"What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July?"

Kelly Therese Pollock  0:00  
This is Unsung History, the podcast where we discuss people and events in American history that haven't always received a lot of attention. I'm your host, Kelly Therese Pollock. I'll start each episode with a brief introduction to the topic, and then talk to someone who knows a lot more than I do. Be sure to subscribe to Unsung History on your favorite podcasting app, so you never miss an episode. And please, tell your friends, family, neighbors, colleagues, maybe even strangers, to listen too. On the fourth of July, 1776, the Second Continental Congress unanimously adopted the Declaration of Independence. The text of the document states, "We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." And yet, Thomas Jefferson, to whom the document was later attributed, while avowing that all men were created equal, also enslaved more than 600 human beings during his lifetime, more than any other United States president. It wasn't just Jefferson. The majority of the signers of the Declaration, a document which defended the right and duty of people who have been abused to throw off their government, were slaveholders. One study found that 41 of the 56 signers, enslaved people. The enslaved population of the United States wasn't ignorant of this hypocrisy, and some enslaved people and the abolitionists who supported them, latched on to the symbols of independence and revolution, in their own fight for freedom. Over time, one of the most enduring symbols of revolutionary freedom was the annual celebration of Independence Day on July 4. As John Adams wrote to his wife, Abigail, "The second day of July, 1776, will be the most memorable epocha in the history of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated by succeeding generations as the great anniversary festival. It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shews, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other, from this time forward, forevermore." He correctly predicted the celebratory nature of the holiday, if not the date. Southern enslavers realized the dangers of allowing the enslaved population to join in the celebrations of liberty. As physician and Episcopal Minister Frederick Dalcho wrote in 1823,  "The celebration of the Fourth of July belongs exclusively to the white population of the United States. In our speeches and orations, much and sometimes more than is politically necessary, is said about personal liberty, which Negro auditors know not how to apply, except by running the parallel with their own condition. They therefore imbibe false notions of their personal rights and give reality in their minds to what has no real existence." No one more eloquently or forcefully used the symbol of Independence Day to highlight the hypocrisy of American slavery, than Frederick Douglass. Born into slavery in Maryland in 1818, by 1852, Douglass had escaped to the north, and was one of the leading orators of the abolition movement.On July 5, 1852, at a meeting organized by the Rochester Ladies Anti-slavery Society, in Corinthian Hall, he delivered a fiery address that would become known as his "What, to the Slave, is the Fourth of July?" speech, in which he recognized the righteous principles on which the country was founded, while pointing out how very far from those ideals the country was, especially as experienced by the enslaved population. Although many of the early abolitionists, especially the white abolitionists, had been pacifists who hope to convince people that slavery was wrong through moral arguments, by the middle of the 19th century, more abolitionists were recognizing that violence may be needed to end slavery, in much the same way that violence was needed for the colonies to achieve independence from Great Britain. On July 4, 1859, white abolitionist, John Brown, dictated a Declaration of Liberty by the Representatives of the Slave Population of the United States of America, which his son Owen wrote out on sheets of paper that were then pasted onto a long cloth to create a scroll. In direct reference to the Declaration of Independence, Brown declared, "We hold these truths to be self evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that nature had freely given to all men, a full supply of air, water and land for their sustenance and mutual happiness; that no man has the right to deprive his fellow man of these inherent rights, except in punishment of crime." With this document, Brown justified the right and duty of enslaved people to rise up against their enslavers. On October 16, 1859, Brown, with an army he had organized of 22 men, including five Black men, and three of Brown's sons, raided a federal armory in Harpers Ferry, a town in what was then Virginia, now part of West Virginia. Brown and his followers hoped to begin a nationwide armed revolt of enslaved people and thus abolish the institution of slavery. Instead, by the next morning, Brown's, men were surrounded. And on October 19, when Brown refused to surrender, US Marines attacked, killing 10 of the men, including two of Brown's sons. Brown was tried for treason, and murder, and found guilty. Before his execution in December, 1859, Brown slipped a note to a guard, which read, "I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away, but with blood." He was, of course, correct.

