What do you think?
Rate this book
Who Freed the Slaves?: The Fight over the Thirteenth Amendment
In the popular imagination, slavery in the United States ended with Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation. The Proclamation may have been limited―freeing only slaves within Confederate states who were able to make their way to Union lines―but it is nonetheless generally seen as the key moment, with Lincoln’s leadership setting into motion a train of inevitable events that culminated in the passage of an outright the Thirteenth Amendment.
The real story, however, is much more complicated―and dramatic―than that. With Who Freed the Slaves? , distinguished historian Leonard L. Richards tells the little-known story of the battle over the Thirteenth Amendment, and of James Ashley, the unsung Ohio congressman who proposed the amendment and steered it to passage. Taking readers to the floor of Congress and the back rooms where deals were made, Richards brings to life the messy process of legislation―a process made all the more complicated by the bloody war and the deep-rooted fear of black emancipation. We watch as Ashley proposes, fine-tunes, and pushes the amendment even as Lincoln drags his feet, only coming aboard and providing crucial support at the last minute. Even as emancipation became the law of the land, Richards shows, its opponents were already regrouping, beginning what would become a decades-long―and largely successful―fight to limit the amendment’s impact.
Who Freed the Slaves? is a masterwork of American history, presenting a surprising, nuanced portrayal of a crucial moment for the nation, one whose effects are still being felt today.
The real story, however, is much more complicated―and dramatic―than that. With Who Freed the Slaves? , distinguished historian Leonard L. Richards tells the little-known story of the battle over the Thirteenth Amendment, and of James Ashley, the unsung Ohio congressman who proposed the amendment and steered it to passage. Taking readers to the floor of Congress and the back rooms where deals were made, Richards brings to life the messy process of legislation―a process made all the more complicated by the bloody war and the deep-rooted fear of black emancipation. We watch as Ashley proposes, fine-tunes, and pushes the amendment even as Lincoln drags his feet, only coming aboard and providing crucial support at the last minute. Even as emancipation became the law of the land, Richards shows, its opponents were already regrouping, beginning what would become a decades-long―and largely successful―fight to limit the amendment’s impact.
Who Freed the Slaves? is a masterwork of American history, presenting a surprising, nuanced portrayal of a crucial moment for the nation, one whose effects are still being felt today.
320 pages, Hardcover
First published March 23, 2015
14 people are currently reading
96 people want to read
About the author
Leonard L. Richards
12 books4 followersLeonard L. Richards, Ph.D. (University of California, Davis, 1968; A.B., University of California, Berkeley), is Professor Emeritus of History in the College of Humanities & Fine Arts at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, focusing on 19th century United States. He has also taught at San Francisco State College and the University of Hawaii. His
The Life and Times of Congressman John Quincy Adams
was a Pulitzer Prize finalist in 1987.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
July 23, 2015
This is an excellent historical overview of Congress's approval of the Thirteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, which abolished slavery throughout the land, as well as the politics and calculations involved in getting the Amendment ratified by 3/4 of the States. This work focuses on the indefatigable Representative James Ashley, a Radical Republican representing Toledo, Ohio, in Congress, who ushered the resolution approving the Amendment to its requisite 2/3 approval in the House of Representatives on January 31, 1865, despite its prior rejection by that body in 1864, and opposition from almost all Northern "Copperhead" Democrats (those who were sympathetic to the Confederacy and sought peace and reunion at any price), a majority of Northern "War" Democrats (those who fully supported the Union's aims in suppressing the rebellion), and virtually all of the border-state Unionists who had previously been Whigs. The resolution to approve the Amendment had easily passed the Senate by a 2/3 majority in late 1864, as it was safely in Republican hands, so there wasn't much drama to that phase of the process, although this work gives a good, succinct retelling of that as well. If you've seen the wonderful movie "Lincoln" and want to know what actually happened, read this book, along with Michael Vorenberg's "Final Freedom." Although Richards gives most of the credit to Ashley and his fellow Radical Republicans in the House, while Vorenberg concludes that several Northern "War" Democrats played a very constructive role in assuring the House's approval, the two books together give a fairly complete narrative of events during the crucial years of 1863-1865.
