Transcripts For CSPAN2 British 20240705

Our first moderator this afternoon. And that is going to be brian gabriel. And brian is with the panel transnational perspectives on american slavery and the United States civil war. Brianwell, listen, im so sorryt im not joining you, all of you there in augusta. I wish that i were there, of course, in person. I think weave a niill be first. The second american revolution. Canadian editors and the outbreak of the u. S. Civil war, ow from Texas Christian University and simon vodrey from carlton up in canada. He will have probably a little bit more than what im saying to you in terms of timing. I will time myself. Hub is that okay or is someone timing me off . Brian . Time yourself. Okay. All right. All right. So i think we need to get started here so we can keep things on track. Right. I hope everyone can see this now. Very good. It is sometimes forgotten that the close bond the United States shares with canada is manifesta. And the signing of the treaty of ghent that ended the war of 1812 through the 19th century, the United States remained adversarial toward canada because it represented an extension of British Colonial power in north america and a land that took Foreign Policy directives from london. As a result, canadians had a mix of antipathy and sympathy for the americans. As the unionist that apart during the winter of sumter. Americans north and south had their reservations about canada to. In the north, they worried that canada will harbor would harbor southern spies who had hatch plots against the union. Certainly as the war progressed and southern refugees spilled into were southern agents, including John Wilkes Booth and bennett young, id into st albans, vermont. St albans, and southerners never had much affinity for canada, especially after the 1933 excuse me, 1833 act of parliament that ended slavery in british colonies, including british north america. To further irritate slave owners, most canadians and their press denounced the u. S. Fugitive slave laws, especially the 1850 fugitive slave act. Southerners saw canada as an illegal final stop escape slaves on the underground railroad and a refuge for detested abolitionists who fled the civil war presented challenges for canadians who relied on diplomatic direction and military military protection from newspaper editors closely observed and dreaded the advance to the south and what that meant forritish north for the United States. Looking southward, we see no streak of blue sky. All this gloomy, dark and threatening. George brown, the editor of torontos globe, wrote for months before the showing at fort sumter. He sadly predicted a fierce civil war unlike anything ever experienced on this continent since the inevitable. While many editors like brown, who refer to the United States as a professor of christian and cizemen, stealers welcome the potential end to slavery. They knew whatever came of the war would not be good. This Research Explores the early days of canadian newspaper coverage in two major English Speaking newspapers, the globe in toronto and the gazette in montreal, and focuses on far more broad areas that emerged in the coverage. The gravity of the crisis, slavan the causes of disunion. The union and confederate leadership. And finally, the u. S. And british relations and canadian antiamericanism, while canadian canadian liberal editors like george brown tended to support lincoln in his administration. Conservative ones were less supportive of the unions motives. However, both conservative or liberal understood what was at stake and hoped for a peacel resolution. In toronto, brown, one of canadas liberal leading liberals and a staunch ■[■abolionist who once assisted fugitive slaves to freedom, believed that it was the norths duty to destroy this disgrace, this atrocious system that spread leprosy. Even so, it is so. Even so, the first editor editorial on april 13th in his newspaper after fort sumter said, we are loath to believe that the contest will last long. We fully expect the french societal content will cease when historical facts are thoroughly realized. In montreal, canadas largest city, john lowe and Brown Chamberlain of the gazette, a newspaper with considerable of positions. Similarly feared the worst and the calamity of civil war. Unless checked at once. This war, if it may be termed, will be e its movements and most bitter while it lasts of any on record. Without a doubt, seven days later, aer editor said, we cannot be indifferent. Spectators of the impending conflict. We cannot feel that any words of ours can influence that result as simply simple spectators. We cannot see one particle of good which can result from a fratricidal war. As for the labor and the causes of disunion, canadian editors generally abhorred slavery. But conservative ones tended to sympathetic light, seeing their struggle as one over northern economical oppression than slavery. Gazette viewed this as a southern fight for liberty, believing the south as having every right to secede, just as the american colonies had a right to declare their independence from Great Britain. A series of items in the april 16th edition,ll show stht this and shed a more positive light on the events at sumter. Readers learned how bells were ringing in mary peel and the people were engaged in every demonstration of joy after the shelling of the fort. An editorial the following day referred to fort sumter as a glorious affair in