While the raid was immediately unsuccessful, it precipitated the Civil War, as both northerners and southerners increasingly realized that war could not be avoided. As we've previously discussed on this podcast, African Americans, both freeborn and formerly enslaved, rushed to join the fighting on behalf of the Union Army, believing still, in the country's founding promise. Joining me now is historian Dr. Matthew Clavin, Professor of History at the University of Houston, and the author of, "Symbols of Freedom: Slavery and Resistance Before the Civil War."

First, though, here's my friend, Chicago actor Anthony C. Brown, reading excerpts from Frederick Douglass', "What, to the Slave, is the Fourth of July?" speech. We only have time for a small segment of the speech, but I urge you to read the whole thing, which I will link to in the show notes.

Anthony C. Brown  10:01  
Fellow citizens, pardon me. Allow me to ask, "Why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I or those I represent to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us, and am I therefore, called upon to bring our humble offering to the national altar, and to confess the benefits and express devout gratitude for the blessings resulting from your independence to us? I am not included within the pale of glorious anniversary. Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us. The blessings in which you this day rejoice are not enjoyed in common. The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity and independence bequeathed by your fathers is shared by you, not by me. The sunlight that brought light and healing to you, has brought stripes and death to me. This Fourth of July is yours, not mine. You may rejoice. I must mourn. To drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me by asking me to speak today? My subject, then, fellow citizens, is American slavery. I shall see this day and it's popular characteristics from the slave's point of view. Standing there, identified with the American bondman, making his wrongs mine, I do not hesitate to declare with all my soul, that the character and conduct of this nation never looked blacker to me than on this Fourth of July. Whether we turn to the declarations of the past, or to the professions of the present, the conduct of the nation seems equally hideous and revolting.

America is false to the past, false to the present, and solemnly binds herself to be false to the future. Standing with God,and the crushed and bleeding slave on this occasion, I will, in the name of humanity which is outraged, in the name of the liberty which is fettered, in the name of the Constitution and the Bible which are disregarded and trampled upon dare to call in question and to denounce with all of the emphasis I can command everything that serves to perpetuate slavery, the great sin and shame of America. I will not equivocate. I will not excuse. I will use the severest language I can command and yet not one word shall escape me that any man whose judgment is not blinded by prejudice, or who is not at heart a slaveholder shall not confess to be right and just. What, to the American slave, is your Fourth of July? I answer, a day that reveals to him more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham. Your boast of liberty an unholy license, your national greatness, swelling vanity. Your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless. Your denunciation of tyrants, brass fronted impudence, your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery. Your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity are to him mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy, a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices more shocking and bloody than are the people of the United States at this very hour.

Kelly Therese Pollock  15:07  
Hi Matt, thanks so much for joining me today.

Matt Clavin  15:09  
Thanks for having me. I very much appreciate it.

Kelly Therese Pollock  15:12  
Yes, I really enjoyed your book. So I'm excited to get to talk to you about this. I want to hear, this is not your first book. You've written several books. I want to hear a little bit about why you decided to write this one, you know, what, what inspired this particular topic?

Matt Clavin  15:26  
You know, as I do this, over the years, as an as I become more of a veteran, professional historian is one thing, I love to tell students from the undergrad level to graduate level, I always tell them, and they never listened to me, but to always write a source driven paper. You can have the greatest idea, and I've had many great ideas for articles and books, and then when I tried to find the evidence, it's it's either not out there, or it's too expensive to get access to or you know, it's very difficult and can make your life very difficult. So what I've always tried to do, and I know it sounds corny, but I've, I see myself as almost just like a vehicle, as a vessel to tell these stories. So what really happens most of the time is I just come across something in a library, on microfilm, in an archive, and then I then the light bulb goes off. And I'm like, "Well, is there more of this information? Is there more examples of this? Are these accessible? You know, can I get to the New York Public Library? Can I get to the Antiquarian Society?" And then if that all works out, and you're like, "Oh, my goodness," then all the sources, like I said, and I just become the vessel to tell this story. So this book, in particular, was years ago, and I'm from Baltimore, and just kind of came across a newspaper article one day of anywhere between 50 and 75, slaves tried to escape from southern Maryland to Pennsylvania to cross the Mason Dixon Line to become free. They did this armed over the Fourth of July weekend in 1845. And again, a bell goes off, like, "Okay, so they're doing this on Fourth of July weekend. Does this have anything to do with the Fourth of July?" And of course, the southern newspapers made no mention of the coincidence. They just matter of factly, they ran away on the fifth of July, you know, et cetera, et cetera. You read the northern newspapers, the abolition newspapers, and they do things like call these runaways to quote disciples of the declaration, and they say they must be inspired. And so that incident on its own, doesn't really prove much of anything. But since that time, I've done tons of research and found that many slaves escaped intentionally on the Fourth of July. So that's where it all started. And ever since then, I've just been fascinated with how enslaved people, how their allies, early to mid 19th century, were very enamored with the symbols of freedom: Fourth of July, the American flag, the bald eagle, all that stuff, and it just, it just became a book that was very easy for me to write.

