David Barton

Several other pro slavery laws were also passed by Democrats in Congress, including the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law. That law required Northerners to return escaped slaves back into slavery or else pay huge fines. In many instances, the law became little more than an excuse for southern slave hunters to kidnap Free Blacks in the North and carry them into slavery in the South, for if a black was simply accused of being a slave, under the Fugitive Slave Law he was denied the benefit of both a jury trial and the right of habeas corpus despite the fact that those rights had been explicitly guaranteed by the Constitution.

Because the Fugitive Slave Law became little more than a law to sanction kidnapping, whenever a slave-hunter entered a State such as Massachusetts, broadsides were printed to warn black Americans about this threat to their freedom. Such broadsides were published when it was learned that a slave hunter had come north. The anti-slavery States wanted to make sure that every poster were printed to warn blacks about southern kidnappers and slave hunters black American in the North could take cover so they would not be kidnapped and taken to slavery in the South.

Because the Fugitive Slave Law allowed Free Blacks to be carried into slavery, this law was disastrous for blacks in the North; and as a consequence of the atrocious provisions of this Democratic law, some 20,000 blacks in the North left the United States and fled to Canada. In fact, the Underground Railroad reached the height of its activity during this period, helping thousands of slaves escape from slavery in the South all the way out of the United States and into Canada simply to escape the reach of the Democrats’ Fugitive Slave Law.

In 1854, the democratically controlled Congress passed another law strengthening slavery: the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Even though Democrats in Congress had already expanded the federal territories in which slavery was permitted through their passage of the Missouri Compromise, they had retained a ban on slavery in the Kansas-Nebraska territory. But through the Kansas-Nebraska Act, Democrats the Underground Railroad moved thousands of black Americans to safety repealed those earlier restrictions, thus allowing slavery to be introduced into parts of the new territory where it previously had been forbidden, thereby increasing the national area in which slavery would be permitted.

This law led to what was called “bleeding Kansas,” where pro slavery forces came pouring into that previously slave free territory and began fighting violent battles against the anti slavery inhabitants of the territory. The Kansas Nebraska territory covered much of what is now the upper United States Following the passage of these pro-slavery laws in Congress, in May of 1854 a number of the anti-slavery Democrats in Congress along with some anti slavery members from other political parties, including the Whigs, Free Soilers, and Emancipationists formed a new political party to fight slavery and secure equal civil rights for black Americans.

david barton david barton

The God of heaven and earth is the same yesterday and today and forever Hebrews 13:8. He has seen the affliction of our countrymen with an eye of pity. He has seen the anguish which has taken place when parents have been torn from their Rev. Jones’s sermon children and children from their parents, and conveyed with their hands and feet bound in fetters on board of ships prepared to receive them. He has seen them exposed for sale, like horses and cattle upon the wharves. He has seen the pangs of separation between members of the same family.

Though masters and mistresses have been deaf to their cries and shrieks, they have been heard in Heaven. The ears of Jehovah have been constantly open to them: He has heard the prayers that have ascended from the hearts of His people and He has as in the case of his ancient and chosen people the Jews come down to deliver our suffering countrymen from the hands of their oppressors. He came down into the Congress of the United States last winter when they passed a law, the operation of which commences on this happy day.

In behalf of our brethren, it becomes us this day to offer our united thanks. Let the song of angels, which was first heard in the air at the birth of our Savior Luke 2:13-14, are heard this day in our assembly. Let us sing psalms unto Him and talk of all His wondrous works. Let the first of January the day of the abolition of the slave trade in our country be set apart in every year as a day of public thanksgiving. And when our children shall ask in time to come, saying, and “What mean the lessons, the psalms, the prayers, and the praises in the worship of this day?” let us answer them by saying, “The Lord on the day of which this is the anniversary abolished the trade which dragged your fathers from their native country and sold them as bondmen in America.”

Very few today know that in 1808 Congress abolished the slave trade, or that Bishop Absalom Jones delivered such a compelling sermon. Although slavery still had not been abolished in all the States, things definitely were moving in the right direction. Yet a major reversal was about to occur.

