Bleeding Minnesota

In the 1850s, Senator Stephen A. Douglas had argued in favor of popular sovereignty, a system where the people of a state would decide whether slavery would be legal or not.  This idea was tested with the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act.  Though both states were north of the previously agreed upon 36th parallel, the act allowed them to organize how they chose.  Unsurprisingly (well, it must have been a surprise to Douglas & President Franklin Pierce), abolitionists and pro-slave forces flooded into Kansas.  Murder and mayhem followed: Bleeding Kansas.  John Brown was quite active, gaining his fame or infamy depending on one's point of view.  It is agreed that this was a big step on the way to Civil War.

Today, the question is illegal immigration.  Again, we have a popular sovereignty where some states encourage illegal immigration and protect those immigrants from deportation.  The term Sanctuary City goes back decades.  There are many who are strongly opposed to illegal immigration.  Unlike the case in the 19th Century where slavery was not only legal, but Constitutional, illegal immigration is clearly illegal.  There is no argument in favor on the basis of law.  Sanctuary cities have always been enabling lawlessness, which the federal government has tolerated to varying degrees.

Just as the slavery question grew more and more contentious as the 19th century progressed, the issue of illegal immigration has done the same.  One could argue that Donald Trump won both his elections on that issue alone.  Trump is to illegal immigration what Lincoln was to slavery.  Why is illegal immigration so important to those who support it?  They would claim human decency.  That is no more convincing than when slave owners declared their slaves to be too stupid to take care of themselves.  No, there are several benefits.  First, illegals count in the census, which is why there was such a ruckus when Trump tried to get a question about legal status on the 2020 Census.  If one accepts the long-stated 12 million illegals, that is 16 seats in the House of Representatives, even if illegals don't vote.  If they do vote (and many have), they are going to reliably vote for the pro-illegal immigrant party (i.e., Democrats).  Then there is the money.  As has been exposed with the Somali daycares, a lot of money is supporting illegals in America.  How much of that gets kicked back to political campaigns or activism?

Much as the American South had built a culture on exploiting slaves, the Democratic Party of today has built a system that exploits illegal immigrants.  Like the slave, the immigrant doesn't have recourse to law; he will be deported.  The illegal immigrant is just a variation of the same old Democratic playbook: cheap labor and greater electoral representation.  Just as they resorted to violence to protect and extend slavery in Kansas, they are resorting to violence in Minnesota.  ICE represents the abolitionists.

The Last White House Slaves

Zachary Taylor was the 12th president and the last slave owner to be elected.  Born in Virginia in 1784 and raised in Kentucky, Taylor joined the military in 1808.  One feature of the US Army in the era was that officers could apply for additional pay to hire a servant; this was to give officers the appearance of gentlemen with valets, cooks, etc.  Slave owning officers could keep the pay for themselves.  Yeah, that's not going to be abused.  Taylor first applied for the additional pay in 1817 when he was a major posted in Green Bay, Illinois Territory (yes, Illinois, not Wisconsin).  Of course, in 1817, slavery was illegal in the territories.  Nonetheless, despite spending decades stationed at forts in the western territories, Taylor took his slaves with him.   When Taylor moved from Baton Rouge, LA, to Washington DC, he brought at least one - and probably several - slaves with him.  His chief slave, Charles Porter, whom he inherited from his father, died at the White House in July 1849.  The presence of other slaves is unclear but highly likely.  

The book is most concerned with the life of Jane, who is first documented as Taylor's slave in 1820. Jane - a mulatto slave - was listed on his reimbursement form while he was posted in Louisiana.  She was last listed on his reimbursement form in 1849.  Depending on rank, officers had a limit to how many "servants" they could claim for reimbursement; for reasons of propriety, female slaves were often omitted.  When Jane is listed, she is usually the last name on the form.  It was an open secret that female slaves were often concubines for their male owners.  Considering that, it is of note that Jane had two children, a son named William and a daughter named Caroline.  Each of them - also listed as mulattos, appear on Taylor's or his son-in-law's reimbursement forms.  In 1862, Lincoln proposed reimbursing slave owners rather than outright emancipation.  The plan was instituted in Washington DC.  Among those for whom freedom was purchased by the government were Jane and her daughter, Caroline; Taylor's daughter was still living in DC and had inherited the two in 1852.  Jane's son, William, had relocated to Canada in advance of Taylor's inauguration as president.  Bachman posits that William looked so much like Old Zach that it would be highly embarrassing to have him around.  In the final chapter, Bachman details the account of Bill Taylor (1944-2013) who stated that his ancestor, William Taylor, had been Zachary Taylor's son and slave.

The book is short but provides insight into the antebellum military in general and the Taylor family in particular.  Recommended.