Kelly Therese Pollock  17:52  
So let's talk a little bit about sources, then. You've got the these newspaper articles from the time and you're looking at kind of a stretch of time, because since you're looking at symbols, you're not looking at just one event, but rather lots of events. So what what are the kinds of sources then that you were digging into that you were looking at that you were examining?

Matt Clavin  18:13  
A lot of newspaper articles, a lot of images, so daguerreotypes, images, engravings, and broadsides and newspapers. manuscripts of you know, a lot of slave narratives of escaped slaves, like people like William Wells Brown, who said he was inspired by hearing a Fourth of July reading of the Declaration of Independence. And he said, after hearing that, he said, "I'm never going to be a slave permanently again." Like he vowed that day to escape. So it was a wide variety of sources. Increasingly, that stuff is online. But sometimes it's not. The incident in Maryland, you know, I traversed the Annapolis, Baltimore, Maryland State Archives, to try to find anything on this escape attempt in the legal in the court record, and there was nothing. In fact, it was rather curious that summer of 1845, there was like a gap at the archives of where there would be, you know, some sort of account accounting of what happened to these fugitive slave rebels. So it's a lot of different sources. And the book looks at between the time period from the end of the War of 1812, what we call the era of good feelings, super nationalism, super patriotism, all the way through the start of the Civil War.

Kelly Therese Pollock  19:27  
Let's talk a little bit then about this central tension that you identify, you identify but also all of the the actors in your story identify of a country that is founded on a violent revolution for the cause of liberty, versus slavery, which is, you know, is is rampant in the United States, both from its founding and then you know, continuing through the time period that you're looking at. So how does this tension kind of play out in these sources that you're looking at? You know, what, what are the kinds of discussions that people are having around that?

Matt Clavin  20:01  
Well, from the, you know, from the northern or more accurately the anti slavery perspective, and they share the same view as enslaved people all across the south. You know, it's it's double sided. So on one side, all of this talk about freedom and democracy and equality, it's just, it's insulting to them, that they think that slave owners, slavery, slavery supporters, they make a mockery of freedom. I mean, I gotta tell you, I lived in Washington, DC went to grad school there. And I have been many times to the corner of where there was a very famous slave market, you know, within within, can't throw a football, but it's a couple 100 yards from the US Capitol. And for years, this was just as historic. I mean, everyone knew about this huge slave market. It's where Solomon Northrup was imprisoned for time. And these sons of guns, who ran his slave market, they have, they hung this huge US flag atop their market. And so for slaves, slaves being traded, slaves living in the district, anti slavery people living in the district, visitors from the north, you know, Congressman, they'd come to the district and this was, this was so insulting. It was just painful to see what was happening to this beautiful symbol of American freedom. And so on one hand, they're very critical, they're angry, they complain, you know, just dissent everywhere, that these symbols are being  so disrespected and abused by pro slavery forces. But the other side of the coin is, they interpret, and I'm really talking about enslaved people here and that small group of abolitionists who are willing to help them, I mean, they, they, they, over time, they interpret the declaration, they interpret founding ideas, they really interpret Patrick Henry's, you know, cry of "Liberty or Death," they interpreted literally. And so what the two terms that I've come up with is, you know, most Americans, northern and southern, they have like this rhetorical nationalism. You know, rhetorically, all men are created equal, rhetorically, give me liberty or give me death. But they don't really mean it. It's just, it's a cool fancy symbol slogan, but for enslaved people, and this is what really excites me about the book and made me you know, produce this thing way quicker than I thought I like couldn't stop. But the you know, to hear an enslaved person, as they're escaping to freedom and they have, you know, gunfight or, you know, fist your hand, hand to hand combat with someone who's trying to capture them, and they're crying out "Liberty or Death!" Like that's the real deal. And I call these people Black Patrick Henrys. And I am always thinking like, I'm sure this I'm sure the original Patrick, the white, Patrick Henry never intended, you know, his cry to be used like this as he was a southern slave owner. So the bottom line is enslaved people, their allies, they don't appreciate the rhetorical nationalism. They appreciate the original and what I call revolutionary nationalism, where to be a good bonafide American citizen, you have to be willing to stand up to tyrants. You have to be willing to battle your oppressor. And oftentimes that reveals itself, you know, in vionlent resistance, and slavery is a violent institution. And so slaves, their allies, they appreciate that we might have to fight, die, perhaps even kill to become free, just like the founding fathers did.

