Introduction

Slave trade in America did not end by default but through labored efforts that were propelled by debates, meetings, and concern for humanity. In 17^th and the early 18^th century, slavery was predominant in the United States leading to the division of states due to their perception of the slave trade.[1] Although the system was somehow willing to end the slave trade and slavery, there were lesser incentives to start slaves off their free lives. This resulted in years of debates and meetings that saw the light at the end of the tunnel.

According to Fredrick Douglas speech that he delivered in Ireland on 14 October 1845, the slave trade was against the very religious believes that the America christain who were now masters claimed to uphold. The bloody practice led to the separation of two married people, merely because the law permitted the master to hold the slave as his property, whom he decided what he shall eat, where to sleep, who to marry and how many children to have.[2] The masters claimed to uphold Christian faith but chose to do the otherwise. They preached obedience to the slaves and made them believe that they were made to be a worker and its only disobedience that lend to poverty and suffering. Therefore, there was a need to stop slavery and the slave trade as a means of upholding religious beliefs and ethics.

Also, the preachers and religious leaders were very much to be blamed for the spreading and intensification of the slave trade. They preached to the slaves that there is no happiness but true obedience[3]. The impact a belief that’s the slaves are children of a lesser god and that they ought to be obedient to whatever the white masters instructed. The hypocritical preaching made they have used a means of instilling fear, and believe that the slaves naturally deserved the position they were in and that it was the best that the society could offer. This hypocritical insubordination and intimidation did not only enslave the slaves physically but also mentally to the extent that they could think of nothing other than serving their masters. Therefore to end the slave trade according to Fredrick, there was a need to change how preaching was done and uphold the true belief of Christian faith. Religion and hypocrisy were one of the significant challenges in ending the slave trade both in the south and north.

The constitution of the American anti-slavery also played a significant role in ending slavery. This constitution was based on the belief that God created one blood all nations to dwell on the face of the earth and therefore all men were equal[4] This meant that all the Americans despite being back or white had equal rights and freedom. Slavery was therefore against the natural principle of justice and was destructive to the prosperity of the nation. Taking this perspective, the slave trade was consequently seen as being contrary to the American republican form of government and that of Christian faith.  The American Anti-Slavery Constitution advocated that each state should abolish slavery and in doing so legislate against the slave trade, the society shall stand to alleviate the character as well as the condition of the people of color using encouraging intellectual, religious and moral improvement as well as removing prejudice and promoting equality[5] The constitution also held that a person should be regarded as a member of the society and be granted the right to vote in meetings if they hold principles of this new constitution. This constitution, therefore, replaced the previous law that was based on an ideology that slaves should be properties of their masters. The American Anti-Slavery trade cleared a path of the end of slavery.

Conclusion

Although slavery was beneficial to a few masters in the United States, it polluted the moral principles within which the nation was based. Without a push for change, it was difficult to end slavery as the most fundamental pillars of society such as religion and the law were one of the core propagators of slavery, with religion preaching subordination and intimidation of the slaves while the law was perceiving the slaves as property of their master[6]. The society perceived the slaves as uneducated and ignorant and that they could do nothing better than slavery[7]. For a change, there was a need for change, resulting in American Anti-slavery constitution.thanks to numerous debates and meetings that help shade light and evict the evil of slavery from America.

Bibliography

“Exploring U.S. History | the Debate over Slavery.” Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media. http://chnm.gmu.edu/exploring/19thcentury/debateoverslavery

“Exploring U.S. History | the Debate over Slavery.” Roy Rosenzweig Center for History  http://chnm.gmu.edu/exploring/19thcentury/debateoverslavery/pop_spectator2.html.

Berlin, Ira. “American slavery in history and memory and the search for social justice.” The Journal of American History 90, no. 4 (2004): 1251-1268.

Ericson, David F. The debate over slavery: antislavery and proslavery liberalism in antebellum America. NYU Press, 2000.

Parish, Peter J. Slavery: history and historians. Routledge, 2018.

[1]. Exploring U.S. History | the Debate over Slavery.” Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media. http://chnm.gmu.edu/exploring/19thcentury/debateoverslavery

[2]. David Ericson, The debate over slavery: antislavery and proslavery liberalism in antebellum America. NYU Press, 2000

[3]. Peter Parish, Slavery: history and historians. Routledge, 2018.

[4]. Ira Berlin, “American slavery in history and memory and the search for social justice.” The Journal of American History 90, no. 4 (2004): 1251-1268

[5]. Exploring U.S. History | the Debate over Slavery.” Roy Rosenzweig Center for History http://chnm.gmu.edu/exploring/19thcentury/debateoverslavery/pop_spectator2.html.

[6]. “Exploring U.S. History | the Debate over Slavery.” Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media. http://chnm.gmu.edu/exploring/19thcentury/debateoverslavery

[7]. David Ericson, The debate over slavery: antislavery and proslavery liberalism in antebellum America. NYU Press, 2000.