which such splendid courage and daring were displayed and nobody hurt. It asserted that if the south, if the south is thoroughly and earnest, it cannot be conquered by the north. While the newspaperot support slavery as as a published remark. On april 15th suggested the death blow to slavery on this continent was struck in charleston, south carolina, on ybreak on friday by its most devoted advocates and friends. The slave owners, george brown, also likened events to the revolutionary war, but penned the cause of disunion squarely on slavery. Back when . Brown back in january, when brown heard a false report that fighting had begun, he wrote the first shot has been fired in the second american revolution. How strangely it sounds, how different the motive. He continued in seven 1876, it was to secure freedom, to vindicate and uphold the rights of man. In 1861, it is to secure the institution of slavery, to render it impossible that for millions of men should receive their rights. The first had reason and justice and the sympathies of freemen everywhere, even in a country invaded, in the country Whose Authority was about to be thrown off on its side, and it succeeded. The second had has neither reason nor justice nor humanity, nor the sympathies of the free, nor the prayers of the good and its behalf. And it must fail. Union and the Canadian Press initially viewed lincoln as weak as his predecessor, James Buchanan brown, who supported lincoln even but even once referred to him as a fourth great lawyer and said that mostly positive things about him as being the representative of the norths great fight against slavery. If mr. Lincoln is for war, then let him say so. In the loyal and loyal north will back him to death. Noble co fight for, as any for which blood has ever been shed. Every motive which impels men to do well is do well and bravely is theirs. If they stand as nobly by their cause as their causes noble, they cannot fail of success. Another editorial the end of the first act, appeared a week later, observing president lincoln seems to have made up his mind as to the future course and will probably pursue it with firmness and energy. Another on the 20th said that the cause of which mr. Lincoln is to represent it is a noble one. Brown new york editors who did not saying they are making themselves ridiculous by abusing lincoln, scott and seward for errors which they alleged to have committed it in the conduct of affairs. Notably, the conservative gazette in montreal hardly mentioned lincoln, referring to him only as the president and not by name. In the days before, forts sumter, the newspaper said little about the u. S. President or his response to the brewing tensions in charleston. The notable exception was an unflattering april 10th item from the correspondent of the montreal gazette. Readers learned new yorks apparent new new yorkers apparent attitudes toward lincoln. Almost everybody here pities old abe. The poor man is frightened. Have to death. That he does not know his own mind. The correspondent also said that new york women have moren than. The ladies are upset if war breaks out, it will be very difficult for them to obtain obtain new fashions from paris, which of course, would be atter. They talk about presenting an address to their seceding sisters of the south. Asking as pathetically as possible whether they are prepared to sanction a course which might cause a paris bonnet to be six months in reaching this country. Confederate president Jefferson Davis received even less notice in the two papers. The gazette reported on april 23rd, 29th, that Jefferson Davis was about ready to march on washington. An editorial in the globe also mentioned davis by name, saying there was something mysterious about the disappearance of president jeff davis from the scene. While the editorial quotes disclosed to reader that davis had been ill, it also observed nobody should set up in the trade of rebellion who ino ailmf humanity. Canadian newspaper editors had long memories of u. S. Aggression against british north america, and they waited for britains reaction to the war in america. As england weighed diplomat recognition of the south. An april 20th editorial in the globe said that the United States and Great Britain have not enjoyed a Good Relationship and observed america would take advantage of the weakest weakness of our mother country and Great Britain face two similar crises. Likewise, in an editorial on the may 25th present criticizing members of the northern news press upset that the british didnt take a stronger stand against the southern privateers, reminding them that the United States never supportedom england in time, apparel or disaster, or when the ties of kindred should have found them to her side. Further, it noteho are of troubs seized upon as an opportune time to bully, thwart and vex her and to exert unfair concessions from her. English speaking canadians, especially men like brown, were loyal to the crown and did not admire americas form of government or americans and their grandstanding. The workers entered an editorial opportunity to express some antiamerican sentiment and delineate culturaleen the two. By aprils end, for example, george brown suggested in the editorial, not without its drawbacks, that american democracy had limits. One of the results of the republican form of government is to develop to a greater extent than any other than under any other system. Individuality of the people