Kelly Therese Pollock  23:21  
So then let's talk a little bit about the, the transition that abolitionists go through. So you know, it's well understood among the enslaved population that sometimes you have to violently rebel if you want to get away. But the especially the white northern abolitionists, you know, for a long time are trying this, this non violent, you know, let's be peaceful, let's go for moral suasion, and that they go through, not all of them, but most of them go through a transition over the course of the 19th century. Can you talk a little bit about that, and the way that they're sort of interpreting these documents and symbols along the way?

Matt Clavin  23:57  
Yeah, one of my favorite one was beautiful things you'll see from the early 19th century as the American or the National Anti-slavery Society, when they're formed in the early 1830s. Was it the American Anti-slavery Society, National Anti- slavery Society, with William Lloyd Garrison, all the legendary abolitionists. They have this beautiful like declaration or proclamation of their principles. So it's almost like their own declaration of independence. And it has this beautiful drawing at the top. It's an awesome wood engraved thing. You can see it online. Library Company, I think, has a very beautiful high resolution image of it. But point is one of their founding principles is you know, we basically worship the founding fathers. We appreciate everything they did for us in our country. However, they make it clear, we are non resistant. We're not going to shed blood. Like they really go the next level hyperbole and they're like the founding fathers. They reveled in shedding the blood of others and like we're better than that. So we're going to do it passively. And on the face, I love this right? I applaud this. I went to grad school to study, you know, non violence in the civil rights movement. I love the story of SNCC, and all that stuff. I really do. But it doesn't take long for abolitionists to learn that that just doesn't work. Like not only are slave owners uncompromising by the 1830s, and 40s. They are, again, they're angry, they're militant themselves. And God help you if you're an abolitionist, or just moderate on the issue of slavery, and you happen to speak out in the south in the antebellum era. And so now it starts with Black abolitionists. Many of them had been militant, even before the 1830s. But certainly by the 1840s, an increasing number of white abolitionists, one thing my book shows is that Garrison, William Lloyd Garrison is all over the place. I mean, he's a pacifist. He's adamant that we're not going to use violence. But you might be shocked how many times and beginning with Nat Turner in 1831, every time there's a major incident of violence, he defends the militants, the uprisers, the rebels. And then he'll always qualify and say, "I don't support, you know, violent resistance." But for an entire speech, he just said it was okay. And it was justified. But certainly with the Fugitive Slave Act in the 1850s, even moderate, or, you know, radically pacifist, abolitionists throw up their hands and say, "This isn't working, like we have to try something else." And even though they will support, most of them will support violence half heartedly, they understand it, and they defend it on occasion. And then you have certain radicals, who by, James Redpath comes to mind, you know, by 1859, with John Brown, he and John Rock and all these abolitionists, they're just there, they're yelling and screaming for slaves to rise up. They're talking about, you know, funding the arming of these people. And so you can't avoid a civil war at that point. You have two sides, uncompromising, militant, and revolutionary in their, their own minds.

