Footnotes For: Robert Cover, "Chapter Nine: Formal Assumptions of the Antislavery Forces" in Justice Accused: Antislavery and the Judicial Process , (Yale University Press: 1975).
<fn1> [*149] See William Jay, Miscellaneous Writings on Slavery (Boston, 1853); Salmon Portland Chase,
Speech in the Case of the Colored Woman Mathilda . . . March 11, 1837 (Cincinnati, 1837); Dwight Dummond, ed., James Gillespie Birney Letters 1831-1857
(Gloucester: P. Smith, 1966), pp. 646 ff. See also the argument of Charles Sumner in Roberts v. City of Boston, 59 Mass. (5 Cush.) 198 (1850); Argument of Robert Rantoul in Sim's Case, 61,Mass. (7 Cush.) 285
(1851), and before the Commissioner in the same affair, see, J. Stone, reporter, Trial of Thomas Sims on an Issue of Personal Liberty, on the claim of James Potter of Georgia, against Him, as an alleged Fugitive from service.
Arguments of Robert Rantoul, Jr. and Charles G. Loring, with the Decision of George T. Curtis, Boston, April 7-11, 1851 (Boston: W. S. Damrell & Co., 1851). For Dana, see Dana, ed., Speeches in Troubled Times;
see also, his speeches in Sim's Case, noted above wife, respect to Rantoul. Other notable advocates included Samuel Sewall, Thaddeus Stevens, John Jolliffe, John Parker Hale, Charles Ellis, and T. C. Ware.
Politicians whose forensic skills were evident and used in the antislavery cause included Joshua Giddings, Benjamin Wade, and John Quincy Adams.<fn2> [*150] Two works especially useful for understanding the split in antislavery are Gilbert Barnes,
The Antislavery Impulse (New York and London: D. Appleton Century Co., 1933), and Aileen Kraditor,
Means and Ends in American Abolitionism (New York: Pantheon, 1969). Always useful is Dwight Dummond, Antislavery (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1961).<fn3> [*152] W. Phillips, The Constitution: A Pro-Slavery Compact (Boston, 1844), pp. vi-vii.
<fn4> [*152] W. Phillips,
A Review of Lysander Spooner's Unconstitutionality of Slavery (Boston: Andrews & Prentiss, 1847), p.17. The avalanche of authorities is on pp. 18-25. (Hereafter cited as Review). <fn5> [*153] "God does not require any of his creature to juggle their fellows out of the gift of power, and then use that power contrary to their promises, in order to serve humanity. That were to ask 'robbery for burnt offering.'"
Review, p.15.<fn6>
[*153] Ibid.<fn7>
[*154] Phillips, The Constitution, 3rd ed., pp. 171-181.<fn8> [*154] Phillips, Review, pp. 3-4.<fn9>
[*154] Jacobus tenbroek, Antislavery Origins of the Fourteenth Amendment,
republished as Equal Under Law (New York: Collier Books, 1965). H. Graham, "The Early Antislavery Background of the Fourteenth Amendment," 1950 Wisconsin Law Review 479 ff. and 610 ff.
(1950). In a sense I proclaim the motives of tenbroek and Graham with little documentation though I believe they would embrace my description. TenBroek in his introduction to the new, enlarged edition of his work,
praising Brown v. Board of Education, says: Equal protection is again emerging from its relative latency to strike down some of these vestiges. . . the work in the name of equality is far from done, perhaps
never will be done. . . . . . . It was to explore file origins and nature of these goals . . . that this book was written (Equal Under Law, pp. 15, 26).