Replies

DiogenesLamp: "I know people like to blame Georgia and South Carolina, but my take is that they were the vocal states, and others, who may have felt the same as they do, didn't bring it up, but might have if someone else hadn't objected.
I find it odd that a Union of which the vast majority were slave states, would only have two of their number objecting to the anti-slavery language, when it applied to all states except Massachusetts, at the time."

Jefferson himself claimed that some Northerners had also objected to his proposed anti-slavery section of the Declaration, though he didn't identify them by name or state.

So, several points to make here:

Under the British, all US colonies were legally slave states, but not all colonists owned slaves.
Of those who signed the 1776 Declaration of Independence, roughly 1/3 did not own slaves, including nearly all signers from Connecticut, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.
States where all signers did own slaves included: New York, Maryland, Virginia and South Carolina.
States with one non-slaveholder delegate included: New Hampshire, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Delaware, North Carolina & Georgia.
By the time of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, every New England state plus Pennsylvania had begun to abolish slavery.
Fewer than half of those who signed the 1787 Constitution were slaveholders, with non-slaveholders including nearly all the delegates from New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey & Delaware.

My point here is that even in 1776, and especially by 1787, many leading Americans, North and South, took slavery very seriously and were doing what they could to abolish it wherever possible.

By the time of the 1787 Constitutional Convention, every New England state plus Pennsylvania had begun to abolish slavery.

They had mouthed a bunch of formalities and passed a bunch of laws that said they would abolish it at some point in the future.

I tend to be an absolutist, and I don't consider stating intentions to be the same thing as doing the deed.

My measure of the abolition of slavery is that it no longer exists in any form within a state that has abolished it.

This is of course not true for the vast majority of States that "abolished it" in the 1790 era. I think Pennsylvania still had slaves on the census in the 1840s. I know some of the states did.

My point here is that even in 1776, and especially by 1787, many leading Americans, North and South, took slavery very seriously and were doing what they could to abolish it wherever possible.

I think there is a lot of truth in this. Even George Washington himself, in his later years decided he wanted to abolish it, and he often pondered how it might be accomplished.

But did most people oppose it because they thought it was wrong, or did they oppose it because they didn't want white men to have to compete with slaves for paying jobs? Did they oppose it because they didn't want "colored" living among them?

When you go back and look at it, there is indeed written evidence that some people opposed it because they thought it was immoral, but there is also a lot of evidence that the majority opposed it for economic and racial reasons.

There are all sorts of people who said they wanted to keep the territories for white people, meaning they simply didn't want any black people in them. I think Lincoln said this too.

The various "black codes" in the various Northern states indicate that the populations were primarily driven by hatred, not love.