Kelly Therese Pollock  27:06  
So I want to talk about July 4, because it's one of my favorite symbols in American history, being my birthday. Sidenote, I was told growing up that the fireworks were for me. So this is, you know, important symbolism to me. So I want to start with talking about July 4, as it's celebrated in the south. You talk about in the book, these slave owners who are allowing their enslaved population to celebrate, to party, but at the same time trying to hide from them the real meaning of the holiday. So can you talk a little bit about that, and that weird tension there?

Matt Clavin  27:42  
Right. So other historians have done a really great job of showing how the Declaration of Independence was just not that big of a deal for a while. You know, in the 1770s, 80s, 90s, it was one of many other declarations. It's really not until the early Republican era of the earliest decades of the 19th century, as we start to see more and more polarization, new political parties, and then certain ideas. And before you know, it, the idea that all men are created equal, it starts to grab a hold among certain groups. And so that gives more weight to the Fourth of July, which is the celebration of the Declaration of Independence. So originally, it was just like, we celebrate the, we celebrate the Fourth of July, and independence, but they didn't celebrate the idea that all men were created equal, because that was subversive on some level. But certainly by the 1820s, and 30s, I would say north, south and west, everybody is celebrating the idea that all men are created equal. But it's like, you know, working class men are now considered equal. White men without money are considered equal, they have the right to vote and all this stuff. But whether or not you know, people of color figure into this, it starts to get complicated by this time period. So then when you get the abolition movement in the 1830s, it gets really twisted in the north, where you have a lot of northerners very anti slavery, and they're really running with this thing that this document declares all men are created equal, that includes people of color. Most northerners disagree, we have some race riots, a lot of conflict on the Fourth of July in the north. In the south, it's a little bit different, because you have less diversity of opinion, it's not allowed, it's not accepted. So what I think a lot of the evidence shows and I think other historians have certainly alluded to this is that by the 1840s, and 50s, white southerners just aren't really big on the Fourth of July. They still observe it, but not to the extent that they used to, and even when they do, they try to de-politicize it as much as possible. And you know, some historians have written about like, you know, what makes an American holiday today. And it's sort of like, the further we get away from celebrating its principles, the more important a holiday it is you know. So like Fourth of July to that, you know, Christmas today, right? It's supposed to be this religious. It's it's for giving gifts. Capitalism has nothing to do with its original intent. Fourth of July is about barbecuing. And I live in Texas and who doesn't love a good Fourth of July, brisket, barbecue, um, hotdogs, burgers. Who talks about the British, you know, being defeated on the Fourth of July anymore? Quite frankly, nobody. So in the white south, they start to just totally treat the Fourth of July, as an apolitical, you know, social gathering, lots of food, drink, partying, but we don't want to read the Declaration of Independence. Slaves are among us. They don't need to be given any encouragement. And so you just see all these divides over the course of time before the Civil War, that northerners and southerners just view not just the world differently, but their nation differently. They view the holidays, the flag, the bald eagle, they view them differently.

Kelly Therese Pollock  30:46  
So then that brings us to Frederick Douglass and this incredible speech that he gives on July 5, although as you note that's not necessarily subversive, it just happened to be July 5, about the meaning of July 4 to enslaved populations. So can you talk a little bit about that sort of what how did this speech come to be? And what's the impact of it? Because it really, I mean, it still resonates today.

