-1-

Abiturjahrgang 2008/2010

Gymnasium Neustadt an der Waldnaab

Facharbeit in Englisch

“Is the existence of the United States of America legal?”

von Martin Sommer, K13

 -2-

Contents page

Title Page ............................................................................................................................1

Contents ............................................................................................................................2

Outline ..............................................................................................................................3

Text …..................................................................................................................................4

Annotations …...................................................................................................................21

Index ….............................................................................................................................22

Declaration of Authorship …..............................................................................................23

 -3-

Outline page

1. Introduction ….....................................................................................................4
2. Sources of Law ….................................................................................................4
2.1 Human Rights ….............................................................................................4
2.2 International Law …......................................................................................5
3. The Indians ..…....................................................................................................7
3.1 Overview on the conflict between the whites and the Indians ....................7
3.2 Violation of Law .…........................................................................................9
3.2.1 Violation of Human Rights before the foundation of the USA .............9
3.2.2 Violation of Human Rights after the foundation of the USA …............11
3.2.3 Breaches of own treaties …..................................................................12
3.3 Justification (“Manifest Destiny”) …..............................................................13
4. Slavery ….............................................................................................................14
4.1 Overview on Slavery …..................................................................................14
4.2 Breaches of Law ….........................................................................................16
4.3 Justifications …..............................................................................................18
4.4 Aftermath (Lynchings) …...............................................................................18
5. Conclusion ….......................................................................................................20
 -4-

1. Introduction

The subject of my thesis , “Is the existence of the United States of America legal?” , is a thrilling
but controversial topic.
From the point Columbus reached America to the point the USA was founded, non-whites were
exploited, offended against and exterminated. This exploitation, however, did not end with the
foundation of the USA but kept on to the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in 1865 (when
Slavery was abolished) and to the termination policy in the 1950s which led to the removal of all
state responsibility concerning Indian society and gave the natives the right to live as normal
U.S. citizens. The consequences of these events do, however, still extent into our modern times
as discrimination nowadays closes the gap between historical facts mentioned in my thesis and
current affairs.

The main reason I chose this topic is that its core is about the understanding of the way humans
have reacted when facing other civilizations, thus different cultures and ethical values, and in
what way they justify their deeds afterwards.
Our moral values today teach us that meeting other cultures needs to be encountered with a
bilateral convergence. For us, the understanding of each others' way of life is more important
than anything else, in order to live together in peace and harmony. But in this regard the
approach couldn't have been more different than it was those centuries ago. Even though
human rights were often claimed at these times , white men always found a way around them if
the person was a black slave or a Native American.
After in-depth research about this topic, I now do think I can showcase my results.

2. Sources of Law
2.1 Human Rights

Definition : Human Rights are basic rights and freedoms to which all humans are entitled 1
Its concept assumes that every man, only because of being human, is provided with equal rights
that are indisputable and unalterable. The development of Human Rights is closely related to
humanism (an ideology that pursues dignity and values for every human) and to the idea of
natural justice (the notion of the existence of rights for everyone).

As Human Rights belong to subjective law they can only be claimed if embedded in
constitutions or international treaties. Then human rights are often named basic rights.
 -5-

History : As far back as antiquity goes, there have been ambitions to implement "human
rights“-alike principles for the foundation of states. The introduction of democracy in Athens
with a restricted universal suffrage (women and slaves were excluded) was a sign of this
progress. More evidence of this development was the philosophy of the Stoa that claimed rights
for all the people of ancient Rome.

In the Age of Enlightenment (17th - 18th century) several philosophers, such as Thomas Hobbes,
John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Immanuel Kant shaped the idea of Human Rights.
John Locke claimed that every man has certain rights and those are to be protected by the state.
This suggestion was then seized by Thomas Jefferson and implemented in the Declaration of
Independence in 1766. Indispensable values such as life, freedom and the pursuit of happiness
were written down.

Back to the thesis : As I mentioned earlier Human Rights can only be claimed if committed to
paper and this is the fact with the law of the United States of America.
The first evidence for this is George Mason's "Virginia Declaration of Rights“ which provided
certain Human Rights to the people of the State of Virginia.
This script (signed in 1776 unanimously) had later on a great influence on the Bill of Rights, the
first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America, and therefore
represented a guarantee of Human Rights to the people of the USA.

2.2 International Law

Definition : International Law is a term used to refer to a regulation between states in order to
acknowledge certain values and standards. These explicit or implicit agreements do, however,
primarily concern states, rather than individuals.

Moreover, International Law is divided into three distinct principles :

• Public International Law that governs the relationship between states and
intergovernmental organizations (to a lesser degree with individuals ,too)
• Private International Law that regulates lawsuits of states that involve a "foreign“ law
element which can cause different judgments to be made
• In Supranational Law nations explicitly submit their rights to a common set of
institutions, that can override individual decisions (i.e. European Community Law)
 -6-

Back to the thesis : Due to the definition itself I had to pick out the aspect of international law
that touches my thesis.
As Private International Law and Supranational Law base on the existence of (at least) two
sovereign states , which has never been the fact between the Indians and the white settlers,
they can't be employed in a reasoning.
Even though Public International Law primarily concerns states and intergovernmental
organizations (which the Indians are neither), it also concerns Individuals to a lesser degree and
this fact can be utilized in my thesis. I will therefore only go into more details with Public
International Law.

