Gabriel. And brian is with the panel transnational perspectives on american slavery and the United States civil war. Brian gabrial. Brian . Well, listen, im so sorry that im not joining you, all of you there in augusta. I wish that i were there, of course, in person. I think we have a nice panel for you. Ill be first with my paper. The second american revolution. Canadian editors and the outbreak of the u. S. Civil war, followed by Matthew Arendt from Texas Christian University and simon vodrey from carlton up in canada. He will have probably a little bit more than what im saying to you in terms of timing. I will time myself. Hub is that okay or is someone timing me off . Brian . Time yourself. Okay. All right. All right. So i think we need to get started here so we can keep things on track. Right. I hope everyone can see this now. Very good. It is sometimes forgotten that the close bond the United States shares with canada is largely a 20th century manifestation. And the signing of the treaty of ghent that ended the war of 1812 through the 19th century, the United States remained adversarial toward canada because it represented an extension of British Colonial power in north america and a land that took Foreign Policy directives from london. As a result, canadians had a mix of antipathy and sympathy for the americans. As the unionist that apart during the winter of secession, through the firing on fort sumter. Americans north and south had their reservations about canada to. In the north, they worried that canada will harbor would harbor southern spies who had hatch plots against the union. Certainly as the war progressed and southern refugees spilled into canada. Certainly among them were southern agents, including John Wilkes Booth and bennett young, who led a stunning 1864 confederate raid into st albans, vermont. And southerners never had much affinity for canada, especially after the 1933 excuse me, 1833 act of parliament that ended slavery in british colonies, including british north america. To further irritate slave owners, most canadians and their press denounced the u. S. Fugitive slave laws, especially the 1850 fugitive slave act. Southerners saw canada as an illegal final stop for escape slaves on the underground railroad and a refuge for detested abolitionists who fled the country. The outbreak of the civil war presented challenges for canadians who relied on diplomatic direction and military military protection from Great Britain. Canadian newspaper editors closely observed and dreaded the advance to the south and what that meant for british north america and for the United States. Looking southward, we see no streak of blue sky. All this gloomy, dark and threatening. George brown, the editor of torontos globe, wrote for months before the showing at fort sumter. He sadly predicted a fierce civil war unlike anything ever experienced on this continent since the inevitable. While many editors like brown, who refer to the United States as a professor of christian and civilized, civilized nation of men, stealers welcome the potential end to slavery. They knew whatever came of the war would not be good. This Research Explores the early days of canadian newspaper coverage in two major English Speaking newspapers, the globe in toronto and the gazette in montreal, and focuses on far more broad areas that emerged in the coverage. The gravity of the crisis, slavery and the causes of disunion. The union and confederate leadership. And finally, the u. S. And british relations and canadian antiamericanism, while canadian canadian liberal editors like george brown tended to support lincoln in his administration. Conservative ones were less supportive of the unions motives. However, both conservative or liberal understood what was at stake and hoped for a peaceful resolution. In toronto, brown, one of canadas liberal leading liberals and a staunch abolitionist who once assisted fugitive slaves to freedom, believed that it was the norths duty to destroy this disgrace, this atrocious system that spread leprosy. Even so, it is so. Even so, the first editor editorial on april 13th in his newspaper after fort sumter said, we are loath to believe that the contest will last long. We fully expect the french societal content will cease when historical facts are thoroughly realized. In montreal, canadas largest city, john lowe and Brown Chamberlain of the gazette, a newspaper with considerable of positions. Similarly feared the worst and the calamity of civil war. Unless checked at once. This war, if it may be termed, will be the most rapid in its movements and most bitter while it lasts of any on record. Without a doubt, seven days later, another gazette editor said, we cannot be indifferent. Spectators of the impending conflict. We cannot feel that any words of ours can influence that result as simply simple spectators. We cannot see one particle of good which can result from a fratricidal war. As for the labor and the causes of disunion, canadian editors generally abhorred slavery. But conservative ones tended to hold southern actions in a more sympathetic light, seeing their struggle as one over northern economical oppression than slavery. The editorial position at the gazette viewed this as a southern fight for liberty, believing the south as having every right to secede, just as the american colonies had a right to declare their independence from Great Britain. A series of items in the april 16th edition, ill show straight this and shed a more positive light on the events at sumter. Readers learned how bells were ringing in mary peel and the people were engaged in every demonstration of joy after the shelling of the fort. An editorial the following day referred to fort sumter as a glorious affair in which such splendid courage and daring were displayed and nobody hurt. It asserted that if the south, another editorial asserted, if the south is thoroughly and earnest, it cannot be conquered by the north. While the newspaper sympathized with the south, they did not support slavery as as a published remark. On april 15th suggested the death blow to slavery on this continent was struck in charleston, south carolina, on daybreak on friday by its most devoted advocates and friends. The slave owners, george brown, also likened events to the revolutionary war, but penned the cause of disunion squarely on slavery. Back when . Brown back in january, when brown heard a false report that fighting had begun, he wrote the first shot has been fired in the second american revolution. How strangely it sounds, how different the motive. He continued in seven 1876, it was to secure freedom, to vindicate and uphold the rights of man. In 11, it is to secure the institution of slavery, to render it impossible that for millions of men should receive their rights. The first had reason a justice and the sympathies of freemen everywhere, even in a country invaded, in the country Whose Authority was about to be thrown off on its side, and it succeeded. The second had has neier reason nor justice nor humanity, nor the sympathies of the free, nor the prayers of the good and its behalf. And it must fail. Union and confederate leadership. The Canadian Press initially viewed lincoln as weak as his predecessor, James Buchanan brown, who supported lincoln even but even once referred to him as a fourth great lawyer and said that mostly positive things about him as being the representative of the norths great fight against slavery. If mr. Lincoln is for war, then let him say so. In the loyal and loyal north will back him to death. The north has a noble cause to fight for, as any for which blood has ever been shed. Every motive which impels men to do well is do well and bravely is theirs. If they stand as nobly by their cause as their causes noble, they cannot fail of success. Another editorial the end of the first act, appeared a week later, observing president lincoln seems to have made up his mind as to the future course and will probably pursue it with firmness and energy. Another on the 20th said that the cause of which mr. Lincoln is to represent it is a noble one. Brown defended the lincoln and his administration against new york editors who did not saying they are making themselves ridiculous by abusing lincoln, scott and seward for errors which they alleged to have committed it in the conduct of affairs. Notably, the conservative gazette in montreal hardly mentioned lincoln, referring to him only as the president and not by name. In the days before, forts sumter, the newspaper said little about the u. S. President or his response to the brewing tensions in charleston. The notable exception was an unflattering april 10th item from the correspondent of the montreal gazette. Readers learned new yorks apparent new new yorkers apparent attitudes toward lincoln. Almost everybody here pities old abe. The poor man is frightened. Have to death. It is regarded as evident that he does not know his own mind. The correspondent also said that new york women have more concern about fashion than war. The ladies are upset if war breaks out, it will be very difficult for them to obtain obtain new fashions from paris, which of course, would be a serious matter. They talk about presenting an address to their seceding sisters of the south. Asking as pathetically as possible whether they are prepared to sanction a course which might cause a paris bonnet to be six months in reaching this country. Confederate president Jefferson Davis received even less notice in the two papers. The gazette reported on april 23rd, 29th, that Jefferson Davis was about ready to march on washington. An editorial in the globe also mentioned davis by name, saying there was something mysterious about the disappearance of present jeff davis from the scene. While the editorial quotes disclosed to reader that davis had been ill, it also observed nobody should set up in the trade of rebellion who is not proof against the ailments of humanity. Canadian newspaper editors had long memories of u. S. Aggression against british north america, and they waited for britains reaction to the war in america. As england weighed diplomat recognition of the south. An april 20th editorial in the globe said that the United States and Great Britain have not enjoyed a Good Relationship and observed america would take advantage of the weakest weakness of our mother country and Great Britain face two similar crises. Likewise, in an editorial on the may 25th present criticizing members of the northern news press upset that the british didnt take a stronger stand against the southern privateers, reminding them that the United States never supported england in time, apparel or disaster, or when the ties of kindred should have found them to her side. Further, it noted how often britons are of trouble was seized upon as an opportune time to bully, thwart and vex her and to exert unfair concessions from her. English speaking canadians, especially men like brown, were loyal to the crown and did not admire americas form of government or americans and their grandstanding. The workers entered an editorial opportunity to express some antiamerican sentiment and delineate cultural differences between the two. By aprils end, for example, george brown suggested in the editorial, not without its drawbacks, that american democracy had limits. One of the results of the republican form of government is to develop to a greater extent than any other than under any other system. The individuality of the people composing the nation. American believe they can be president. But the problem is they are taking actions and criticizing their leader without much regard to brown. There was no surer or shorter way to anarchy. A may 37th Globe Editorial commemorating Queen Victorias birthday compared american with canadians by saying, while we admire the voted ness to the union of the people of the northern states, we are glad we are not them. We are glad we do not belong to a country torn by intestine divisions. We are not a demonstrative people. There is little spread eagle ism in our composition. Finally, a may 27th editorial called british interference had a noticeably antiamerican tone. The americans imagine themselves such an almighty nation that when a government meets their wishes, they attribute it to the fear of their wrath. They imagine in their presence, the needs of the mightiest must knocked together from the very terror. The writer observed, americans are not a people bound by any authority. Whatever right or wrong it should be in accordance with their interests or prejudices. Eventually, in conclusion, in canadas official political and diplomatic diplomatic position about the civil war was settled on may 13, when Queen Victoria issued a proclamation of neutrality. While the proclamation determined canada and englands International Stance toward the union and confederacy, Canadian Newspapers continued voicing their concerns about what was happening to the south. But they werent the only newspapers paying attention. Nearly six weeks after the firing on fort sumter for example, the times of london correspondents provided this observation for london readers. The Great Southern rebellion is believed here without whether justly or unjustly, to be the result of a conspiracy to overthrow the free institutions of the United States. When they shall cease to be perverted for the uses of filibustering and the extension of slave slavery. Im going to end here. But there is one more blurb about their excerpt that you can see from the times. But i want to just end by saying as a result, a made Many Americans dont realize this, but as a result of the civil war that canada confederated actually became, start becoming its own country in 1867. And thats a topic for another discussion. Thank you very much. And did you go next to introduce you to your next panelist, please . Our next panel panelist is Matthew Arendt from Texas Christian University. Matt, ill let you introduce your own to your own title. Thank you, brian. And my topic is the spirit of 74, a methodism and slavery. And so i just want to say first, i wish i could be at the symposium, but to everybody whos here for the first time, welcome. Its a great experience. Now, without further ado, i just want to get into my presentation. So on march fourth, 1850, john calhoun would deliver what would be his final speech in the senate. He has two colleagues delivered on his behalf because he was too sick and elderly at that point. And his speech looks at two key concepts. He looks first at while hes discussing what was came to be known as the compromise of 1850. Hes looking at how can we save the union . But then the second question, arguably more consequential is how did the union even get to that point in the first place . And on the latter question, calhoun blamed abolitionism, believing that it had sundered what he called the cords that bind the states together. Now, these cords were in John Calhouns perspective. They were political, social and religious institutions, which bound northern and southerners together into a common union. But in calhouns telling, he said, the first of these cords, which snapped, was that of the powerful Methodist Episcopal Church. Now, calhoun surprised that the Methodist Church was the first one to split was and contribute to the sexual rift. Warrens greater examination because the Methodist Episcopal Church was americas Largest Church at that point in time. In the 1840s before it split in 1844. But it was more than just a national church. It was, as David Hampton is aptly called it, an empire of the spirit. It was an international tional movement that began as a Reform Movement within the church of england in the 1700s, spread to the United States in after the formation of United States and sent missionaries across the globe. Methodism had a complicated relationship with slavery, but its fundamentally antislavery sentiment made it a logical first step in america for heading down the road to secession and civil war. So today im going to examine the denominations antislavery origins under john wesley, how his legacy continued through the denominations first magazine, the armenian magazine. The divergence between british and american methodists and how they would felt it was best to address the problem of slavery and how the religious press offers us a window into why british methodist might have not been so vocally critical of their american compatriots as to not pushing against slavery as aggressively as they might have liked. And so were going to start with john wesley, because hes famous for being a theologian, for being the founder of methodism. But he was also, in many ways, a social reformer. And in 1774, so two years before the declaration of independence, wesley published his own critique of the slave trade. This is 15 years before the great wilberforce brought slavery to the forefront of british politics and his work in 1774 was called thoughts upon slavery. Wesley, though, didnt just attack the slave trade. He condemned slave holding and racism, too, and linked them into what he termed this complicated villainy. Wesley, in his disciples, saw slavery as this complicated villainy, as they put it, because it combined a host of other evils. Wesley call said fraud, theft, murder were a