Matt Clavin  31:14  
You know, when I first got out of grad school, and, you know, we all lack confidence, and we're all scared to submit things to publishers, because you know, you never know. Writing that chapter was the scariest thing for me because I worshiped Frederick Douglass, like being from Baltimore, Maryland used to walk the street that he grew up on, and it just, he is an impressive figure, and so much has been written about him. But I knew I had to have a whole chapter on his speech because it is it is so profound, intellectually, it just it just, it just move it's moving. It's an incredibly moving speech. But the way I see it is, you know, Frederick Douglass when he escaped from Maryland, and he very quickly becomes this, this this highly sought after recruit, if you will, of the abolition movement. He's so eloquent. He's so intelligent, he's physically imposing. And at first, he pretty much just follows the ideas the ideology of people like William Lloyd Garrison, Wendell Phillips, you know, the the titans of the abolition movement, and one of the cardinal sort of roles of abolitionism, 1830s and 40s is that the Constitution is a, I don't want to say despised, but it's a it is a considered a pro slavery document that lacks their respect for sure. And everyone knows that in the 1850s, William Lloyd Garrison at one point burns the Constitution after one of his speeches on the Fourth of July. So in general, most abolitionists, most white abolitionists, they have a love hate leaning towards hate relationship with the Constitution. They love the declaration. It says all men are created equal. The Constitution seems to condone slavery. That being said, by the late 1840s, Douglass, following some other abolitionists, changes. He switches, and I tell students every semester, I'm not sure I agree with his interpretation, but I respect it because it's Frederick Douglass. But what he says is, you know, the Constitution, it doesn't say that these people are enslaved. It doesn't use the word Negro. It doesn't use the word, slavery. It just it gives African Americans who are held in captivity, it gives them personhood. And so then there's the 20 year clause about we can get rid of the slave trade. So it gives the federal government some anti slavery powers. So by the 1850s, Frederick Douglass has changed. And he is defiant. He is he's basically forfeiting all of the goodwill he has built up with northern abolitionists, and he has to he is he's shunned. And so he has to launch his own newspaper, he moves to Rochester and all sorts of stuff. And so he what he wants to do is he wants to give this big speech, where he explains his his new point of view, and people don't understand. He's very heavily criticized. And so he just, it's really cool. He works with this Rochester women's sewing club. And he's tight with all these middle class white women in Rochester. And they're doing all the behind the scenes work. And they set it up for him. And I speak to you today with a sore throat partly because I lecture all the time. He originally intends to give the speech one year, but he has laryngitis. So he has to delay it a whole year. So people are just dying, like what's he doing? What's he thinking? So finally, in Rochester in a big arena, he gives a big theater, he gives this speech, in which I mean, it's shocking if you really read it closely. And if you haven't read all the secondary literature on it, you might miss it. It's so obvious. But he makes the most incredible case for American exceptionalism. And it's like, you know, among a lot of people today among a lot of historians, that idea is, is defunct, like this idea that America is close to perfect, and we're better than everybody else, and everyone should want to emulate us. But man, you read Douglass's speech, and that's exactly what he's saying. But he's not saying we're perfect. He's not saying everyone should follow us, but he says we have the potential. Like he says, "We have all the ideas written on paper, ie Declaration of Independence." He said, "If we would only see it through, if we would just get rid of the one thing, the one cancer, that is that is holding us back, that is threatening to destroy us, slavery, we're going to, we're going to, you know, we're going to realize our values, and then, you're darn right, the whole world is gonna want to emulate us." So Frederick Douglass, who was born a slave, you know, had to escape, was was hunted down for years, if anyone had the right to dislike his nation, it was Frederick Douglass. And at times, he does say, "I don't like the United States." You know, he lives in England, says, "I love it in England, the United States is horrible, for all these reasons." But when push comes to shove, Douglass is a nationalist. He not only loves America, he thinks it has the potential to be better than any other country. And so what he and so many abolitionists are trying to do ultimately, is they're trying to reclaim all of these symbols. They want the Fourth of July to be an anti slavery holiday. They want the declaration to be read literally as an anti slavery text and anti racism text. They want the American eagle to be seen as a bird of flying freedom, not a predator, you know, that hunts down escaped slaves. So Douglass is just paramount to this entire story. It's a it was a fascinating, fun chapter to write.

Kelly Therese Pollock  36:18  
Yeah, and I love I love that speech. You know, I it's one of those moments in history you wish we had video recordings of. But so the this idea of the Fourth of July, as you know, sort of a symbol, it comes up several times in groups that are, you know, planning events, right. So you talked at the beginning about this group of slaves that escaped around that weekend of the the Fourth of July and then talk about the original Harpers Ferry raid was going to be on July 4. So can we talk about that sort of the the symbol, the really violent symbol of July 4, and how it resonates then throughout throughout the imaginations of these people who are thinking about events and things, causes that they can do?