February 14, 2018
An excellent account of the fight in Congress to pass the 13th Amendment, focusing primarily on work in the House. The nature of Congressional sessions in the 19th century and the relative ease of passage through the Senate makes matters a little disjointed. It would have been useful to have shown a bit more about the black experience of the fight, even though there was no direct participation
January 5, 2021
This was the free ebook-of-the-month from UCP for November of this year, and certainly not something I would have gotten around to reading otherwise. That said, in light of the present debates and demonstrations regarding civil rights and Black Lives Matter, it is a very interesting look into a period when when black lives decidedly did not matter even to most abolitionists, and when white supremacists made absolutely no bones about the "fact" of white supremacy, proudly standing behind that now-odious descriptor.
The narrative focuses on radical abolitionist congressman James Mitchell Ashley, of whom I had never heard despite my several American History classes over the course of my schooling, including one college-level course that was supposed to be Reconstruction to Present and spent 2/3 of its time on Reconstruction because the professor was a Civil War buff. There was plenty of vaguely familiar material surrounding—Lincoln, of course, far more ambivalent than even the contrarian fashion of today reminds us, along with Chase; Grant and eventually Sherman, and the rest of the generals of both sides; the unhelpful Tammany Hall, and naturally the unimpressed Frederick Douglass—but the scale of the sheer cynicism of the Emancipation Proclamation and the outright corruption involved in the political game in that era definitely was not covered as such in primary, secondary, or undergraduate academia, and positively reeks of sausage from all sides.
The most surprising takeaways for me, however, were (a) just how bitterly fought all of this was from far more than just the black-and-white, North-vs-South, abolitionist-against-slaver binary story that history typically portrays, and (b) how little effect the amendment had as a result of allowing rich southern slavers, unreconstructed confederate rebels, and inveterate white supremacists from both political parties and every state and territory to resume governance of the barely-restored so-called Union. Clearly, we continue to pay the price for these "compromises" and missteps today.
The one thing I didn't like, and for which I only take off one star since it is a common problem with sprawling historical material, was the see-saw progression of the narrative over time. In order to unravel the complex threads, the author has continually to follow a line through to a later date, only to have to reel back to an earlier point in the story again in the next chapter. This makes the interconnections rather difficult to follow, but I suppose to some extent in cannot be helped when dealing with such a tangled, if focused, topic.
The narrative focuses on radical abolitionist congressman James Mitchell Ashley, of whom I had never heard despite my several American History classes over the course of my schooling, including one college-level course that was supposed to be Reconstruction to Present and spent 2/3 of its time on Reconstruction because the professor was a Civil War buff. There was plenty of vaguely familiar material surrounding—Lincoln, of course, far more ambivalent than even the contrarian fashion of today reminds us, along with Chase; Grant and eventually Sherman, and the rest of the generals of both sides; the unhelpful Tammany Hall, and naturally the unimpressed Frederick Douglass—but the scale of the sheer cynicism of the Emancipation Proclamation and the outright corruption involved in the political game in that era definitely was not covered as such in primary, secondary, or undergraduate academia, and positively reeks of sausage from all sides.
The most surprising takeaways for me, however, were (a) just how bitterly fought all of this was from far more than just the black-and-white, North-vs-South, abolitionist-against-slaver binary story that history typically portrays, and (b) how little effect the amendment had as a result of allowing rich southern slavers, unreconstructed confederate rebels, and inveterate white supremacists from both political parties and every state and territory to resume governance of the barely-restored so-called Union. Clearly, we continue to pay the price for these "compromises" and missteps today.
The one thing I didn't like, and for which I only take off one star since it is a common problem with sprawling historical material, was the see-saw progression of the narrative over time. In order to unravel the complex threads, the author has continually to follow a line through to a later date, only to have to reel back to an earlier point in the story again in the next chapter. This makes the interconnections rather difficult to follow, but I suppose to some extent in cannot be helped when dealing with such a tangled, if focused, topic.
May 7, 2019
This is an excellent book detailing the Congressional and political fight leading to the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment. Although the number of actors, states, and issues discussed by the author are substantial, he does a remarkable job avoiding confusion and telling a riveting story.
