Arguing about Slavery: John Quincy Adams and the Great Battle in the United States Congress (Paperback)

~ (Author) "ON DECEMBER 16, 1835, an otherwise undistinguished thirty-eight-year-old congressman named John Fairfield, from York County, Maine, rose upon his legs in the United States House..." (more)
Key Phrases: tipsy merriment, petition from slaves, gag resolution, United States, New York, South Carolina (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Product Description

In the 1830s slavery was so deeply entrenched that it could not even be discussed in Congress, which had enacted a "gag rule" to ensure that anti-slavery petitions would be summarily rejected. This stirring book chronicles the parliamentary battle to bring "the peculiar institution" into the national debate, a battle that some historians have called "the Pearl Harbor of the slavery controversy." The campaign to make slavery officially and respectably debatable was waged by John Quincy Adams who spent nine years defying gags, accusations of treason, and assassination threats. In the end he made his case through a combination of cunning and sheer endurance. Telling this story with a brilliant command of detail, Arguing About Slavery endows history with majestic sweep, heroism, and moral weight.

"Dramatic, immediate, intensely readable, fascinating and often moving."--New York Times Book Review

From the Inside Flap

In the 1830s slavery was so deeply entrenched that it could not even be discussed in Congress, which had enacted a "gag rule" to ensure that anti-slavery petitions would be summarily rejected. This stirring book chronicles the parliamentary battle to bring "the peculiar institution" into the national debate, a battle that some historians have called "the Pearl Harbor of the slavery controversy." The campaign to make slavery officially and respectably debatable was waged by John Quincy Adams who spent nine years defying gags, accusations of treason, and assassination threats. In the end he made his case through a combination of cunning and sheer endurance. Telling this story with a brilliant command of detail, Arguing About Slavery endows history with majestic sweep, heroism, and moral weight.



"Dramatic, immediate, intensely readable, fascinating and often moving."--New York Times Book Review

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 592 pages
• Publisher: Vintage (January 12, 1998)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0679768440
• ISBN-13: 978-0679768449
• Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.5 x 1.5 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.9 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (15 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #733,056 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars A great, great book, October 12, 2000

By	Schmerguls "schmerguls" (Sioux City, Ia USA) - See all my reviews (TOP 1000 REVIEWER)

This book deals with events from 1835 to 1845 and is principally concerned with John Quincy Adams' fight over the House rule which forbad the reception of petitions about slavery. This may seem like a narrow issue to be the subject of a 556 page book, but this book is flawlessly written, and has great humor--exposing the idiocy of the slavery upholders--and at times brought tears to my eyes. A dropback to the stirring events of 1775 and 1776, found on pages 155 to 157, is as good a writing as I have ever seen evoking the sheer drama of those days. This is a nigh flawless book for one as interested as I am in congressional history and the years before the Civil War.

9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Wonderful chronicle of an astonishing period in Congress, December 30, 1998

By A Customer

Miller presents a detailed history of a remarkable period in U.S. Congressional history leading up to the Civil War. Miller describes the battle waged in the U.S. House of Representatives, led by John Quincy Adams, to preserve the right of citizens to petition their government, and his efforts to keep the issue of slavery before the House. I finally saw one of the important effects of the infamous 3/5's rule, which was to create a power imbalance in Congress in which slave holding states dominated the House due to the additional Congressional Reps. they gained by virtue of their large slave populations. It was this imbalance that hindered Congress from a full debate regarding the abolition of slavery. Extremely informative, very well researched and documented, and Miller weaves a witty commentary throughout that is most enjoyable. This is a book that should be read in every high school American History class. It is at times dry (big surprise as Miller details Congressional proceedings) but nonetheless fascinating. I have a new appreciation of the contribution of Adams to the battle against slavery.