Matt Clavin  37:09  
Yeah, you know, John Adams, he famously says that we you know, in the 1780s and 1770s, right after the, you know, shortly after the declaration, he said, "We're going to celebrate," and he's talking about July 2, but mentally because July 4, interpreted, but he basically says, you know, "Moving forward, we should as a nation celebrate this holiday every July with pomp and circumstance, and fireworks, and explosions, and gunshots, and all sorts of stuff." And it really is like a revolutionary sort of connotation. And from that moment forward, to this day, the Fourth of July is absolutely associated with these, these marks of violence, if you will. And one of the one of the just disturbing findings of the research I did is how there's a very famous slave narrative written by a guy named Charles Ball in Maryland. And he recounts how, in the early 1800s, he is literally sold at auction on the Fourth of July. And you know, he is sold, and he's sitting on a bench. I think he's chained to the bench for the entire afternoon, evening, as his new owner, and all the slave traders, they're in a pub, you know, celebrating, firing their pistols to the Fourth of July and the idea that all men are created equal, if you can believe that. And, you know, years later, he publishes the story. And a white Southern writer, you know, writes this editorial that for its day goes viral, and he says Charles Ball is lying. We would never do that on the Fourth of July. So of course, I had do my investigation. And all over the south, they bought and sold African Americans on the Fourth of July, throughout the antebellum era. And so in the white South, the Fourth of July is a day for many things, including slave auctions. So for an enslaved person, I can't think of anything more infuriating, degrading, revolting. And so for a person like Charles Ball, that justifies any reaction on the Fourth of July or any other day, and I did come across several instances of slaves being transported on the Fourth of July, and they break out. They escape on that day, and there's violence, people die. And so I think slaves just have no qualms about fighting and killing for freedom, quite honestly any day of the year. But on the Fourth of July, if it ever seen more justified that you wouldn't find a day more justifiable. 

Kelly Therese Pollock  39:30  
Then of course, we need to talk about the Harpers Ferry raid and John Brown. This is monumental, history changing event in in this country. And so let's talk about that. And the way that John Brown is is influenced by the abolition movement, but also by by the interpretation of these symbols of freedom.

Matt Clavin  39:53  
Yeah, he is another one if you are not careful, and you read enough of his letters and his editorials he writes, you might come away with the idea that he doesn't love his country, because he is so highly critical. But at various points in his most radical period of the year leading up to Harpers Ferry, he shows himself time and time again, one of the greatest champions of American freedom. One of the one of the greatest examples I have is he's in Canada, both hiding out, and he's also sort of, you know, raising money, money and trying to get recruits for his Harpers Ferry invasion. He's in a part of Canada, that is populated almost exclusively with escaped American slaves. So the vast majority are Black men and women. And they have a big convention. And at one point in time, you know, they write this constitution, they write this declaration of, you know, what are their values, what are they going to do moving forward, etc. And at one point, the only thing that they disagree and argue on is called Article 46, of what's called John Brown's Constitution. And in that John Brown says, we're going to do what we're going to do at Harpers Ferry. And we're going to do it under the stars and stripes, like basically saying, we're going to go to Harpers Ferry under an American flag, and we're going to fight and kill for the freedom of enslaved people. And a lot of his, the Black delegates at this at this meeting, they oppose this. And they said, "No, we escaped the United States. The United States is a place of, is a land of slavery. You know, we're now under the embrace of Mother England here in Canada, and she no longer tolerates slavery. So we'll go to Harpers Ferry with you. But we will not be doing it under a flag," and Brown pushes back. And he says, "You know what, then I'm not going, like, we're going to do this under the American flag, or we're not going to do it at all." He says, "It was good enough for the founding fathers. It was good enough for me." And they all agree. And they eventually adopt this article. And there's another instance at the same time where someone proposes you know, "It's too early. We need to wait for like the United States to get involved in a war with some other country. You know, wait until the United States is at its weakest point, and then attack." And John Brown says, "No, this isn't about hurting the United States. This is about helping the United States. So we're just gonna we're gonna make this stand. It's very symbolic, we may not survive. But the goal is to just sort of set a precedent, teach the American people a lesson. And let's symbolically let's get the ball rolling on the end of slavery." And again, it's a horribly violent, this ending, but he does it in in patriotic terms. And he's not anti American. He's very, very critical. But some people would say that's the greatest sign of an American citizen. And so he is certainly that.

