University of Virginia Library

Letters To The Editor

It's An Honest Mistake, Huh?

This letter is in regards to Mr.
White's letter of 10/28/71, dealing
specifically with his rationale for
not placing moral blame on
Southern slave owners. His
statement centers around the
assertion that slavery was not
considered immoral during
mid-nineteenth century in southern
America because the "best
information available in their day"
justified it. His position is blatantly
untenable in regard to historical
fact.

In American history slavery was
condemned as early as the late
seventeenth century in Puritan
journals. In the early 1800's the
importation of slaves became
illegal. The law was not enforced
thus Southern slave owners chose
to ignore it. At this same time it
became British national policy to
prevent slave ships from leaving the
African coast, no matter what
country's ships were carrying them.
British ships intercepted and
destroyed slave ships during this
time, returning the slaves to
Freetown in Sierra Leone and
prosecuting the slave merchants.
American and French vessels joined
periodically in this effort. In this
country and in Europe emancipated
slaves wrote journals that
powerfully articulated the
inhumanity of slavery. I refer Mr.
White to Africa Remembered
edited by Philip J. Curtin.

The simple facts of history in
short do not support Mr. White's
rationale. Southern slave holders
simply chose to ignore the moral
issues inherent in slavery for reason
other than a lack of antislavery
information. Humanitarian
literature, legal documents, and the
national policies of several nations
bear this point out. Slavery in the
South was not an "honest
mistake." For these reasons I attach
all the moral blame for slavery in
the South to Southern slave
holders.

Ditto

Christian S. White, in the CD of
October 28, 1971, states that "no
moral stigma can attach to them
[the Confederates] for their
beliefs" because "Southerners
based their opinions on the best
information available in their day."
I find this point of view deeply
amusing.

To follow Mr. White's logic, the
massacre by the Viet Cong of scores
of human beings at Hue during Tet
1968 must be condoned. Were not
the Viet Cong acting on "the best
information" that this massacre
would aid their fight for freedom?

Similarly, we must honor the
German extermination factories at
Auschwitz and Buchenwald.
Consider the vast ingenuity and
technical skill that converted the
German Republic from a bankrupt,
downtrodden nation to the most
powerful war machine in the world.
Surely such intelligent men must
have been acting on "the best
information" in imposing the final
solution to the Jewish problem.

In the Civil War itself, if
Southerners were actually acting on
"the best information," must we
conclude that the Union was
wrong, that it was acting on
second-rate information in believing
that slaves were human beings?

Mr. White is wholly correct in
asserting that we must consider the
moral standards and beliefs that
were accepted at the time in
evaluating any human endeavor.
However, it is foolish and
dangerous to refuse to make any
moral judgments simply because a
man believed he was right at the
time. Bull Connor believed he was
right at the time. General Sherman
believed he was right at the time.
Attila the Hun believed he was right
at the time. Pontius Pilate believed
he was right at the time. I think it is
time—after a full century for Mr.
White to accept the fact that
slavery was wrong, and that those
who supported it were wrong.