composing the nation. American believe they can be president. But the problem is they are taking actions and criticizing their leader without much regard to brown. There was no surer or shorter way to anarchy. A may 37th Globe Editorial commemorating Queen Victorias birthday compared american with canadians by saying, while we admire the voted ness to the union of the people of the northern states, we are glad we are not them. We are glad we do not belong to a country torn by intestine divisions. Webere a demonstrative people. There is little spread eagle ism in our composition. Finally, a may 27th editorial called british interference had a noticeably antiamerican tone. The americans imagine themselves such an almighty nation that when a government meets their wishes, they attricbute it to te fear of their wrath. They imagine in their presence, the needs of the mightiest must knocked together from the very terror. The writer observed, americans are not a people bound by any authority. Whatever right or wrong it should be in accordance with their interests or prejudices. Eventually, in conclusion, in canadas official political and diplomatic diplomatic position about the civil war was settled on may 13, when Queen Victoria issued a proclamation of neutrality. While the proclamation determined canada and gland ■ nainternational stance towarde union and confederacy, Canadian Newspapers continued voicing their concerns about what was happening to the south. But they werent the only newspapers paying attention. Nearly six weeks after the firing on fort sumter for example, the times of london correspondents provided this observation for london readers. The Great Southern rebellion is believed here without whether justly or unjustly, to be the result of a conspiracy to overthrow the free institutions of the United States. When they shall cease to be perverted for the uses of filibustering and the extension of slave slavery. Im going to end here. But there is one more blurb about their excerpt that you can see from the times. But i want to just end by saying as a result, a made Many Americans dont realize this, but as a result of canada confed actually became, start becoming its own country in 1867. And thats a topic for another discussion. Thank you very much. And did you go next to introduce you to your next panelist, please . Our next panel panelist is matthew university. Matt, ill let you introduce your own to your own title. Thank you, brian. And my topic is the spi methodi. And so i just want to say first, i wish i could be at the symposium, but to everybody whos here for the first time, welcome. Its a great experience. Now, without further ado, i just want to get into my presentation. So on march fourth, 1850, john calhoun would deliver what would be his final speech in the senate. He has two colleagues delivered on his behalf because he was too sick and elderly at that point. And his speech looks at two key concepts. He looks first at while hes discussing what was came to be known as the compromise of 1850. Hes looking at howt then the s, arguably more consequential is how did the union even get to that point in the first place . And on the latter question, calhoun blamed abolitionism, believing that it had sundered what he called the cords that bind the states together. Now, these cords were in John Calhouns perspectiv political,d religious institutions, which bound northern and southerners together into a common union. But in calhouns telling, he said, the first of these cords, which snapped, was that of the powerful Methodist Episcopal Church. Now, calhoun surprised that the Methodist Church was the first one to split was and contribute to the sexual rift. Warrens greater examination because the Methodist Episcopal Church was americas Largest Church at that point in time. In the 1840s before it split in 1844. But it was more than just a national church. It was, as David Hampton is aptly calledk i an empire of the spirit. It was an international tional movement that began as a Reform Movement within the church of england in the 1700s, spread to the United States in after the formation of United States and sent missionaries across the globe. Methodism had a complicated relationship w its fundamentally antislavery sentiment made it a logical first step in america for heading down the road to secession and civil wgoing to ee the denominations antislavery origins under john wesley, how his legacy continued through the denominations first magazine, the armenian british and american methodists and how they would felt it was best to address the problem of slavery and how the religious press nto why british methodist might have not been so vocally critical of their american compatriots as to not pushing against slavery as aggressively as they might have liked. And so were going to start with john wesley, because hes famous for being a theologian, for being the founder of methodism. But he was also, in many ways, a social reformer. And in 1774, so two years before the declaration of independence, wesley published his own critique of the slave trade. This is 15 years before the great wilberforce brought slavery to the forefront of british politics and his work in 1774ghts upon slavery. Wesley, though, didnt just attack the slave trade. He condemned slave holding and racism, too, and linked them into what he termed this complicated villainy. Wesley, in his disciples, saw slavery as this complicated villainy, as they