Importance of Freedmen in New York and the Support They Received
Although the established of slavery garnered much support in New York, it was also met with much opposition as well. As slavery was abolished in NY as of 1827, newly freedmen were in desperate need of aid and support. Because of this, many schools were established by the Manumissions Society in order to teach children reading, writing, mathematics, geography, and vocational skills. The Society also developed free night schools for adult freedmen that taught them vocational skills. These schools helped to ease the transition from slavery to life in a free society, which was a daunting task for most slaves. There was also an abundance of newspaper advertisements, promoting new job opportunities for freedmen (McManus 173). This proves the idea that freedmen and African Americans, in general, had much support in the North.
Even before abolition in New York, slaves faced much support from various religious groups. Quakers and Presbyterians led the charge in aiding freedmen. In the 1780s, the Quakers of Flushing, set up a committee to offer financial aid to freedmen. The Quaker congregation in Chappaqua, a town in Westchester, voted to compensate former slaves for the number of years they spent in bondage. The Presbyterians aided freedmen as masters themselves. The church urged its members to educate their soon-to-be-former slaves in order to prepare them for free life better. (McManus 174). Slaves had some supporters in New York and did not face complete dejection.
Even before abolition in New York, slaves faced much support from various religious groups. Quakers and Presbyterians led the charge in aiding freedmen. In the 1780s, the Quakers of Flushing, set up a committee to offer financial aid to freedmen. The Quaker congregation in Chappaqua, a town in Westchester, voted to compensate former slaves for the number of years they spent in bondage. The Presbyterians aided freedmen as masters themselves. The church urged its members to educate their soon-to-be-former slaves in order to prepare them for free life better. (McManus 174). Slaves had some supporters in New York and did not face complete dejection.
Anti-Slavery Sentiment
Despite the ever-present pro-slavery attitude of many New Yorkers during the 1800's, slavery was abolished in New York in 1827. The work of abolitionists across the North and in New York led to this change. Abolitionists continued to advocate for equality and the end of slavery up until the end of slavery in 1865. Across New York, anti-slavery societies and individuals worked to end slavery across America.
The common fear of whites in the North, particularly New York City, was that blacks and whites would marry and have children -- the term used they used was "amalgamation"-- and the white race would no longer be pure. Typically it was a black abolitionist who led the effort to end slavery in the United States. They set the tone, mapped out the strategies, and inspired anti-slavery whites. The Anti-Slavery Society of New York was formed in 1831 by the Tappan brothers. Arthur and Lewis Tappan went against the norm set by wealthy white men by advocating for the end of slavery rather than supporting the practice. They became particularly hated in New York due to their funding of abolitionist groups and view that slavery was the nation's greatest sin. Their beliefs led to the violence of the 1834 riots as whites took the streets, yelling Arthur Tappan's name and attacked their houses with bricks and stones. The Tappan brothers remained a primary target of pro-slavery forces in New York but still persisted in advocating for abolition. Arthur Tappan served as the president of the New York City Anti-Slavery Society and signed their constitution, which called for "a total and immediate abolition of slavery in the United States" (Anti-Slavery Society of New York 1833 par. 8).
Similarly, the Female Anti-Slavery Society of New-York published works that outlined their reasons for abolition and called for immediate abolition across the world (Ladies New York City Anti-Slavery Society 1836 15). Religion was frequently used by Anti-Slavery societies as a way to promote their arguments; they called slavery a sin and claimed it offended heaven (Ladies New York City Anti-Slavery Society 1838 10). The anti-slavery societies of New York faced considerable opposition by going against many wealthy and powerful men but persisted, and eventually, it led to the end of slavery.
Individuals across New York called for a nationwide end to slavery. One example of this is Reverend O. B. Frothingham, who spoke before the American Anti-Slavery Society in 1836 in Nassau, New York. Frothingham claims that mostly all of the northern citizens are anti-slavery, which is unusual as other sources tend to say that the North is divided. Whigs and merchants are mentioned explicitly in his list of anti-slavery advocates. By matching the names of men who participated in New York City "ratification meetings" with names from the wealthy citizen list, one finds that 12 whig officers from the meeting, were also wealthy businessmen. The 12 officers accounted for 35% of the Whigs at the meeting (Gatell 239). This is interesting because one would expect Whigs, who did not support slavery, to not be wealthy. If they were wealthy, they would be expected to support slavery because of their economic agenda. In another study looking at 909 affluent men in New York City, of the 70.6% of men who identified themselves politically, 84.3% were Whigs (Rich 264). He then goes onto say how even though merchants use slave power, they are abolitionists who see the end of slavery as inevitable, but they use it because it is present and available for profit ( Frothingham 18).
