Slavery was a system of coerced labor, primarily agricultural labor in North
America, in which slaves-and the children of slave women — were legally the
chattle property of their masters for their entire lives. Save for a few Indians
during the seventeenth century, in North America it was confined exclusively
to Africans and their African-American descendants. Slaves' race and their
life-long legal status as property is what primarily distinguished slaves from
white European indentured servants, who were also coerced laborers for
fixed terms and who formed the vast proportion of the agricultural labor
supply in the tobacco-growing colonies of Virginia and Maryland for most of
the seventeenth century. Only after 1680, when the supply of white
indentured servants sharply declined, did labor-hungry planters in the
Chesapeake region and the new colony of South Carolina begin to import
African slaves on a large scale. By 1750 black slaves formed 44 percent of
Virginia's population, 31 percent of Maryland's, and 61 percent of South
Carolina's.
While slavery was always more dominant in the southern than northern
colonies, at the time of the Declaration of Independence, when slaves formed
about one-fifth of the total colonial population, slavery was legal and existed
in every northern colony, although only in New York did the proportion of
slaves exceed 10 percent of the population. After the Revolution, however,
the history of slavery followed a different course in the North and South. All
of the original northern states abolished slavery, although usually very
gradually by post-nati laws that freed no slaves alive at the time of their
passage but stipulated that slave children born after their passage were to be
freed when they reached their twenties. This meant that well into the third and
fourth decades of the nineteenth century a few slaves still lived in some
northeastern states, but the course of slavery's extinction there was clear.
The eradication of slavery in western areas north of the Ohio River
bequeathed to the United States by the Treaty of Paris in 1783 came much
sooner. The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 prohibited slavery from the
Northwest Territory that encompassed the later states of Ohio, Indiana,
Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin. Even so, five years after Illinois's admission
as a free state in 1818, there was a concerted effort, that came remarkably
close to succeeding, to admend its state constitution in order to legalize
slavery within the state.
South of the Ohio River, however, the story was dramatically different.
Southern areas west of the Appalachian mountains inherited the same laws
regarding slavery as the South Atlantic states of Virginia, North Carolina, and
Georgia which ceded them to the United States in the 1780s. Thus Kentucky
in 1792 and Tennessee in 1796 entered the Union as slave states, and
slavery was also legal in the area from which the states of Mississippi and
Alabama would eventually be formed. Slaveholders did not move in great
numbers into those areas, however, until the invention of the cotton gin in
1793 and the end of the War of 1812. The cotton gin allowed the profitable
growth of short-staple cotton which would become the antebellum South's
pre-eminent market crop. That invention ignited a massive migration of
slaveholders away from the Atlantic Coast into Up-Country South Carolina,
central and western Georgia, Mississippi, which gained statehood in 1817,
and Alabama which became a state in 1819. The result was a dramatic shift
in the distribution of the slave population within the South. In 1790 the upper
South states of Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky,
and Tennessee contained four-fifths of the South's slaves. By 1860 the seven
lower South states contained three-fifths of a total slave population of
3,953,760.
By 1860, the size of the United States had increased considerably since the
boundaries established in 1783. Thus the question arose as to whether
slavery should be extended to new territorial acquisitions. At first, this
question aroused little controversy, for most Americans agreed to perpetuate
the laws regarding slavery of the nations from which the United States
acquired new territories. Thus, because the Spanish had legalized slavery in
Florida, slavery existed there after the United States acquired it from Spain in
1819, and in 1845 Florida entered the Union as a slave state. Similarly,
because the Spanish and French allowed slavery in New Orleans, slavery
was presumed to be legal there and in the huge, if still vaguely defined,
Louisiana Territory which Americans acquired in the Louisiana Purchase of
1803. Thus Louisiana entered as a slave state in 1812, slaveholders moved
confidently into what became Arkansas, and, more important, into Missouri,
most of which was west of the free state of Illinois.
Sectional controversy over slavery extension, indeed, first empted when
residents of Missouri applied to Congress for entry as a slave state in late
1818. Northerners tried to bar slavery from the new state, setting off a
heated debate that was only settled by passage of the Missouri Compromise
in 1820. This allowed Missouri's admission as a slave state in 1821, called
for Maine's admission as a free state in 1820, and, most important, "forever
prohibited" slavery from the remainder of the Louisiana Purchase territory
north of the 36°30' line, the southern border of the new state of Missouri.
Controversy over slavery extension west of the Mississippi River broke out
again in 1844 over annexation of the proslavery Republic of Texas. Southern
slaveholders had begun moving into Texas when Mexico was still controlled
by Spain and slavery was legal, but after Mexico's successful rebellion from
Spain in 1821, Mexicans declared slavery abolished throughout the new
nation. Thus slaveholders in Texas lived in defiance of Mexican law, an
anomaly that helped provoke Texans' war of independence from Mexico in
1836. Immediately after this revolution, Texans applied to the United States
for annexation, but abolitionist groups in the North, appalled by the possible
extension of slave territory, agitated so intensively against it that annexation
was shelved until President John Tyler reopened the issue. Because of Tyler's
initiative and the Democratic party's embrace of immediate annexation, Texas
became a central issue in the presidential campaign of 1844. After
Democrats won that contest, they passed a joint-resolution in Congress, over
nearly unanimous Whig opposition, that offered Texas immediate entry as a
slave state. Texas formally accepted the offer in July 1845, and it was
admitted as a slave state in December 1845.
Northern opposition to slavery expansion became even more intense when
the outbreak of war with Mexico in the spring of 1846 raised the possibility
of acquiring Mexican territory into which slavery might expand still further
westward. Northerners opposed slavery extension for a combination of
reasons — antipathy to the spread of an institution they considered morally
intolerable; a racist insistence that western areas be preserved for the
exclusive settlement of whites; and a growing determination that the South's
political power in Washington not increase with the addition of still more
slave states. But unquestionably the disregard of slaveholders in Texas and
the older slave states for Mexico's antislavery laws, by demonstrating that
Southerners, or at least Southern Democrats, would not be bound by the
laws regarding slavery of the nation from which the United States acquired
new lands, if those laws were antislavery, also intensified their concern. Thus
in August 1846, twenty months before the United States actually acquired the
Mexican Cession in March 1848, David Wilmot introduced his famous
Proviso barring slavery from any land acquired from Mexico as a result of the
war. Wilmot's Proviso set off four years of sectional wrangling over the
Mexican Cession because even Southerners who believed that slavery could
never be profitably established in the arid Southwest considered a federal
ban on slavery to be an intolerable deprivation of white Southerners' equal
rights in the nation. So heated did this quarrel over the Proviso and the
Cession grow that it would not be resolved until passage of the Compromise
of 1850.
Yet Northerners' antipathy to the possible spread of slavery into the Mexican
Cession paled in terms of its ferocity and extent next to the outrage provoked
by passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act in 1854. This statute effectively
repealed the Missouri Compromise's ban on slavery north of the 36 30' line
in the remainder of the Louisiana Purchase territory, and it ignited a chain of
political events that led to the formation of the Republican party in the North,
its election of Abraham Lincoln as President in 1860, southern secession, and
Civil War.