put it, because it combined a host of other evils. Wesley call said fraud, theft, murder were all part of slavery and that they were institu actually part of that system. They couldnt be separated from it. So as a resu, you coulslavery,. His solutions to those participating were quite simple escape for your life or in another he said, quit immediately. Wesleys antislavery views would establish a legacy of opposing the souths peculiar institution on both sides of the atlantic. For decades to come. But thoughts upon slavery is divided into five different components. The first of these is where he defined slavery and looks at its characteristics. So he talks about how its perpetual, how its different than just what he calls mild domestic service. How it reduces people to the statusthe second part he looks t africa and specifically parts of he instead says its one of the most fruitful places in the known world in part three. He looks at the trade in all of its components, so he doesnt just lk being stole, as he would say, stolen from africa. He looks at what the middle passages like. He looks at how were slaves sold er to the to the british colonies in the americas. And then what it is like for them when they are forced into servitude. In the fourth part, wesley takes everything he he will. He illustrated in these first three parts and uses them in an indictment, a scathing indictment of the whole institution of slavery. He opens the section with actually an offer to the reader to say he will he as he says, he will set the bible out of the question and simply use justice and mercy to destroy this institution. And he looks at two major critiques and two major proslavery arguments. He says that one argument is the idea that slavery is fine because its legal. And he rebuts this by saying, can law, human law change the nature of things . This is by no means not withstanding 10,000 lawsng is w. He says you cant pass a law to turn darkness into light. In the second casee at the arguy is necessary for the wealth and glory of the British Empire. And he just completely disregards this. He says, better no trade than bp says it would be better if all of the islands in the caribbean were left on cultivated land to be cultivated at the expense of suffering, at the expense of human suffering. Wesley also pushes back against racism that made chattel slavery a possibility in the first place. He says, quote, in angola and has the same natural rights as an englishman, unquote. He also invokes his christian background and does insist that the slaves should be considered the, as he says, quote, die brother, unquote. And in the fifth part, wesley tu focus to appealing to the people involved in this whole trade, the traitors, the people capturing peoe africa, the merchants who sell them, and then the slave holders themselves. And he reserves his greatest blame for the slaveholders, actually. He says men, buyers are on the sa level wit stealers. And wesley, this this phrase, men stealers is something that would be very popular among abolitionist and wesley, as oneh popularized this idea. But he goes on to say to the slave owner, it is your money that pays the merchant. And through him, the captain and then the african butcher that he says, you are the spring that puts this all in motion. And if you werent buying slaves, if you werent using else would be doing any of this other stuff. But his solution to ending slavery is very simple. He says, give liberty to whom liberty is due, that is, to every child of men, to every partakers of human nature. Let none serve you. But by his own act, indeed, by his voluntary choice, away with all whips, all chains, all compulsion. Be gentle toward all men and see that you invariably do unto others as you would. He should do unto you. Wesley very much embodies this attitude on both sides of the atlantic for years. After thoughts upon slavery is published in 1778. Wesley found the armenian magazine, and this word in the 19th century be renamed the methodist magazine, and then eventually the wesleyan methodist magazine. And it would be a periodical that championed wesleys perspective on evangelization and things like that is what he put it. Speaking the truth and love. Well, into the 19th century and the armenian magazine, when wesley was still the editor, would curate and promote opponents of slavery, including philadelphia abolitionist anthony ben, as that british antislavery leader Thomas Clarkson and even american founding father dr. Benjamin rush. Across the atlantic, though, american methodist adopted a very similar perspective to their british counterparts. Francis asper, who was wesleys handpicked the apostle to the americas, was an opponent of slavery and brought that into the church. He actually enlisted the help of a former slave named Richard Allen to help him evangelize in the americas and in the United States. And Richard Allen would go on to eventually found the african Methodist Episcopal Church. But beginningthhe early 1800s, there starts to see we start to see a split where the british methodist continue to have this wesleyan opposition to slavery. But the american method is start to soften their harder edges in the hopes of winning southern converts, many of whom own slaves among gaining and also getting access to plantations where they could evangelize to slave populations. Even ashbery, who started very committed to to writing the Methodist Church of slavery of initially after decades