Arguing About Slavery: John Quincy Adams and the Great Battle in the United States Congress By William Lee Miller

 Arguing About Slavery: John Quincy Adams and the Great Battle in the United States Congress

By William Lee Miller 

Today, we’re going to look at a book that covers a half-forgotten part of history.  Arguing About Slavery covers the Gag Rule, which was one of the first major legal and social battles over slavery.  This nine-year-long struggle did a lot to propel the debate over slavery to the center stage of America. Before I get to in depth on that, though, let’s talk about the book and the author. 

The book itself was published in 1998 by Vintage Books, a division of the ever-present Random House, the massive publishing company that prints nearly 1 out of 4 books printed in the United States. So if you own more than 5 books and if any of them are nonfiction, odds are you’ve bought one of their books. Arguing About Slavery was written by William Lee Miller; let’s talk about him for a bit. 

William Lee Miller is an American who was born in Bloomington, Indiana, on April 21st, 1926.  He was the son of a minister, and so lived in a number of states growing up, which I can relate to.  After finishing high school, he attended the University of Nebraska and then Yale, ending up with a PhD from Yale University in Religious Social Ethics. 

 He would work as a journalist from 1953 to 1965, contributing to the Reporter, a biweekly American news magazine.  He also served as a speechwriter for Adlai Steveson in 1956. He would teach at Smith College, Indiana University, and Yale, with his last teaching post being at the University of Virginia, where he started in 1982.  He started writing history books in the 1960s and continued writing and publishing until the year of his death in 2012.  He left behind a sizable body of work and taught hundreds, if not thousands, of students.  With that, let’s turn to the book in question. 

Arguing about Slavery covers the fierce debate over the Congressional Gag rule that was in effect from 1836 to 1844. Now, before we get into the book, let me provide some context here.  After the Revolution, most of the Northern states abolished slavery, with New Jersey being the last in 1804.  While most “Yankees” considered slavery distasteful, they also thought that they had no right or ability to meddle in the affairs of Southern States. 

Abolitionists were unpopular, seen as moralizing busybodies, and, to be blunt, Southern propaganda was in full swing, convincing Northerners that slavery wasn’t that bad and most slaves were happy.  Plus, everyone was sure that eventually slavery would die away, being an archaic institution that belonged to the past.  So why rock the boat? 

Abolitionists knew better, but also found themselves ice skating uphill. So they decided on a three pronged strategy, first focus on countering and disproving Southern propaganda, second on writing slave owners directly and trying to convince them to free their slaves and lastly petitioning Congress to ban slavery and the slave trade in Washington D.C feeling that the capital of a nation that was supposed to been founded in liberty was no place for a slave market. 

It’s that last tactic that concerns us the most, because these petitions outraged Southern Congressmen so much that they compelled the House of Representatives to pass a gag rule in 1836, a rule that automatically prevented any petition requesting any limitation on slavery from being even considered. Now, back then, the right of petition was a much bigger deal because of the limits on communication technology; it was harder to be heard by the federal government, but anyone was allowed to send a petition to their Representative and be assured that Congress would at least spend a couple of minutes on it, even if they decided to tell you no. 

But now this right was being curtailed to protect the feelings and interests of one part of American society over the rest. This did not sit well with many Congressmen, among them John Quincy Adams. Now, John Quincy Adams is himself somewhat forgotten despite being one of the most distinguished and perhaps talented civil servants America ever had. He served as an ambassador to almost every great European power, Secretary of State, and even as President before being elected to Congress.  His father was John Adams,  the second President of the United States. He was also, at this point, a cranky old man who was done with everyone else’s crap, and it shows in this book. 

The Honorable Representative Adams would make it his personal mission to either have the gag rule rescinded or ensure that every Southern Congress member regretted its existence.  He did this with the kind of single-mindedness and sly intelligence that only a learned man with decades of experience can pull off.  He wasn’t alone in this; other representatives like Joshua Giddings and William Slade, men all but forgotten, would close ranks with him and fight in bitter debates and endless parliamentary maneuverings

Twice, the Southern members of Congress would try to get Adams censored, which back then meant you would resign from Congress, and once they tried to remove him from heading the Committee on Foreign Relations.  That last one was especially galling to a modern reader as the allegation was that he was too soft on brown-skinned people. Both these attempts failed miserably as Adams outmaneuvered them. They did get Giddings censored, making him resign his seat, but his district was so enraged by this that they sent him right back to Congress with a crushing majority. 

That basically reflects the Northern reaction to the gag rule: while Northern Congressmen would yield to Southern demands in the name of keeping their political parties viable on a national level, the Northern voter grew increasingly upset and angry at this gag, viewing it as a restriction on their rights in the name of Southern comfort. This ironically made Northerners more open to abolitionists' arguments as the undercurrent of “If they’re willing to do this to us now, what else are they willing to do?” bubbled under every debate.  

This is especially ironic, as the Southerners were dead certain that banning discussion in Congress would kill the debate and end any anti-slavery discussion in society.  Which, forgive my bluntness, is so incredibly stupid you wonder just what was in the booze they were swilling back then? 

Now the book itself clocks in at about 577 pages in paperback, although the main text only goes to page 515, with the rest being notes and index. It is a dense and, at some points, dry read as well.  Although there is a bit of dry humor that runs through the book. Dr. Miller is incredibly thorough in covering the background and context of all stages of this battle in American history and in covering the backgrounds of all the key players.  So if you’re not ready for a deep dive into an often glossed-over part of American history, this isn’t your book.  This is not light reading. 

On the other hand, if you want to learn more about John Quincy Adams, the abolitionist movement of the 1820s and 1830s, and the various players in the drama that fought over the gag rule, some of whom would later emerge as key figures in the American Civil War, this is the book for you. It’s also an interesting look at how Southern actions turned the Northern people against slavery through their overbearing demands that they be held above judgment or reproach. I would encourage readers to think about how making demands like that can backfire. 

So, for someone who is a serious reader of American History and is looking to dive deep and learn, this book is an A.  For anyone else, this book would likely come in at C.  So know what you’re getting into before you pick this book up, but I would consider it a good book for those who want to get serious about their history.  

*