Another individual was George W. Clark, who refuted the speech of Charles O'Conner, who was pro-slavery. In Clark's speech, he calls out the democratic part for being the "natural ally" of slaveholders (Clark 9). Clark is a strong advocate of abolition and points to the moral and ethical issues with slavery. He uses quotes from philosophers such as Aristotle and Socrates to add ethos to his argument (Clark 9). Abolitionists, whether societies or individuals, were responsible for the end of slavery and the passing of the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th amendment, which officially ended slavery.
The common fear of whites in the North, particularly New York City, was that blacks and whites would marry and have children -- the term used they used was "amalgamation"-- and the white race would no longer be pure. Typically it was a black abolitionist who led the effort to end slavery in the United States. They set the tone, mapped out the strategies, and inspired anti-slavery whites. The Anti-Slavery Society of New York was formed in 1831 by the Tappan brothers. Arthur and Lewis Tappan went against the norm set by wealthy white men by advocating for the end of slavery rather than supporting the practice. They became particularly hated in New York due to their funding of abolitionist groups and view that slavery was the nation's greatest sin. Their beliefs led to the violence of the 1834 riots as whites took the streets, yelling Arthur Tappan's name and attacked their houses with bricks and stones. The Tappan brothers remained a primary target of pro-slavery forces in New York but still persisted in advocating for abolition. Arthur Tappan served as the president of the New York City Anti-Slavery Society and signed their constitution, which called for "a total and immediate abolition of slavery in the United States" (Anti-Slavery Society of New York 1833 par. 8).
Similarly, the Female Anti-Slavery Society of New-York published works that outlined their reasons for abolition and called for immediate abolition across the world (Ladies New York City Anti-Slavery Society 1836 15). Religion was frequently used by Anti-Slavery societies as a way to promote their arguments; they called slavery a sin and claimed it offended heaven (Ladies New York City Anti-Slavery Society 1838 10). The anti-slavery societies of New York faced considerable opposition by going against many wealthy and powerful men but persisted, and eventually, it led to the end of slavery.
Individuals across New York called for a nationwide end to slavery. One example of this is Reverend O. B. Frothingham, who spoke before the American Anti-Slavery Society in 1836 in Nassau, New York. Frothingham claims that mostly all of the northern citizens are anti-slavery, which is unusual as other sources tend to say that the North is divided. Whigs and merchants are mentioned explicitly in his list of anti-slavery advocates. By matching the names of men who participated in New York City "ratification meetings" with names from the wealthy citizen list, one finds that 12 whig officers from the meeting, were also wealthy businessmen. The 12 officers accounted for 35% of the Whigs at the meeting (Gatell 239). This is interesting because one would expect Whigs, who did not support slavery, to not be wealthy. If they were wealthy, they would be expected to support slavery because of their economic agenda. In another study looking at 909 affluent men in New York City, of the 70.6% of men who identified themselves politically, 84.3% were Whigs (Rich 264). He then goes onto say how even though merchants use slave power, they are abolitionists who see the end of slavery as inevitable, but they use it because it is present and available for profit ( Frothingham 18).
Another individual was George W. Clark, who refuted the speech of Charles O'Conner, who was pro-slavery. In Clark's speech, he calls out the democratic part for being the "natural ally" of slaveholders (Clark 9). Clark is a strong advocate of abolition and points to the moral and ethical issues with slavery. He uses quotes from philosophers such as Aristotle and Socrates to add ethos to his argument (Clark 9). Abolitionists, whether societies or individuals, were responsible for the end of slavery and the passing of the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th amendment, which officially ended slavery.
We call upon you to unite perfect liberty be granted to every one of their inhabitants -- the black man as well as the white man. We are all children of the same gracious God, all equally entitled to life, liberty an the pursuit of happiness"
- George W. Clark
The discrepancy between Northern and Southern views was further proved with the election of Lincoln. Although Democrats were believed to hold the majority of the population in the nation, Lincoln (Republican) won the election of 1860. This is because there were two democratic candidates. Douglas represented Northern interests, while Breckenridge supported Southern interests and advocated for the recognition of slavery as a national institution and the acceptance of secession. This split in voters allowed Lincoln to get the election despite winning only 1,900,000 voters out of 4,700,000, a weak number of 40%. This shows that most in the North, in fact, did not support the Southern agenda of slavery.