of fighting these southern converts, just begins to relent. And just startto gbut one of tht illustrates this transition, we can see in the general rule regulating the practice of can Methodist Church, where in 18 that rule says that it is a sin to buy or sell the bodies and souls of men, women or children. And so, in other words, its a sin to buy or sell any person, just period, end of story. But by 1808, they made slight modifications to it were the rule. Instead of saying it is a sense you buy or sell a man, woman or child, it says it is a sin to buy and sell a man, woman and which essentially meant that where before you had to buy or sell one person to sell. In 1808, in order to send, you had to simultaneously buy a man woman and child and sell a man woman and child, which is what american abolitionists remarked. This relegated that rule to being a dead letter, as he put it. But british methodist, on the other hand, championed abolitionism. They see abolition abolitionism as a way to promote evan because they see the end of slavery is opening the door to converting former slaves the british, the british, methodists become instrumental in fighting against the slave trade repeal in 1807. Abolition 1807, and eventually the end of slavery in the empire in 1833. The wesleyan methodist magazine picked up on this, that in 1824 they actually published a sermon by by methodist theologian Richard Watson and watson, who, 50 years after wesley wrote thoughtscastigating racism in te terms as john wesley. And he condemned racism as what cled a■w■ petty philosophy that treated color of skin as a treat, a color of skin as a justification to strike, as he said, millions of god, unquote. American methodist by contrast, see abolitionism as a threat to conversions and many frustrated methodists in america would point to the fact that many plantation owners would literally turn ministers away and missionaries away from preaching to their slave populations because they heard that the Methodist Church was antislavery. Now, this disconnect continues. For decades, but it becomes increasingly apparent in the 1830s and specifically in 1836, when the American Church holds a general conference in cincinnati. And the british conference holds a conference in birmingham. Birmingham. And so, although the america the wesleyan methodist mazine in britain does not overtly condemn their american counterparts for making peace with slavery, they do gently chide them in very subtle ways. And so example of this would be richard reece, who was a british methodist correspondent, to the wesleyan methodist magazine and a minister. And while he was traveling in the United States, he went to alexandria, virginia, and he recounted in a in a letter for the magazine that he said he was relieved that when he got there, he didnt have to preach to a segregated congress nation, as he wrote in his in his correspondence, he said that that would have been, quote, revolting to the feelings of an english methodist. And so very subtly chiding the church or kind of steering the church away from from compromising too much on slavery. Butri concerned, although they dont voice these concerns. And theres two reasons that seem to suggest why this theres a dearth of coverage in their periodicals. And the first of these is that they are so impressed with methodist evangelization. The United States during the second great awakening that they look at that and they see that as kind ofweighing their compromises on slavery. But the second, i think, most consequential is that they are fed a very carefully cultivated narrative from anti abolitionists in the United States and among them and among the Methodist Ministry who who basically absolve themselves of any responsibility in the souths peculiaro institution. And the case of wilbur fisk, whos one of the leaders of the anti abolition faction in america, who was also the delegate to the british wesleyan conference at birmingham in 1836, gives us a great a great example of this before leaving for Great Britain in 1835. Fisk actually wrote an article and wrote an open letter to abolitn america, telling them to immediately cease all agitation and all discussion of slavery. He said that doing so would, quote, tear the church limb from limb, unquote. But once fisk got to britain, he had a very different perspective. He said that slavery was evil, only evil, and that continually he went so far as to say the entire Methodist Episcopal Church was abolitionist. He said there is no proslavery party in the church, said the entire church agreed on emancipation, just about disagreements over the best way to get emancipation done. That didnt quite align with the reality of the situation the sai in 1836, the American Church condemned abolitionism. And overall mainly refused to condemn slavery. So although british methodist ultimately held their rhetorical fire against their religious brethren during the early 19th century, they nevertheless remained committed to wesleingl whips, all chains, all compulsion. And when the civil war broke out, british methodist and the wesleyan methodist magazineendoo less out of a desire to support the unions causes belli, as they put it, and more out of a concern to see slaves liberated. In their view, a confederate defeat should be desired in england by many a lover of truth and human freedom. Instead, they attacked the newspapers that prioritized southern cotton over the slaves, liberty with many persons