SHOULD HUMANNESS BE LEGISLATED?


Educator Notes for Activities A (3 parts) and B (3 parts)

Educators: In our democratic republic, we constantly strive for a balance between legislating to advance the common good and delimiting the laws authority. Like the subject of abortion today, slavery was a polarizing issue that culminated in war and social revolution in America.

The drama of Margaret Garner’s story evoked pity and outrage across America. It helped bring the true tragedy of the enslaved to the foreground and prepare those living in non-slave states for an inevitable confrontation. Clearly, without the complicity of the North, slavery would not have survived. Slavery was an economic benefit for the entire country, yet it ran contrary to religious teaching and the social revolution occurring across Europe.

One important Constitutional question vital for discussion is whether mainstream values, truths and morals can and should be advanced through the courts? Is it beneficial to the whole society for a government to make laws for as many aspects of life as it can, or should society regulate itself? Because the result of legislating “values” is the imposition of a mainstream view through the force of the state, is it a healthy social goal to alienate large portions of the population? Finally, what is justice, which side is it on, and who has the right to decide what is just? Even in a democratic republic, justice does not always prevail - or does it?

This module contains two, multi-part activities. Activity “A” focuses on how individuals and states approached settling disagreements with the Federal government. It helps students understand the historical importance of developing a strong national government, and what happened when the interests of states, local governments and individuals were pitted against the federal government.

Because the Tariff Crisis of 1828 was integral to the South’s popular sovereignty argument over slavery, it’s an excellent event to research and discuss. This leads nicely to Activity “B” that culminates in a challenging essay question, Should Humanness Be Legislated.

Activity “A” is based on a lesson plan from the White House Historical Association. It has been altered here, but the original lesson can be found at "http://www.whitehousehistory.org/04/subs/activities_03/c01.html"


Activity 1: A Small Rebellion Now and Then

During the Civil War, President Lincoln dealt with a massive challenge to federal constitutional authority, but even before then there were several occasions when groups of citizens questioned the legitimacy of the national government. Read the scenarios below, and then, working in groups of three, complete the accompanying activity.

The Whiskey Rebellion

When the new constitutional government was formed in 1789, control was primarily in the hands of the Federalists. One of those Federalists, Alexander Hamilton, as secretary of the treasury, was responsible for the financial policies of the new government. He proposed two methods for raising money to support the funding and debts of the national government: one was a tariff on imports, and the other was an excise tax on distilled liquor. At that time, the United States didn’t have many industries extensive enough to be worth taxing. Liquor was chosen along with snuff, loaf sugar, and what was then considered a real luxury, carriages. In 1794, farmers in western Pennsylvania challenged federal authority when they refused to a pay a whiskey excise tax and began terrorizing tax collectors. One man, John Lynn, who agreed simply to sublease a portion of his dwelling to the tax collector, John Neville, was dragged from his house in the middle of night. Taken to a remote section of the forest, his head was shaved; he was stripped naked, then tarred and feathered. After making him swear on pain of death not to reveal their names, the protesters lashed him to a tree and left him there for the remainder of the night.1 When word got back of these and similar acts, President George Washington knew he had to do something. He called out the militias of four states and raised an army of nearly 15,000. Furthermore, he personally accompanied the troops as far as Bedford, Pennsylvania, the first and the last time a president of the United States marched with an army. When the militiamen arrived in Pittsburgh - - -

The Hartford Convention

New England Federalists had been angry at the national government since Thomas Jefferson became president. For one, he purchased Louisiana, a region from which many western states could be carved and whose inhabitants would most likely become Democratic-Republicans. Furthermore, Jefferson, in an effort to keep the young United States out of European wars, had imposed an embargo, forbidding American ships from leaving port with their lucrative cargoes. At that time some of the Federalists talked of seceding and forming the Northern Confederacy. Now, they opposed the War of 1812, especially since the United States had invaded Canada, a move, that, if successful, would bring even more "western-like" republican states. Furthermore, New England Federalists felt that once more commerce with Europe was being interrupted by war. In their view, the war aims of the Democratic-Republican President James Madison were favorable to the development of the West and the South, but detrimental to New England. Finally, the idea that the war was being fought for "Freedom of the Seas" was bogus–or so they said. The more vocal members of the New England Federalists wanted to call a convention to draft a new federal constitution, with clauses to protect New England interests, and present it to only the original thirteen states. If these were accepted, good; if not, New England just might make a separate peace with Great Britain and go it alone. Delegates from Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, with scattered representations from New Hampshire and Vermont, held the secret Hartford Convention from December 15, 1814 to January 5, 1815. Among other things, the convention did propose seven amendments to the Constitution "http://www.whitehousehistory.org/04/subs/activities_03/c01_01.html" designed to protect their geographic region from the growing influence of the South and the West. Some attending actually suggested secession from the Union. Unfortunately for these Federalists, their timing could not have been worse! For just as they were bringing their report to Washington - - -

The Tariff Crisis

In 1828, Congress passed what southerners came to call the "Tariff of Abominations," a high protective tax levied on goods coming into the country from abroad. In the South, particularly South Carolina, the people protested. It was an important part of their economic life to sell their cash crops to England and use the profits to purchase items from Europe, especially Britain. A high tariff meant they had to pay more for these goods. Further, in retaliation, Britain might, in the future, decide to impose its own tariff. John C. Calhoun, vice president under John Quincy Adams, had thought through the constitutional means by which the "plantation" states could refuse to obey that law. Building on the nullification doctrine put forth in the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions, Calhoun argued that individual states, acting together, had made the national government, limiting its scope through the framing of the Constitution. What happened, then, if the people believed the national government overstepped its bounds? According to Calhoun, the states had the power to decide. He argued that the Supreme Court couldn’t accurately judge, since that body was a part of the national government. Each state, then, acting through a constitutional convention, could decide if Congress had gone too far. If the state (meeting in convention) so voted, it could refuse to obey this law until three-fourths of all the states ratified an amendment making legal this "overstepping" of authority. If three-fourths of all the states allowed this overstepping by adding this amendment, then the state in question would have to obey the law, or exercise its right to secede from the Union. In 1828, South Carolina published Calhoun’s approach as The South Carolina Exposition and Protest.

When in 1832, Congress passed a tariff almost as high as the 1828 tariffs, South Carolinians called a state convention and promptly agreed to "nullify" both tariffs. That meant they would not allow the collection of the tariff in the port cities of their state. They were refusing to obey a federal law. President Andrew Jackson privately swore to "hang them all," but publicly he - - -

Part 1: Research:
After reading the three scenarios, divide the class into small groups of 3 to 5 students. Each group will research all three scenarios listed above.

  • create an outline that describes the constitutional issues that each side used to support their cause
  • describe how the crisis ended

Part 2: Knee to Knee Confrontation:

  • Proceedure: Divide the class into pairs. Students will create a sign to hang around their neck. Give each pair one Red and one Blue piece of paper (can be any other two colors). Students with the Red paper will write “Government” on the paper, the Blues will write “Protester”. Pass out lengths of string long enough to loop around a student’s neck, and have students tape the string to their paper and place the sign around their necks.
  • Students will review their notes on the first scenario, the Whiskey Rebellion, and will have to present a convincing argument to their partner based on the role written on their sign. Each side will get two minutes.
  • After 5 minutes of review, students will sit with their partner, knee to knee (knees should touch).
  • Using a timer, allow the Protesters to air their views for exactly two minutes. Then time the government side, giving them two minutes also.
  • Bring the class back together. Ask the blues and the reds, in turn to tell what arguments they thought were convincing. Write their comments on the board.
  • Put students back into their paired groups. Tell them to switch signs and sides. They then should review scenario number 2 for 5 minutes. After the review, repeat the knee to knee activity discussing scenario 2.
  • Bring the class back together. Ask the blues and the reds, in turn, to tell what arguments they thought were convincing. Write their comments on the board.
  • Repeat the process with scenario 3.

Materials: enough sheets of two different colors of paper for half of the class to get either color, a roll of string, scissors, rolls of tape.

Part 3: Taking Sides
Divide the class into three groups and have each group draw a 1, 2, or 3 from a bag. Each group, numbered and described below as a “voice”, will assume the role that they drew. The goal is to provide classmates with a better sense of the Whiskey Rebellion through the presentation of three points of view, each described below. You may wish to rehearse this activity using the Whiskey Rebellion and move on to either of the other scenarios for a more challenging activity.

1. The Voice of Balance
Your goal is to simply present the facts of this event. Most likely your classmates have already studied all three, but you want to reacquaint them with the basic information in as balanced a manner as possible. You might use sentences such as:

While the national government believed that the best way to resolve the issue of taxation was to levy an excise on a "luxury item," on the other hand, the whiskey producers felt they were being punished for producing the only thing portable enough to get to market over the terrible roads of the western states.

2. The Voice of the National Government
Your goal is to convincingly present the side of the national government. You are firm in your conviction that the law that has been passed is the most reasonable, the most justifiable means of handling this issue. Keep in mind that you believe that compliance with this law is non-negotiable. Here are some ideas for language:

You say you refuse to pay the whiskey tax, and furthermore, you intend to beat the tax collector to within an inch of his life? Do you know the implications of that for an orderly government? Do you think we can tolerate anarchy? You say you are not going to collect the tariff from ships bringing goods into Charleston harbor? Impossible!

3. The Voice of Protest
Your voice is the strongest of all because you believe you have been terribly wronged! The government has perpetrated such an injustice against you that you are willing to resort to unconventional means to get your point across. Remember, you are the voice of "righteous indignation," but you still want to back your arguments with logic and fact.

How can you make us pay this tax when you know we can barely survive as it is? Why are we being taxed when other people pay nothing? Whiskey is a luxury you say? Well, tell that to the sailors who spend a month at sea: it's a luxury, boys, so this trip we're leaving off your ration of rum!

After you choose your point of view, do some further research to shape your position. Then prepare a presentation. The Voice of Balance is the "fact-giver," so the student presenting this part may simply present a straightforward report or provide a printed set of facts that others can use as they listen to the more "biased" viewpoints. Those taking the National Government and Protest positions can use various methods, such as:

A Broadside
This is a sheet of paper for posting information on the "broadside" of a building. Think of old circus posters to get an idea of how one might look. Design a colorful, language-rich broadside, using "propaganda techniques" to get your point across. You could be inviting protesters to a meeting to plan strategies or to a "town meeting" to think of ways to legally counter certain government actions.

A Ballad
A ballad employs a simple tune to tell a story, sometimes a romantic one, but why not the "The Whiskey Boys of ’94" or "Jackson’s Answer"? If you are musically inclined and find that medium more comfortable than other kinds of presentations, try it. Be sure your ballad has enough verses so that other students get a clear understanding of the issues, and do provide paper copies of the words so your listeners can follow along.

Travel Talk
In the late 1700s and early 1800s, travel accommodations were often poor. People traveling the countryside hoped to find lodging at a wayside inn where they could get an evening meal and a relatively clean bed. Travelers of many walks of life might find themselves talking to each other at the common table where supper was served. Consider a setting where the Voice of National Government ends up at the same table with a Voice of Protest. To make it more interesting, have the "innkeeper" chime in from time to time as the Voice of Balance referee. In this way, all three points of view are heard.

Follow-Up
After each group presents, ask classmates to write down which side of the issue they most agreed with, then to write down one argument from each side that they found most convincing. Think about how these situations were resolved, and compare them to the actions taken by South Carolina which led to the Civil War. As a whole group activity, generate at least six compare-and-contrast statements and post them in the classroom. Display the statements with the broadsides and copies of the ballads.


Activity 2: Should Humanness Be Legislated?

One of the great tragedies of American history was the institution of slavery. The debate undertaken by many politicians, North and South, bears credible witness to their differing beliefs: that the humanity of a person could or could not be determined by law. The Margaret Garner case provides an interesting lens through which to examine whether morality should be legislated.

This activity focuses on the question of humanness - or human rights. When the colonies rebelled by issuing the Declaration of Independence, the Constitutional Congress based their revolution on life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. These inalienable rights, they said, are given to humans by their Creator, not a government. On that basis, a whole range of critical moral questions should have been solved. But that’s not what happened. Slavery was institutionalized by the Constitution and upheld by a succession of laws and rulings. As was discussed in Activity 1, a constitutional republic uses various methods to protect the interests of the people it serves. Part one examines the process through which a practice that many framers of the Constitution professed to abhor, was institutionalized.

Part 1: How Slavery was Institutionalized
There are other documents that can be included in this discussion that students may not think of like the Northwest Ordinance and the Missouri Compromise, as well as state constitutions that also either allowed or disallowed slavery. Also, the “black laws” of some free states were important contributors to the institutionalization of slavery. After the study groups have completed the assignment, you can provide each group with super-sized “post-it” notes to write the main phrase (and identification) on for each reference. The class can discuss each, and arrange them in categories taped to the board. Some references will not fit or they may have excluded important ones.

Assignment: Document the legal process through which slavery was legalized in the United States.

  • divide the class into small study groups.
  • review the following documents - Declaration of Independence, Constitution of the United States, Fugitive Slave Acts, Dred Scot decision
  • cite each instance where language regarding the legality of slavery was inferred or stipulated and include the title, section, date, and a complete quote
  • write an explanation of the relevance of each quote
  • extra credit for additional references

Part 2: Was the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 Constitutional?

After completing Part 1, students will take a position, either for or against the question, “Was the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 Constitutional?” Students will use the Margaret Garner case as an example, along with any other cases they choose to include.

  • Pass a copy of Steven Weisenburger’s article, A Historical Margaret Garner to each student and discuss it in class
  • Divide the class into two groups - Pro and Con. Using their notes from Part 1, ask students to write a convincing essay, supported with any quotes from primary resource documents they can find (properly footnoted), to defend their position. Use at least 3 Core Democratic Values.
    • Pro: Yes, the Fugitive Slave Law was Constitutional.
    • Con: No, the Fugitive Slave Law was not Constitutional.

Discussion: Draw a Venn Diagram, or three columns, on the board and label the
sections Pro, Same, Con.

  • Divide each group into smaller sub-groups and ask them to compare notes and consolidate their statements into one, including all the arguments.
  • Discuss each Pro and Con side, writing each point, regardless if it’s invalid, into the Venn Diagram.
  • Look at the points on each side and discuss which ones are shared and write
    those in the middle.
  • Ask students to copy the Venn Diagram.

Part 3: Culminating Activity - Should Humanness be Legislated?

Assignment: Write an essay on the subject, “Should Humanness be Legislated.”

  • Students must take a position. (Write a clear position statement)
  • Students must provide at least three examples that support their position. (Use footnotes correctly)
  • Students must use at least one Core Democratic Value in the defense of their position. (Use footnotes to correctly reference the section(s) from the Constitution and Bill of Rights.)
  • Students must refer to at least one other issue/situation to support their position. (Use other social studies knowledge to support position.)
  • Students must then refute their own argument using at least one piece of evidence to support their refutation. (Refutation of alternative position.)

return to top