ALD)
|
William E. Niblack (IN
- D)
|
|
John A. Gilmer (NC -
O)
|
John T. Nixon (NJ - R)
|
Those who voted in the negative are:
Mr John B. Alley (MA -
R)
|
John F. Farnsworth (IL - R)
|
Emory B. Pottle (NY -
R)
|
James M. Ashley (OH -
R)
|
Reuben E. Fenton (NY -
R)
|
Edwin R. Reynolds (NY
- ALD)
|
Charles L. Beale (NY -
R)
|
Orris S. Ferry (CT -
R)
|
Homer E. Royce (VT -
R)
|
John A. Bingham (OH -
R)
|
Stephen C. Foster (ME
- R)
|
Charles B. Sedgwick
(NY - R)
|
Samuel S. Blair (PA -
R)
|
Augustus Frank (NY -
R)
|
Daniel E. Somes (ME -
R)
|
Harrison G. Blake (OH
- R)
|
Francis E. Spinner (NY
- R)
|
|
William D. Brayton (RI
- R)
|
Galusha A. Grow (PA -
R)
|
Thaddeus Stevens (PA -
R)
|
James Buffington (MA -
R)
|
John A. Gurley (OH -
R)
|
William Stewart (MD -
D)
|
Anson Burlingame (MA -
R)
|
John Hickman (PA -
ALD)
|
Mason W. Tappan (NH -
R)
|
Alfred A. Burnham (CT
- R)
|
Thomas C. Hindman (AK
- D)
|
Cydnor B. Tompkins (OH
- R)
|
John Carey (OH - R)
|
John Hutchins (OH - R)
|
Charles R. Train (MA -
R)
|
Luther C. Carter (NY -
R)
|
William Irvine (NY -
R)
|
William Vandever (IA -
R)
|
Charles Case (IN - R)
|
Francis W. Kellogg (IL
- R)
|
Charles H. Van Wyck
(NY - R)
|
Stephen Coburn (Maine
- R)
|
DeWitt C. Leach (MI -
R)
|
Edward Wade (OH - R)
|
Roscoe Conkling (NY -
R)
|
M. Lindley Lee (NY -
R)
|
Henry Waldron (Mich -
R)
|
Martin F. Conway (KS -
R)
|
Henry C. Longnecker
(PA - R)
|
E. P. Walton (VT - R)
|
Henry L. Dawes (MA -
R)
|
Dwight Loomis (CT - R)
|
Cadwalader C. Washburn
(WI - R)
|
R. Holland Duell (NY -
R)
|
Owen Lovejoy (IL - R)
|
Ellihu B.
Washburne (IL - R)
|
Sidney Edgerton (OH -
R)
|
Gilman Marston (NH -
R)
|
Alfred Wells (NY - R)
|
Thomas M. Edwards (NH
- R)
|
James B. McKean (NY -
R)
|
James Wilson (IL - R)
|
Thomas D. Eliot (MA -
R)
|
John U. Pettit (IN -
R)
|
John Woodruff (CT - R)
|
Alfred Ely (NY - R)
|
John F. Potter (WI -
R)
|
So the resolution was
passed. Ordered, That the Clerk request
the concurrence of the Senate therein
Gooch, Daniel W, Any Compromise A Surrender, Speech of Hon. D.W. Gooch, of Mass., in the House of Representatives February 23, 1861, Printed At The National Republican Office, Washington D.C. 1861 |
HR
80 was then delivered to the Senate just four days before Abraham Lincoln’s inauguration. On March 2, 1861, after attempts to amend the resolution
failed, the Senate voted and approved the amendment with no alterations by a 24
to 12 margin.
US Senate Journal: Saturday, March 2, 1861:
US Senate Journal: Saturday, March 2, 1861:
Ordered, That "No
amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to
Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic
institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the
laws of said State." pass to a third reading. The said resolution was read the third time.
On the question, Shall
the resolution pass? It was determined
in the affirmative, Yeas ... 24 Nays ... 12.
On motion by William Bigler, The yeas and nays being desired by one
fifth of the senators present, Those who voted in the affirmative are:
Statue of Andrew Johnson at the Tennessee State Capitol |
Henry B. Anthony (RI - R)
|
|
Edward D. Baker (OR - R)
|
Anthony Kennedy (MD - A)
|
William Bigler (PA - D)
|
Milton Latham (CA - D)
|
Jesse D. Bright (IN - D)
|
James M. Mason (VA-D)
|
Lot M. Morrill (ME – R)
|
|
James Dixon (CT- R)
|
Alfred O. P. Nicholson (TN - D)
|
Trusten Polk (MO - D)
|
|
George E. Pugh (OH - D)
|
|
James W. Grimes (IA - R)
|
Henry M. Rice (MI - D)
|
William M. Gwin (CA - D)
|
William K. Sebastian (AK - D)
|
John C. Ten Eyck ( NJ - R)
|
|
Robert M. T. Hunter (VA - D)
|
John R. Thomson (NJ - D)
|
Those
who voted in the negative are:
Kinsley S. Bingham (MI - R)
|
Preston King (NY - R)
|
Zachariah Chandler (MI - R)
|
|
Daniel Clark (NH - R)
|
|
James R. Doolittle (WI - R)
|
Benjamin Wade (OH - R)
|
Charles Durkee (WI - R)
|
Morton S. Wilkinson (MN - R)
|
Solomon Foot (VT - R)
|
The President (Trusten Polk in the chair) announced that the joint resolution was passed.
