In honor of Juneteenth, a brief story about the America that almost was.

I was at the Federal Archives once, searching for a very different document, when I came across a stack of papers titled "Joint Resolutions Proposing Amendments to the Constitution of the United States."
The words "Article 13" were underlined on the page below.

"Oh wow," I thought. "An original draft resolution for the 13th Amendment." I was kind of surprised they had just left it lying around with a bunch of totally unrelated documents.

Then I kept reading.
"Article 13. The right of property in the labor of any person lawfully held to service in the States [ ], ... shall not be abolished or impaired by Congress[ ]; and the United States shall protect all rights of property wherever federal jurisdiction extends."
It was the original 13th Amendment, introduced in January of 1861.

A version of it was passed by both the House and Senate by a two-thirds vote. It was signed by President Buchanan, and the states began to ratify it. Then it stalled out, due to the whole Civil War thing.
The Amendments That Almost Were did not get better from there.

The 14th Amendment: "The power to regulate commerce ... shall not be construed to authorize Congress to make any law impairing the right of the Master to remove from one State to another persons held to service[.]"
Congress drafted these amendments in order to preserve what they believed were important Constitutional rights — through these amendments, they would ensure that Americans "shall not be deprived of the right of property in the service or labor of any person."
The would-be 16th Amendment would have imposed harsh penalties on any state interfering with slavery: "If any state shall enact ... any law impairing [the Fugitive Slave Act] such state shall not be entitled to any representation in Congress [ ] until the the repeal of such law."
And then there's the would-be 17th Amendment, in which the Senate would be divided into two classes — the slave-state class and the non-slave-state class — and "a majority of the vote of each class shall be necessary to the passage of the presiding motion, bill or resolutions."
And to ensure the slavery question would be forever settled, one last amendment was needed.

The 18th Amendment: "The provisions of ... the several amendments to this Constitution, numbered Articles 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17, shall forever be unalterable."

There'd be no going back.
To the proponents of these amendments, what they sought was no more than the preservation of the Union as it had always been, and had always been intended to be: "We ask nothing but that which is in the Constitution itself. The Constitution [ ] recognizes slaves as property."
The idea that "all men are created equal" had literally meant *all* men was "too absurd to talk about. The men of the Revolution were white men… It was all they meant; it was all they intended; it was all that was understood by any man then living to have been intended by it."
As Sen. Wigfall, TX, noted: "What is the fact as to Massachusetts? Why, on the 18th of July, 1776, they published the Declaration of Independence in the Boston Gazette; and, before God, they published an advertisement for a runaway negro, and offered another for sale. [Laughter]"
In the end, these six proposed amendments would not pass in their entirety, because the Northern states could not accept the parts that expanded slavery to new states – thereby upsetting the balance of power with the South.

But the other parts, the North was willing to accept.
In the end, a compromise 13th Amendment was agreed on: "No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will [ ] give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, w/in any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service[.]"
Some in Congress did raise objections to the would-be 13th Amendment – for instance, there was an intense debate over the amendment's awkward phrasing and questionable grammar.

Some thought such terrible grammar would be a bad example to set for children.
But as Senator Baker explained in eloquent remarks before the Senate, the 13th Amendment was "not well written, but well meant." A little bad English could be accepted.

Seven months later, Senator Baker – one of President Lincoln's closest friends – would be killed in battle.
Because the would-be 13th Amendment wasn't enough to stop the war. The Northern states were willing to amend the Constitution to offer permanent protection for slavery, if it would keep the Union together. But the 13th wasn't enough for the South to feel secure; they wanted more.
Besides, it was probably already too late, anyway. It took several weeks for the would-be 13th Amendment to make its way through the House and Senate, and to secure a two-thirds vote from each, and by then, seven of the Southern states had already seceded.
(Plus, many in the South were skeptical of the scheme's core component: an amendment that says it can never be unamended.

For the South, a permanent guarantee of protection for slavery was a must-have. Not all were convinced this bit of Constitutional judo would really hold up.)

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Susan Simpson

Susan Simpson Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @TheViewFromLL2

9 Jun
The report says that the U.S. Park Police didn't learn of Trump's plan to walk to the church until shortly before 3pm that day...

But the report also notes USPP made its decision about when and how to clear to park at around 5pm.
USPP was informed that Trump would make a visit of Lafayette Park "after protesters had been removed from the area."

And yet the report guilelessly concludes that the manner of timing of how the protesters were cleared had nothing to do with Trump's plans for a photo op.
There are not many redactions in the report, but this section here was redacted. An unnamed (but presumably WH) official made some kind of undisclosed request regarding the operation to clear the protesters – a request that the USPP acting chief rejected, for unspecified reasons.
Read 9 tweets
11 May
For @just_security, I wrote a deep dive into the evidence Giuliani was indeed a foreign agent who – on behalf of Ukrainian nationals – lobbied Trump and other officials to fire Yovanovitch.

But instead of registering under FARA, he tried to disguise his status as foreign agent.
Giuliani has indicated his defense will be that, in seeking the ambassador's removal, he was acting only on Trump's behalf, and not for any Ukrainians: "My sole concentration... was to find evidence that proved [Trump] was innocent of Russian collusion."
But the evidence shows Giuliani was acting on behalf of both Ukrainian nationals *and* Trump. He saw that both sides wanted something, and that both sides were in a position to help the other.

And his FARA trouble results from his role in arranging a quid pro quo between them.
Read 19 tweets
8 Jan
At one point, a large crowd of rioters is blocked from moving further into the building by Capitol police.

Then at 24:40, a rioter with a bullhorn announces: "We have permission to go into this room... We can go into this room if we are calm and we commit no violence, ok?"
The Trump mob does not obey; they start to push through. For a moment, a few officers try to bar the way.

Then a rioter chastises a cop: "I would just stop, bro, dude, you're not helping... you're going to get me hurt and other people."

Then it appears police let them through.
While securing permission to move further into the Capitol, one rioter tells the Capitol police standing in the way:
"That's what I'm trying to tell you... you've got to stand down. The people out there that tried to do that, they got hurt, I saw it."
Read 5 tweets
7 Jan
If Trump were remaining in power, this wouldn't change anything for Trump's enablers. They'd make the same clucking noises they made after Charlottesville, and then continue on by Trump's side exactly as they had before.
Even now, Republicans are pointedly refusing to break with Trump, or even blame him for what happened, let alone condemn him. The exceptions to this are so few they hardly exist – the VT governor, Romney, Sasse, that Illinois Rep who is basically Amash-lite, maybe 1 or 2 more?
Some condemn "the violence" and "the lawlessness," and give passionate defenses of the Electoral College while noting that without it Republicans may never win the presidency again. The truly bold among them may venture to say that Trump's comments "aren't helpful."
Read 8 tweets
5 Jan
May this be the last Trump rally I ever watch, but one last time, here we go.

Trump begins his griping right from the get-go: "I told Kelly, if you lose, you lose, and that's acceptable. But when you win in a landslide and they steal it, that's unacceptable."
Trump, after heaping some fawning praise on his VP: "I hope Mike Pence comes through for us. Of course, if he doesn't come through with us, I won't like him quite as much."
He screwed up earlier and used the word "Democratic" in its correct grammatical context, so he's having an off night.
Read 33 tweets
5 Nov 20
All right, let's do this. I'm watching Fox tonight. For old time's sake.

Tucker is on with @JennaEllisEsq. Only caught the end of it, but the discussion is very abstract, with generic invocations of transparency and right to vote, etc. Very detached air to the whole exchange.
My Pillow commercial, drink.
"We still have a path to victory," Tucker's subdued next guest insists. He then complains about the failure of a judge to recognize the Trump campaign's "right" to view various election activities.
Read 50 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(