Product Description

A blow-by-blow re-creation of the battle royal that raged in Congress in the 1830s, when a small band of representatives, led by President John Quincy Adams of Massachusetts, employed intricate stratagems to outwit the Southern (and Southern-sympathizing) sponsors of the successive "gag" rules that had long blocked debate on the subject of slavery.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #223739 in Books
• Published on: 1996-01-16
• Released on: 1996-01-16
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 577 pages

From Publishers Weekly
In tracing the growing hostility between North and South over the extension of slavery into the Western territories, Miller (The First Liberty) pays special attention to the so-called gag rule, in force from 1834 to 1844, which blocked discussion of antislavery proposals in the House of Representatives. The central figure in Miller's study is John Quincy Adams, in his second career as U.S. representative from Massachusetts, and his heroic fight for repeal of the gag rule and for the right to petition Congress for the abolition of slavery. The author recounts how the ex-president succeeded in spite of the bitter denunciation of his opponents and a concerted effort in 1842 to have him censured. Miller calls the repeal of the gag rule "the first clear victory over the Slave Power in the United States." He captures the confrontations on the floor of the House and the eloquence of the speakers, in a conflict of words and ideas that would ultimately lead to the Civil War. BOMC selection.
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Library Journal
Miller (The First Liberty, LJ 2/1/86) covers the great debates in the House of Representatives from 1835 to 1845 on the legality of slavery in the United States. Even though the period is well before the Civil War, the author feels that this battle really began the intense feelings that culminated in the war. He sets the stage for the debate, then intersperses direct quotations from the Congressional Globe and Register of Debates, with the personal beliefs of the participants, the mood and feelings from the various regions or states, as well as his own interpretation of the discussions. Miller ties all this together within a framework of the political climate and writings of the period. He gives an excellent portrayal of the House of Representatives, its makeup, and especially its leadership. His book should be required reading for anyone interested in the slavery issue, as well as the history of the U.S. Congress, since it examines both with exceptional clarity.
W. Walter Wicker, Louisiana Technical Univ., Ruston
Copyright 1996 Reed Business Information, Inc.

From Booklist
According to Miller, he was working on a project "on America's moral and intellectual underpinnings" when he came upon the subject of this book, and it grabbed him by his collar, threw him to the floor, sat on his chest, and insisted that it be told. A bit melodramatic, perhaps, but his subject is an extraordinary episode in U.S. history. It was a long argument that took place mostly on the floor of the House of Representatives, in the 1830s and early 1840s, over the right of the people, particularly nonvoting women, to petition, when those petitions begged for the ending of the slave trade in the capital, when those petitions came from slaves ("they are property, not persons; they have no political rights" ), and, in the end, when those petitions even mentioned slavery. So then, this little-known controversy was an argument to end American slavery without destroying the Union, before there was an inkling of the Civil War. The hero is John Quincy Adams, an ex-president, who presented more of those petitions than any other representative, particularly after Representative Waddy Thompson attempted to censure him for it. Thompson didn't realize "he mistook his man." After a nine-year struggle, during which gag rules were passed and two attempts were made to censure him, Adams defeated the gag rule on petition. Miller's book is of the utmost importance, for it shows how close we were to moral destruction in those days of state's rights and suggests how close we are again. Bonnie Smothers