By 1820, most of the Founding Fathers were dead and Thomas Jefferson’s party the Democratic Party had become the majority party in Congress. With this new party in charge, a change in congressional policy emerged. Recall that the 1789 law prohibited slavery in a federal territory. In 1820, the Democratic Congress passed the Missouri Compromise and reversed that earlier policy, permitting slavery in almost half of the federal territories. Several States were subsequently admitted as slave States; and for the first time since the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, slavery was being officially promoted by congressional policy. Yet, the only way for the Democratic Congress to promote slavery was to ignore the principles in the founding documents. As Founding Father and President John Quincy Adams explained:

The first step of the slaveholder to justify by argument the peculiar institutions of slavery is to deny the self-evident truths of John Quincy Adams the Declaration of Independence. He denies that all men are created equal. He denies that they have inalienable rights.

david barton david barton

Hamilton at last conceded to his friends that if he did not face Burr in a duel, he knew that he would be publicly branded as a coward and that his own personal reputation would be so tarnished that he could never again hold public office. He explained: baron burr

David Barton tells us that to those who, with me, abhorring the practice of dueling, may think that I ought on no account to have added to the number of bad examples, I answer that my relative situation, as well in public as private, . . . impressed on me . . . a peculiar necessity not to decline the call. The ability to be in future useful, whether in resisting mischief or [achieving] good . . . would probably be inseparable from . . . public prejudice [against me if I refuse]. 56

Hamilton did not want to fight, yet he knew that he must at least appear to fight – and “appear to fight” is a key phrase. Since it was his personal commitment that he would shoot no man unless it were on a military battlefield in defense of life or country, Hamilton therefore decided not to fire at Aaron Burr but rather to fire his pistol into the air – or even not fire it at all. In those final days before the duel, Hamilton recorded his decision for posterity:

I have resolved, if . . . it pleases God to give me the opportunity, to reserve and throw away my first [shot]; and I have thoughts even of reserving my second [shot] – and thus giving a double opportunity to Col. Burr. 57 Hamilton believed that Burr would take full advantage of this opportunity and that Burr would likely shoot him down.

david barton david barton

Hamilton and Burr had a long history of political opposition, born chiefly of Hamilton’s strong conviction that Burr’s character made him completely unfit for public office. Hamilton made this opinion clear to his friends: [Burr is] as unprincipled and dangerous a man as any country can boast. . . . [T]here is nothing in his favor. His private broom’s letter to his son and so corrupt methods will be to man of either party . . . who does not think Mr. Burr the most character is not defended by his most partial friends. . . . [He] has no principle, public or private. . . . [H]e is believed by friends as well as foes to be without [honesty or integrity]. . . . [He is] in debt vastly beyond his means of payment, [and] with all [his] habits [of extravagance], he cannot be satisfied with the regular [salary] of any office of our government, [][] him a necessary resource. . . . I could scarcely name a discreet unfit man in the United States for . . . office. 55 As subsequent events later proved, Hamilton’s assessment of Burr’s character was completely accurate.

Because of his unwavering conviction of Burr’s dangerous tendencies, Hamilton did everything he could to keep Burr from gaining any public office. He opposed Burr for State governor, for U. S. President, for foreign diplomat, and for every other position Burr sought. Burr’s arrogance did not permit him to suffer such public defeats, and in an attempt to save face, he challenged Hamilton to a duel.

David Barton shows us that at the time of Burr’s challenge to Hamilton, dueling was still an accepted practice in America. If challenged, you could, and usually would, defend your honor in a personal duel. Although as a military leader, Hamilton was trained in the art of war and weaponry, he was part of a slowly growing movement which disapproved of personal duels. He therefore tried to dissuade Burr from the duel, and even offered other recourses – all of which Burr refused.

david barton david barton

James left home to attend college at Princeton, and Jacob, like a good father, was concerned about how his son would behave while away at school. He exhorted his son: “I flatter myself you will be what I wish, but don’t be so much flatterer as to relax of your application – don’t forget to be a Christian. I have said much to you on this head, and I hope an indelible impression is made.” 54

 Jacob Broom – reminding his son to stay true to the Christian teachings in which he was raised! This letter provides more evidence that the Founding Fathers were indeed men of religious conviction.

David Barton explains that  in the picture over the landing is Alexander Hamilton – honored in several other places throughout the Capitol. He was a signer of the Constitution and, as an author of The Federalist Papers, is considered one of the three men most responsible for the ratification of the Constitution.

You may recall that Alexander Hamilton died a premature death (at age 48) at the hands of Aaron Burr in a duel in 1804. For all practical purposes, Hamilton was executed by Burr.

david barton david barton