Kelly Therese Pollock  42:30  
And so then that brings us to the last vignette in your book. So this is during the Civil War. This is the 54th Massachusetts, and this incredible story of I think it's Sgt. Carney. I think that's his name, William Carney picking up the flag and making sure that the flag, the United States flag, stays flying. So can you talk a little bit about that? And the the meaning of that?

Matt Clavin  42:57  
Well, I will tell you this much. I was an undergrad when that movie "Glory" came out. And it probably seeing that very last scene, I was like, "Yep, I'm going to grad school." Like, you know, very few history movies have ever spoken to me. But that one, just, it just was a game changer for me. It was. And it's interesting, you know, there's always historical inaccuracies. But as far as Hollywood goes, "Glory" was was very accurate. And they've actually, I have learned, used some of the quoted material is from the historical record, that Matthew Broderick says, you know, so it's really kind of, it's really rooted in a true story. And there's nothing more heroic than a soldier in battle, not carrying a weapon, but carrying a flag into the face of the enemy, and being shot down. And it's like the greatest patriotic sacrifice. And what really happens in the Battle of Fort Wagner is this other man is holding the flag and he is shot down, and Carney, you know, throws down his weapon, picks up the flag, and he refuses to let it touch the ground. And he takes a couple of bullets. He very famously in the United States loses to the Confederacy on that day. So he's dragged or somehow carried back to a medical tent. And as they bring him into this tent, there's wounded Black and white soldiers, and they just applaud him. It's like this incredible, patriotic interracial moment, where it's like, "Okay, this is what this war is all about. You know, it's not necessarily just about the union anymore. It's about getting rid of this ugly institution of slavery. We have enslaved people fighting for us." Carney may or may not have been an escaped slave. His father was. We're not sure how he actually became free, but he was a slave at some point in his life. And so this is the greatest from and I love the cover of the book. Because ultimately, this is about African Americans. And today in American history, or today in the United States, there still is this way of thinking that African Americans are less patriotic, that they don't love their country as much as you know well to do white Americans, and they point to NFL players kneeling down. They point to all these sorts of protests over racism. They point in what's happened in Tennessee, we have people expelled because they're protesting all the gun violence and things of that nature. And they happen to be African American politicians. And they're, they're booted out of the legislature. And so there is this sort of thinking in the last decade or so that Black Americans aren't as patriotic. They don't love their country as much. Well, here is one of countless examples, that they not only love their country, they may love it more than white Americans. And, you know, I know enough African Americans who have served in the military, they fought in Vietnam, they fought in Persian Gulf. I mean, you could make the argument that African Americans, descendants of slaves, have little to no business fighting for the flag, dying for their country. But what I have seen, I think what the record shows is, they are more than willing to do more than their share of sacrifice. And certainly, that's what William Carney represents. He could have very well stayed in the north gone to Canada and said, "'m done with the United States." Now instead, he puts his life on the line, you know, not just for the war effort, but for literally for the flag. He would have died for it. And that's a very powerful moment in history.

Kelly Therese Pollock  46:11  
So please tell listeners how they can get this book, which I should mention is full of these images that we've talked about.

Matt Clavin  46:18  
Well, thank you. I don't really like the social media for my mental health and well being. So Amazon any major bookseller will have the book New York University Press is the best press and they sell it also. And thank you so much. I can tell you really read the book and appreciate the book and it makes me feel great.

Kelly Therese Pollock  46:35  
Is there anything else you wanted to make sure we talked about?

Matt Clavin  46:38  
No, but Happy Birthday, upcoming birthday and Happy Fourth of July. 

Kelly Therese Pollock  46:41  
Thank you. Thank you.

Matt Clavin  46:43  
You're very welcome.

Teddy  47:09  
Thanks for listening to Unsung History. Please subscribe to Unsung History on your favorite podcasting app. You can find the sources used for this episode and a full episode transcript @UnsungHistorypodcast.com. To the best of our knowledge, all audio and images used by Unsung History are in the public domain or are used with permission. You can find us on twitter or instagram @Unsung__History, or on Facebook @UnsungHistorypodcast. To contact us with questions, corrections, praise or episode suggestions, please email Kelly@UnsungHistorypodcast.com. If you enjoyed this podcast, please rate, review, and tell everyone you know. Bye!

Transcribed by https://otter.ai