selfish considerations are paramount to all others. Their own gain comes before wesleyan methodist magazine further observed, while lancashire is depressed, the slave may have some rest from his labor. They saw it as was a design of the all wise ruler, as they put it, to secure the downfall of slavery. The specter of disunion andme civil war on abolitionism. The british methodist held the opposite view. Both the north and south will learn. They said that if they not destroy slavery, it will destroy them. So the American Civil War may have been a conflict between slavery and freedom, but at that political civil war would not have been possib■■ule civil wart preceded it. Methodism, that religious denomination that rose to the heights of prestige and influence in americabeabolition. It seceded the church in 1842 and the church split in 1844. British methodist could only watch was torn limb from limb. Its first put it. Nevertheless, the american methodist had made a bargain with slavery in the hopes of securing a■ greater good, but collapsed under the weight of that contradiction and in doing so sealed the fate of a nation they had so desperately sought to avoid. Thank you. ■■ thank you very much. Mathews very interesting. Our final panelist and i think were at his breezing along right on time. Here is Simon Beaudry from Carleton University in canada. And hes going to tell you a little bit about george brown, an editor who doesnt get as much as much attention as it should in the United States. Simon youre actually there, a guest right there . Yeah. Can you hear me . Yes. All right. O in that one right there . Yeah. ■okay. All right. So hopefully you can hear me and see me to everyone who is zoom. So my paper, as you can see, is also bookending this first panel by looking at the canadian perspective of the American Civil War, check issue. Ill talk a matter. If it doesnt work, i dont need it. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So im not also looking at the canadian perspective of the American Civil War. However, unlike brians paper, im doing it solely through the perspective of george brown, George Browns the globe, which if you ever read Canadian Newspapers, you know, today it succeeds or exists as the globe and mail, not the globe. ]now, much of the news that is reported in the Canadian Press or originates from our neighbor to the south, United States that fact was as true in the bay in 19th century as it is today when the American Civil War began. North americas northern neighbor, canada, was not yet a country. It was an Informal Alliance of british north american colonies. Most notably, as you can see here. Well go for that then. Thats no problem there. As you can see here. Upper canada, which or canada west as was also as it was also known which is present day ontario and lower canada or canada, as it was known at the time, which is present day quebec or a portion of it, and also the maritime colonies of new brunswick, nova scotia, Prince Edward county and newfoundland were also english colonies that were not yetze tos the country of canada. Now, although slavery been abolished by the British Empire and therefore across can was canada east and the british maritime colonies nearly 30 years before the American Civil War began. The institution of slavery, of course, was thoroughly discussed and contested in british north americas newspapers of that era. Such discussions appeared most notably in George Browns the globe, which was published in toronto, canada, which was the biggest city in canada. West, of course, kwn ontario. Now, consequently, this paper uses proquest historical database to look at how the American Civil War and more specifically, more acutely, i should say, how the issue of slavery was represented in George Browns the globe in canada west throughouthe time wf course, the immediate aftermath of the civil war itself. So i look at briefly after the wwaas well, to see how was that issue in particular the issue, the slavery issue as it was commonly referred to, reported in the globe at that moment when the physical and emotional wounds caused by the conflict remain raw among the American People. And right for discussion in newspapers north of 49th parallel. Now but before we can get to examining how that was the case and how those how that issue was represent, did we need to inow d its reliance upon chattel slavery was viewed in English Speaking canadas perspective and why brown then was for that particular topic. So as was previously mentioned, the globe was the largest circulation canadian language newspaper in the Informal Alliance known as the canada. At that point in time, before canada became a country four years after the war. And what i wanted to do was picture of the german, the left, who was at the helm of the globe. Thats, of course, george brown. George brown was the owner, proprietor and publisher of the globe newspaper in toronto. The man the right, maybe a little more familiar to you, if any of them are. And he is, of course, sir john mcdonald, who would go on in 1867 to be elected as canadas first prime minister. Now, the two of them had a bitter rivalry. Of course, at that point in george brown, the german, the left and proprietor of the globe, was a staunch abolitionist. He was a staunch abolitionist and aof the true grits as the party was known at the time, which was the predecessor to what would become the liberal party of canada as we know it today. Drummond the