If you are a Lincoln fan, as I am, the story is difficult to read. In trying not to offend border states, Lincoln was usually willing to sacrifie the hoped-for rights of the enslaved population in exchange for keeping the border states in the Union. While Lincoln likely would have been far superior than Andrew Johnson in protecting the rights of freedman after the war had he not been assassinated, his legacy is diminished by the record. His most lasting accomplishment was, of course, what Frederick Douglass noted was Lincoln's refusal to retreat from the Emancipation Proclamation once he signed it.
If you are a Lincoln fan, as I am, the story is difficult to read. In trying not to offend border states, Lincoln was usually willing to sacrifie the hoped-for rights of the enslaved population in exchange for keeping the border states in the Union. While Lincoln likely would have been far superior than Andrew Johnson in protecting the rights of freedman after the war had he not been assassinated, his legacy is diminished by the record. His most lasting accomplishment was, of course, what Frederick Douglass noted was Lincoln's refusal to retreat from the Emancipation Proclamation once he signed it.
August 2, 2019
Wonderfully enlightening read...
Most popular books I've read about this period have, for me, failed to provide sufficient context to feel as though I've understood the motives of all sides. But this book proved rich with explanations of ambitions, events and agendas that helped build a larger picture.
It also provides sufficient references to support the view that Ashley deserved more credit for pushing the slow and painful progress of emancipation during this time.
Lincoln is also presented by a fuller and more rounded treatment that avoids any over-hype.
This can be a difficult read at times as it's not presented in a completely linear temporal ordering. So it helps to notice that people or events are often unravelled along their 'micro-timelines' before returning back to the action.
Well worth the effort.
Most popular books I've read about this period have, for me, failed to provide sufficient context to feel as though I've understood the motives of all sides. But this book proved rich with explanations of ambitions, events and agendas that helped build a larger picture.
It also provides sufficient references to support the view that Ashley deserved more credit for pushing the slow and painful progress of emancipation during this time.
Lincoln is also presented by a fuller and more rounded treatment that avoids any over-hype.
This can be a difficult read at times as it's not presented in a completely linear temporal ordering. So it helps to notice that people or events are often unravelled along their 'micro-timelines' before returning back to the action.
Well worth the effort.
April 7, 2020
Fascinating overview of the history around the 13th Amendment, with deep exploration of related issues.
December 22, 2022
As early as 1856, James Ashley, an Ohio Representative, proposed an amendment to the Constitution that would outlaw slavery. Leonard L. Richards' "Who Freed the Slaves?" chronicles Ashley's indefatigable efforts to end slavery and advance civil rights. Richards provides the reader with a lively look at the labyrinthine legislative machinations orchestrated by Ashley, and others, to effect passage of the 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The son of a Campbellite preacher, Ashley had abolitionist blood coursing through his veins. He aided and abetted fugitive slaves as early as 1839. To avoid prosecution under the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, Ashley and his wife fled their native Kentucky, and took refuge in free Ohio. Unlike other radical abolitionists, Ashley entered practical politics and actually got things done; in essence, he forsook rhetoric in order to enact positive law.
Not all of Ashley's dreams became reality; his management of the Johnson impeachment proved to be a bridge too far. Nevertheless, Representative Ashley acted out of conviction, and, for the most part, followed the better angels of our nature.
Richards does an excellent job finding an element of human interest in a subject beset with arcane procedural maneuvering. Indubitably, Ashley and his like minded colleagues were disappointed by the breakdown of Reconstruction; however, they fought the good fight, and cared not that they failed to garner the appreciation they so richly deserved. An excellent book, well worth reading.
The son of a Campbellite preacher, Ashley had abolitionist blood coursing through his veins. He aided and abetted fugitive slaves as early as 1839. To avoid prosecution under the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, Ashley and his wife fled their native Kentucky, and took refuge in free Ohio. Unlike other radical abolitionists, Ashley entered practical politics and actually got things done; in essence, he forsook rhetoric in order to enact positive law.
Not all of Ashley's dreams became reality; his management of the Johnson impeachment proved to be a bridge too far. Nevertheless, Representative Ashley acted out of conviction, and, for the most part, followed the better angels of our nature.
Richards does an excellent job finding an element of human interest in a subject beset with arcane procedural maneuvering. Indubitably, Ashley and his like minded colleagues were disappointed by the breakdown of Reconstruction; however, they fought the good fight, and cared not that they failed to garner the appreciation they so richly deserved. An excellent book, well worth reading.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews