Abolitionist against Jefferon?

Is it possible for the Federalists to run an abolitionist candidate against Jefferson during 1800 or 1804? Maybe some rich Northern big business owner or something?
 
No, not that early. Abolitionism took a long time to evolve in the USA and remained an ideology that was 1) as bitterly divided amongst itself as modern-day challengers to the status quo and 2) had varying bases of support at different times in the country's history. This is too early and abolitionism in a political sense is still too inchoate.
 
No, not that early. Abolitionism took a long time to evolve in the USA and remained an ideology that was 1) as bitterly divided amongst itself as modern-day challengers to the status quo and 2) had varying bases of support at different times in the country's history. This is too early and abolitionism in a political sense is still too inchoate.

So not even a statesman that stood on his own without running on total abolition? What about a Federalist backed candidate that didn't own slaves and criticized the institution? Maybe called for the end of importing slaves? Of course he wouldn't win but it would be interesting, the federalists were dying after Adams lost and the death of Hamilton, could there be a minor split?
 
Your best bet it to have someone who is willing to contain it. John Jay was an abolitionist to some extent, not sure how much except that he did get it out of New York. But, It hink someone like him would also have to be a realist; they'd be best off getting it abolished int he territory west of the Mississippi, and working from there afterward.

Of coruse, Jay would have problems because of Jay's Treaty.

I wonder how pro-bolition we can get Aaron Burr to be. Of course he has his other problems, but he always struck me as Nixonesque more than anything, not totally evil. So, maybe if he remains Federalist; he kind of flip-flopped a bit IIRC.Of coruse,t hat might have been just political pragmatism int he early 1790s.
 
Is it possible for the Federalists to run an abolitionist candidate against Jefferson during 1800 or 1804? Maybe some rich Northern big business owner or something?

If they do come up with a good plan he either agrees with them or changes the plan slightly. Jefferson was by no means pro-slavery. He signed various legistlation that limited it and sponsered others that did the same. He inherited an estate that was heavily in debt (A big reason why he hated banks!) with the slaves entailed. There is every indictation that he would have freed them if he could have legally.
 
So not even a statesman that stood on his own without running on total abolition? What about a Federalist backed candidate that didn't own slaves and criticized the institution? Maybe called for the end of importing slaves? Of course he wouldn't win but it would be interesting, the federalists were dying after Adams lost and the death of Hamilton, could there be a minor split?

The death of the international slave trade was a done deal. It was abolished as soon as it constitutionally (1808) could be and Jefferson was one of the backers.
 
The Quakers had always been against slavery, and they would often write to influential Americans asking them to push for abolition (Washington thought about it several times, but for mostly financial reasons didn't take the plunge).

Given that the British where passing the anti-slavery laws at this time is it not possible for the liberal north to push harder on slavery?

It was the elephant in the room at the establishment of the USA, I am sure that it would only have taken a little nudge for it to be discussed. Of course that will probably mean that the US was split from the start... so prehaps not!
 
The Quakers had always been against slavery, and they would often write to influential Americans asking them to push for abolition (Washington thought about it several times, but for mostly financial reasons didn't take the plunge).

Given that the British where passing the anti-slavery laws at this time is it not possible for the liberal north to push harder on slavery?

It was the elephant in the room at the establishment of the USA, I am sure that it would only have taken a little nudge for it to be discussed. Of course that will probably mean that the US was split from the start... so prehaps not!

It WAS discussed. It was discussed as early as the constitutional convention which is how you wound up with the 3/5 law among other things.
 
Top