right was, of course, john mcdonald, who was the head of the tory party at that point in time, which eventually would morph into the conservative party as we think , like i said, was a staunch abolitionist and he was also one of the founders of the Antislavery Society of toronto. And happened then as the american progressed and as was alluded to by brian a few moments ago, brown on the left and mcdonald on the right, both figuratively and literally in this particular instance, decided to bury the hatchet, their political hatchet, and come to agreement throughout the war to ultimately try to repel the threat of american annexation. And by our orchestrating a union which would become canada, whih would in 1867, on july 1st, be born as the dominion of canada, as it was called at that point in time. So how did those be passed for backup . I should say, too, in canada was still just an Informal Alliance in the early months of 1861, when a civil war began. Well, how did torontonians or how did people in upper canada or canada west think of the slavery issue . What do they think of . Well, to answer that question then requires acknowledging the fact that, well, slavery may have indeed been abolished in the about slavery, in the context of americas civil war, and also about the broader sympathies with either the union or theded along regional, cultural, ethnic, ethnic, economic andnto newspapers of tt particular era were no exception to that rule. For instance, george brown, the globe may have indeed been unwaveringly supported, supportive. I should say, of the union cause and the abolishing of slavery throughout the war. Its principal rival, the toronto leader, took a much different and opposite approach, remaining sympathetic to the confederacy throughout the duration of the war and its cause. Like many newspapers though, in canada, west the globe weighed in on whether or not the Confederate States of america should be recognized. And in the international community. And also whether or not great and britain should do so. The popular paper also discussed whether or not britain should intervene itself in the war. And again, notpective, the answers to all three of those questions were no, no and no. The wednesday, december■j entitn of recognition grapples with these very issues on that wednesday morning, the author reports the tone of the Newspaper Press across Great Britain and the concurrent testimony of individuals indicate that a large section of the population are more friendly to the southern than the or the north in the pending struggle. Yet the author cautions, but the number of th states should be recognized as a nation, form a mere fraction of a nation. Of a nation think it is appropriate. How does one determine when the timing is right for such recognition was . The question. With that in mind, the globe argues that that a rstate may bt has the facto established. Its independence and it is resolved. And it is acknowledged, i should say, by all. But it is not easy to determine when that time has come. The globe states a fair deduction. Then, for mr. Walker for my historical precedent would appear to justify the conclusion that not until a sovereigns state is abandoned, its efforts to acquire supremacy may rebellious subjects be looked upon as having established their independence. But in the eyes of the globe, if that sovereign s■vtate is built hsvupon a foundation of slave, the timing is never right for recognition by the international globes analysis of whether or not britain should be recognized or britain should recognize the confederacy, and whether or not britain should intervene in the conflict itself is framed in a manner that emphasizes and reaffirms the fact that the British Empire has long since abolished slavery and that any potential bolstering of support could not backslide on that manner. For example, the author argues that if it depleted that Great Britain is boundse purpose of pn end to the fratricidal struggle now being waged. We can understand the argument, though we cannot agree with it more acutely. The globe claims that even those who deny that any sympathy is due to the african must admit that england, if consistent with her tradition, can never do anything to rivet their chains a be for the world when she will forget her past history and lend her aid to a cause which directly or indirectly will contribute to the perpetuation of slavery. That outlook would persist throughout the latter days of the war too, as is evinced in a a tuesday, january 30, 1865, story conveniently named the reason why, which describes for the readers of the globe why that particular pe take the course it does in a reference to the war in the United States. And what exactly is the reason why for the globe you mayquite e concisely, we cannot sympathize with what we think wrong. They state the authors and elaborates on their lack of sympathy by explaining that we cannot sympathize with those who bring about a bloody war for the purpose of■g their government, the government of their country unless they have a very case of tyranny from which there was many speaking no other mode of relief. The globe then argues, in the case of the confederacy, that there is no such quote, strong case for tyranny to justify their actions. For example, the secessionists of the Southern States never furnished, they say, any list of grievances, never cited any evidence of tyranny onhe part against which they repel, rebelled. For the reason that they could not, it states. In addition the globe, reasons thating from tyranny, but they had on the contrary, had more than their fair share in control of the government of their country. In fact, the globe go so far as to claim that more excuses can usually be found for a street riot, then that for the Great Southern rebellion. And then, of course, there is the issue of slavery itself. On that subject, the globe maintains that the case for the confederate leaders is desperately weak. If we consider the mode by which and the extent to which they make an attempt at securing popular sanctions for their bloody rebellion. It is desperately weak because they say, of course, because of course they began by totally excluding the wishes of four millions of their peopm consideration. Those for millions of people, of course, the slaves in the United States at the fact canada, which was the terminus of the underground railroad and also given the fact that george brown was a staunch abolitionist, the globe was also quick to reflect upon president lincolns emancipate proclamation. Tuesday, january six, 1863. Article entitled emancipation as a war measure ruminates upon that all important subject matter. A mere five days after slavery issue and its inherent and corrosive relationship with the south was particularly highlighted. Now that globe article then states that, for instance, or should say that this about the southern rebellion, although not so intended by its neighbors, as in the hands of providence, afforded an opportunity of a gigantic wrong, which a few years ago appeared almost remedy. The author then elaborates on this providentialhat any schemef uncompromised emancipation would have been listened to by and the American People well to make full compensation to. The owners of 4 million slaves and the event of their being willing to accept it would have been almost a superhuman undertaking. The evil had reached such dimensions. The globe claims that it had appeared almost hopeless to look for its removal, but the folie and insanity of the slave themselves have opened a way of deliverance for the slaves. Furthermore the essence of the globes perspective upon the emancipation proclamation and also the larger slavery issue itself is eloquently captured when the author remarks that by rushing into rebellion, they fo1jthey may have had on the fel government for the protection of their slave property. They aord to antislavery men an opportunity of constitution only wiping away the greatest inequity of the age. And president lincoln. Lincoln in seizing the golden to do justice to the downtrodden africans as proved himself be indeed the man for the hour. All good men and states. Well the prove his act and will join in the urn in earnest prayer. Godspeed the day when the proclamation shall have its full shment in the actual enjoyment of freedom by all the dusky bondsman of self. Now, during the war, the g19th century perspective of reprinting entire transcripts from speeches of wellestablished political figures of all stres a ades. Of course, the tuesday, february 10th, 1863 Edition Included them reprinting the transcript of the actual proprietor of newspapers himself, george brown, when he was speaking to the toronto Antislavery Society or the Antislavery Society of canada, in which he stated that mr. Chairman mr. Chairman, i must apologize, but obtain the meeting to so unreasonable a length. But i thought it was a duty we to ourselves and to our neighbor across. The line to our friends in Great Britain that the true merits of this great struggle be clearly from our position of advantage. Now, just over two years later, two bloody years later, when an article entitled the labor question in the first round the globe ■xon thursday, june 22nd, 1865. The civil war be over the north would have achieved victory. Slavery would have been officially abolished by of the 13th amendment having been passed in both houses of congress to be working its way through the state legislatures above and below the masondixon line. And during that time of flux, globe mused that the chivalry of the self, the chivalry, the self find it extremely difficult to reconcile themselves to the realities of their new position. They cannot be admitting that they have been beaten, but they are unwilling to accept the necessary consequences of that goal. In fact. A similar line of reasoning then can be seen when turning to the friday, september first, 1865 edition. The globe in an article entitled the self and slavery. And in that article, the globe, argues that it will be it will be readily by the loyalty of these southern whites. Why it is not in not their best description. They acquiesce because they must. And the defeat of the confederacy. But they are unconvinced of the error in sustaining the rebellion itself and as such to draw things to a close. It is no that emancipation, even by the amendment of the constitution, the globe states will hardly remove the slavery issue from the arena of american politics. With that difficult task of addressing the slavery question in mind. The globe holds, but holds that it is possible to declare slaves it is possible to sustain the decree by the armed power of a nation. But it is not easy to abolish the spirit of slavery. And today, even 158 years later, appears civil war ended and the printing of that article first appeared in the globe ofnto. The argument could be made that the spirit of slavery is notpcse