18 of 22 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Required reading for Southern apologists, January 20, 2004

By	chefdevergue (Spokane, WA United States) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)

Anybody who ascribes to the idiotic notion that Southern secession was all about states' rights and really had nothing to do with slavery needs to be reminded of two antebellum events: the Fugitive Slave Act, which was legislation that solely benefitted slaveowners while being a complete affront to the notion of states' rights; and the gag rule in Congress from 1836-1844, which essentially stripped citizens & Congressmen of their 1st amendment rights.

The gag rule was focused on the 1st Amendment right of petition, which was frequently utilized by US citizens in the early 19th century. The cause of the furor was a dramatic increase of abolitionist petitions that proposed the abolition of the slave trade within the District of Columbia, which was under the direct jurisdiction of the US Congress (DC was chosen because most people believed that the Constitution did not give the Congress jurisdiction in the individual states --- DC was another matter).

The Congress of that period was dominated by pro-slavery Southerners and sympathetic Northerners who would rather not stir up too much trouble. However, a small group of Congressmen, led by John Quincy Adams, waged an 8-year against the gag rule. Along the way, Adams & his cohorts, along with an increasingly organized & vocal abolitionist movement, undermined the neutral attitude most Americans had towards the issue of slavery.

Former president John Quincy Adams is clearly the central figure of the story, and it is pretty obvious that Miller likes the crochety old statesman. One cannot read this book and not come away with an increased respect for Adams, who has unfairly been relegated to historical obscurity. It is remarkable to think that through most of the gag rule battle, Adams was in his mid to late 70's, and almost never missed a day in Congress. The story also displays abundantly Adams' formidable intellect and parliamentary skills.

On the other side of the aisle were the Southern fire-eaters, who were capable of great oratorical flourishes but who possessed precious little strategic skill. Miller recounts how, time again, the pro-slavery forces miscalculated with their tactics. Instead of squelching debate about slavery, hotheads like Henry Wise & Waddy Thompson Jr succeeded only in inflaming the controversy. After 8 years, the leaders of the pro-gag forces were realizing that they might have unleashed forces beyond their control, and abandoned the fight to maintain the gag.

The story is presented in an entertainingly narrative style which I found to be quite enjoyable. Some reviewers have found the author's asides to be a distraction, but I found that they contributed well to the story for the most part. Indeed, some sections of the book (such as when Adams is facing down his opponents who are attempting to censure him) are real page-turners.

While the book was very entertaining, it is also quite sobering. One becomes aware of the appalling nature of the slave-owning bloc. So dedicated were they to preserving their own interests that they repeatedly violated the 1st Amendment & trampled on civil rights of WHITE citizens in general, through the censoring of private mail, violating the writ of habeas corpus (South Carolina had a law on the books for almost 40 years, allowing free black sailors to arrested & imprisoned for duration of their ship's stay in port, simply because they were free blacks and MIGHT incite the local slave population to rebel) and (ironically) violating the doctrine of states' rights --- as the right to due process was systematically denied to the citizens of other states (a free enfranchised citizen of Massachusetts, for example, was not due any rights at all under the constitution of Missouri if he happened not to be white). Eventually, the encroachment by the South on the civil rights of the rest of the nation's citizens became ominous enough for the average citizen in the North to become aware of the genuine threat that the expansion of slavery posed. Almost all of this starts with the fight over the gag rule in Congress.

Miller also examines how Southern politicians tried, with increasing difficulty, to reconcile their claims to being good republicans with their obvious anti-republican actions. Miller argues that the politicians of the South fought to prevent the mere discussion of slavery because they knew better than anyone that the institution & way of life they were defending could not be defended in the playing field was level. If violating the principles of the Constitution & the Declaration of Independence is what it took to defend the peculiar institution, then they would do it, but not without a great deal of moral & intellectual discomfort. It is amazing to read some of the tortured rationalizations of Southern statesmen during this period.

This should be required reading for the student of this period. It is not a dry subject, and fortunately the author writes with plenty of flair. If some devotee of the Lost Cause mythos starts blathering on about how the Confederacy was only about the defense of states' rights & tries to use the Constitution as a rationalization for secession, this book should provide you with plenty of ammunition for your debate.