Scholarly Communications Project


"CAN THESE BE THE SONS OF THEIR FATHERS?" The Defense of Slavery in Virginia, 1831-1832

by

Christopher M. Curtis

Master's Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Virginia Tech in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts

in

History

Approved

Crandall Shifflett, Chair
Neil Larry Shumsky
Peter Wallenstein

April 28, 1997
Blacksburg, Virginia


Abstract

“CAN THESE BE THE SONS OF THEIR FATHERS?” The Defense of Slavery in Virginia, 1831-1832 by Christopher M. Curtis (ABSTRACT) This study argues that the Virginia slavery debate of 1831-32 was an occasion when radical transformations in the nature of the proslavery argument occurred and where changing popular perceptions about the role of government can be seen. Since the Revolution, government in Virginia had been based upon the Lockean concept of the inviolable right of private property and of property’s central relationship to government. During the slavery debate, when the initial emancipationist plan, which addressed the slaveholders’ property rights, was dismissed as impractical, a more radical antislavery doctrine was proposed that challenged traditional beliefs concerning property and the function of government. This doctrine was the legal concept of eminent domain, the right of the state to take private property for public purposes without the consent of the owner. Arguing that slavery threatened public safety, emancipationists called on the state government to act within its eminent domain powers to confiscate this harmful species of property. In the climate of increased public fear, brought on by the recent slave insurrection in Southampton County, this particular emancipationist argument subverted the traditional necessary evil justification for slavery. Defenders of slavery became impaled upon the horns of a dilemma. If they continued to acknowledge that slavery was evil, then they risked engendering the expansive government powers that the emancipationists advocated. If slavery could no longer be justified as a necessary evil, then upon what grounds must its defense now rest? In the face of this dilemma, defenders abandoned their traditional apologetic justification and instead advanced the idea of slavery as a “positive good.”


List of attached files

File NameSize (Bytes)
BIBLIO.PDF37,431 Bytes
CHP1.PDF74,520 Bytes
CHP2.PDF38,165 Bytes
CHP3.PDF58,395 Bytes
CHP4.PDF31,052 Bytes
CHP5.PDF47,910 Bytes
CONCLS.PDF19,861 Bytes
ETD.PDF33,165 Bytes
INTRO.PDF12,868 Bytes
May_22_19970 Bytes


The author grants to Virginia Tech or its agents the right to archive and display their thesis or dissertation in whole or in part in the University Libraries in all forms of media, now or hereafter known. The author retains all proprietary rights, such as patent rights. The author also retains the right to use in future works (such as articles or books) all or part of this thesis or dissertation.
[ETD main page] [Search ETDs][etd.vt.edu] [SCP home page] [library home page]

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu