Helper's book revived the controversy which had been forcibly terminated a quarter of a century before.He resumes the argument of the members of the Virginia legislature of 1832.He reprints extended selections from that memorable debate and then, by extended references to later official reports, points out how slavery is impoverishing the South.The South is shown to have continuously declined, while the North has made immense gains.In a few years the relation of the South to the North would resemble that of Poland to Russia or of Ireland to England.The author sees no call for any arguments against slavery as an economic system; he would simply bring the earlier characterization of the situation down to date.
Helper differs radically from all earlier speakers and writers in that he outlines a program for definite action.He estimates that for the entire South there are seven white non-slaveholders for every three slaveholders.He would organize these non-slaveholding whites into an independent political party and would hold a general convention of non-slaveholders from every slave State to adopt measures to restrain "the diabolical excesses of the oligarchy" and to annihilate slavery.
Slaveholders should be entirely excluded from any share in government.They should be treated as criminals ostracized from respectable society.He is careful to state, however, that by slaveholder he does not mean such men as Benton of Missouri and many others throughout the slave States who retain the sentiments on the slavery question of the "immortal Fathers of the Republic." He has in mind only the new order of owners, who have determined by criminal methods to inflict the crime of slavery upon an overwhelming majority of their white fellow-citizens.
The publication of "The Impending Crisis" created a profound sensation among Southern leaders.So long as the attack upon the peculiar institution emanated from the North, the defenders had the full benefit of local prejudice and resentment against outside intrusion.Helper was himself a thorough-going believer in state rights.Slavery was to be abolished, as he thought, by the action of the separate States.Here he was in accord with Northern abolitionists.If such literature as Helper's volume should find its way into the South, it would be no longer possible to palm off upon the unthinking public the patent falsehood that abolitionists of the North were attempting to impose by force a change in Southern institutions.All that Southern abolitionists ever asked was the privilege of remaining at home in their own South in the full exercise of their constitutional rights.
Southern leaders were undoubtedly aware of the concurrent publications of travelers and newspaper reporters, of which Olmsted's books were conspicuous examples.Olmsted and Helper were both sources of proof that slavery was bringing the South to financial ruin.The facts were getting hold of the minds of the Southern people.The debate which had been adjourned was on the eve of being resumed.Complete suppression of the new scientific industrial argument against slavery seemed to slave-owners to furnish their only defense.
The Appalachian ranges of mountains drove a wedge of liberty and freedom from Pennsylvania almost to the Gulf.In the upland regions slavery could not flourish.There was always enmity between the planters of the coast and the dwellers on the upland.
The slaveholding oligarchy had always ruled, but the day of the uplanders was at hand.This is the explanation of the veritable panic which Helper's publication created.A debate which should follow the line of this old division between the peoples of the Atlantic slave States would, under existing conditions, be fatal to the institution of slavery.West Virginia did become a free State at the first opportunity.Counties in western North Carolina claim to have furnished a larger proportion of their men to the Union army than any other counties in the country.Had the plan for peaceable emancipation projected by abolitionists been permitted to take its course, the uplands of South Carolina would have been pitted against the lowlands, and Senator Tillman would have appeared as a rampant abolitionist.There might have been violence, but it would have been confined to limited areas in the separate States.Had the crisis been postponed, there surely would have been a revival of abolitionism within the Southern States.Slavery in Missouri was already approaching a crisis.
Southern leaders had long foreseen that the State would abolish slavery if a free State should be established on the western boundary.This was actually taking place.Kansas was filling up with free-state settlers and, by the act of its own citizens, a few years later did abolish slavery.
Republicans naturally made use of Helper's book for party purposes.A cheap abridged edition was brought out.Several Republican leaders were induced to sign their names to a paper commending the publication.Among these was John Sherman of Ohio, who in the organization of the newly elected House of Representatives in 1859 was the leading candidate of the Republicans for the speakership.During the contest the fact that his name was on this paper was made public, and Southern leaders were furious.Extracts were read to prove that the book was incendiary.Millson of Virginia said that "one who consciously, deliberately, and of purpose lends his name and influence to the propagation of such writings is not only not fit to be speaker, but he is not-fit to live." It is one of the ironies of the situation that the passage selected to prove the incendiary character of the book is almost a literal quotation from the debate in the Virginia Legislature of 1832.