The
proposed constitutional amendment met the two-thirds majority with its 133
votes in the House and 24 in the Senate. In a last ditch effort to quash
the amendment in the Senate, Lyman Trumbull called a
question of order seeking passage with an affirmative vote of 2/3rds of all 52
Senators currently serving in Congress as opposed to 2/3rds of the 36 Senators
present:
Whether, the joint
resolution being a proposition to amend the Constitution of the United States,
it did not require an affirmative vote of two thirds of the members composing
the Senate, to pass the same. The
President decided that it required an affirmative vote of two thirds of the
senators present, only. From this
decision Mr. Trumbull appealed; and On
the question, Shall the decision of the Chair stand as the judgment of the
Senate? It was determined in the
affirmative, Yeas ... 33 Nays ... 1 So the decision of the Chair was
sustained.
The
amendment (12 Stat. 251) was upheld with only 36 of the 52 Senators
present and 24 or 23rds of the 36 voting yes. The 66 Senators, two from each of
the 33 States that served in the beginning of the 36th Congress
were not at issue because by March 2, 1861, seven of the Southern states had
already declared their secession:
South Carolina seceded on December 20, 1860
Mississippi seceded on January 9th, 1861
Florida seceded on January 10th, 1861
Alabama seceded on January 11th, 1861
Georgia seceded on January 19th, 1861
Louisiana seceded on January 26th, 1861
Texas seceded on February 1st, 1861
Mississippi seceded on January 9th, 1861
Florida seceded on January 10th, 1861
Alabama seceded on January 11th, 1861
Georgia seceded on January 19th, 1861
Louisiana seceded on January 26th, 1861
Texas seceded on February 1st, 1861
Notably
absent for the vote was William Seward (NY – R), who had proposed language that
was incorporated into the Amendment. Seward explained his rationale on
January 12, 1861, stating on the Senate floor that "Discontented citizens
have obtained political power in certain States, and they are using this
authority to overthrow the Federal Government." Disunion would be an
unspeakable calamity. It "would not only arrest, but extinguish the
greatness of our country." Seward made it clear in the speech
that slavery was a matter exclusively within the concern of each State; that the
Fugitive Slave Act must be enforced; and that, if necessary in order to save
the Union, he would agree to a constitutional amendment to that effect.
Seward would later be appointed by Abraham Lincoln as the Secretary of
State.
On
March 2, 1861, President James Buchanan endorsed the proposed 13th Amendment by
taking the unusual step of signing it. His signature on the Congressional joint
resolution was not required because the U.S. Constitution does not provide for Presidential
authority in the constitutional amendment process.
Two
days later, on March 4th, 1861, Abraham
Lincoln was installed as President. In his inaugural address Lincoln
stated:
I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution -- which
amendment, however, I have not seen -- has passed Congress, to the effect that
the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of
the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction
of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular
amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied
constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and
irrevocable.
On March 16, 1861, the
New York Times article, “The Proposed Amendment to the
Constitution” concluded:
The
amendment offered is eminently proper in itself, is as necessary to the
interests of Freedom as of Slavery, and at the same time, its adoption would go
far to soothe the excited public feeling of the South, strengthen the hands of
the friends of Union, and restore peace and harmony to the country. We cannot
imagine a solid objection to it, and it may be hoped that it will be ratified
by all the States.
A
month prior to the outbreak of the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln
transmitted the amendment to each state's governor, noting in his March 16th
letter that President Buchanan had approved it.
To His Excellency, The Governor of the State of North Carolina, Raleigh\
Washington, March 16, 1861
Sir:
I transmit an authenticate copy of a Joint Resolution to amend the Constitution of the United States, adopted by Congress and approved on the 2d of March, 1861, by James Buchanan, President.
I have the honor to be,
Your Excellency's obedient servant,
By the President: Abraham Lincoln
William H Seward, Secretary of State
This
final attempt to salvage the union without bloodshed failed with the firing on
Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861. The remaining southern states, despite
Kentucky’s ratification on April 4, 1861, chose secession over the amendment’s
pending adoption.
Virginia seceded on April 17th, 1861
Arkansas seceded on May 6th, 1861
North Carolina seceded on May 20th, 1861
Tennessee seceded on June 8th, 1861
Arkansas seceded on May 6th, 1861
North Carolina seceded on May 20th, 1861
Tennessee seceded on June 8th, 1861
Five
States, despite the outbreak of war, followed suit and ratified the proposed 13th
amendment:
Kentucky ratified April 4, 1861
Ohio ratified May 13, 1861
Rhode Island ratified May 31, 1861
Maryland ratified January 10, 1862
Virginia ratified February 13, 1862*
Illinois ratified February 14, 1862
Ohio ratified May 13, 1861
Rhode Island ratified May 31, 1861
Maryland ratified January 10, 1862
Virginia ratified February 13, 1862*
Illinois ratified February 14, 1862
*Known as "Restored Government of
Virginia" this state was comprised of counties in Northern Virginia and
those that later became West Virginia in 1863.
To this day, I still wonder why CSA scholars that maintain slavery was not the primary cause of secession do not pose these two questions to their detractors: Why did the Southern States choose to secede and wage a civil war when the ratification of the proposed 13th Amendment in 1861 would have institutionalized slavery and indentured servitude? Was secession really just about slavery?
The
current “social justice” inoculation of the journalists, community
leaders, presidents, vice presidents, congressional and state officials who proposed
and/or supported this most deplorable constitutional amendment should be examined. In the
current national debate, it is important that all sides of this question be addressed including the character of those do called “abolitionists” who sought to preserve the
institution of slavery with the ratification of the original Thirteenth
Amendment.
Stanley Yavneh
Klos, Assistant Director & Visiting
Professor
University
Honors Program, Special Projects
Loyola
University New Orleans
6363 St. Charles
Ave.
Campus Box 75
New Orleans, LA
70118-6195
syklos@loyno.edu
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.