Scope of Public International Law : As Public International Law assumes states to have
control over territory, they are also obliged with the treatment of the individuals inside their
state boundaries. Group rights, such as the rights of refugees, and human rights administration
are therefore bound to the state. It further on includes the rights of maintaining peace and
security, as well as a regulation of the use of force. These aspects are closely related to my thesis
and my argumentation will later found on these facts.

Breaches of International law do , however, raise difficult questions for lawyers, as international
law has no established compulsory judicial system. There are , however, international tribunals
in certain areas that govern aspects such as Human Rights and Trade.

History of Public International Law : Early International Law goes back to the 8th century
when Muhammad al-Shaybani, a jurist of Islamic law, introduced the term "law of nations“
which covered the application of Islamic ethics, Islamic jurisprudence and Islamic military
jurisprudence on international affairs, including the regulation of the treatment of hostages,
diplomats, refugees and prisoners of war.
First European treatises on International Law (which were largely influenced by early Islamic
International Law) followed much later in the 16th and 17th century by Francesco de Vitoria and
Hugo Grotius. Perhaps the first instrument of modern public international law was the Lieber
Code , passed in 1863 by the Congress of the United States of America, that should govern the
conduct of US Forces during the Civil War. It was considered as the first written recitation of
rules and articles of war adhered to all nations.

Problems regarding International Law in my thesis : As Public International law is largely

based on international treaties , that are implicitly between states, one can only argument with
 -7-

general principles of law at these times (that refer to the ideology of the settlers) and point out
breaches of own treaties.

3. The Indians
3.1 Overview on the conflict between the whites and the Indians

“ Where are [...] the other tribes of our people? They have vanished before the avarice
and the oppression of the whites , as snow before a summer sun.” 2

It all began in 1492 when Christopher Columbus, a Genoese navigator, landed with his crew in
San Salvador, an island in the Bahamas, southwest of America. Out of curiosity they were
warmly welcomed by the indigenous people of the Taino tribe and presents were exchanged.
Columbus gave these people the name "indios“ and praised them as the most peaceful and
best nation in the world.
Unfortunately, as early as that one fact adumbrated the relationship between whites and Native
Americans: Columbus added in his log book that these natives would make good slaves.
Moreover Columbus took their way of life as a sign of weakness and mentioned that "[those]
people should be made to work in order to adapt European ways“ 3

The early years : As there were many tribes, isolated from each other, and as there were
different waves of Europeans coming to America from different points, there were always
unique and diverse ways of contact.
Most Spaniards were rather forceful when dealing with Indian affairs, in comparison to the
Englishmen. This rather subtle way of contact used by the Englishmen, in order to secure peace,
4
included even crowning an Indian chieftain. After even the daughter of this King “Powhatan”
married an Englishmen, no Indian dared to speak out against the settlers. The resentment of
individuals against the intruders turned around, however, after their chieftain died. Now they
tried to push the settlers back. The consequences of this attempt were 8000 Indians killed
within a few weeks. Howsoever every contact started, the end was always the same: conflicts ;
bloodshed ; extinction.

When in the beginning Indian rituals were still attended by whites , in order to appear
respectful, later no white person cared about such things, especially when the settlers came to
America in thousands. The Indians had to be pushed back.

Acculturation and Segregation : When in 1776 the Declaration of Independence was signed
 -8-

by the thirteen former British colonies Indian affairs became a governmental issue, thus stopped
being treated individually from state to state. At these times various individuals suggested a
policy of acculturation , mainly because most whites acknowledged it as their duty, willed by
God, to turn these “pagan savages” into modern, progressive Christians.
The first to mention a plan to do so was George Washington, the first president of the USA, who
developed a plan with the ulterior motive of Indians benefiting from the whites' expansion to
the west. This concept was primarily based on two cornerstones : Civilization and Assimilation.
This policy of George Washington and his second successor Thomas Jefferson, who adopted his
point of view, did however fail because of the difficulties of the assimilation progress and
due to the whites' preference to focus on seizing the whole country.
The more the Indians were pushed back to the the west, the more their discourage rose and
wars between whites and Indians became inevitable. The policy of assimilation was now
succeeded by a policy of segregation. First evidence of this change in politics was the Indian
Removal Act that passed through the congress on May 28th 1830 . It authorized the president of
the United States of America to set districts west of the Mississippi to be Indian territory. The
Indians should relocate there.

Introduction of Reservations : This also called permanent border did not exist for long
though, the reason being thousands of immigrants coming to America, founding new states
west of the Mississippi, thus making the land for the Indians narrow. The new solution to this
problem was called “reservations” : areas in which the Indians could live under military
protection. They ought to stay there until they were ready for American civilization .
These reservations were governed by the BIA (Bureau of Indian Affairs), a section of the
Department of the Interior. From then on, Indian Policy was shaped under each president's rule,
and by the head of the BIA.

With cultural pluralism gaining more and more influence since the early 1930s, laws changed
and so were laws concerning Indian society. The Indian Reorganization Act is therefore an
example of some concessions, regarding people of different colors, that were made. It banned
the parceling of reservations and took a different approach: the Indians were to gain political,
economical and cultural independence. By these means they were supposed to form a local
government as well as well-working enterprises.
 -9-

An era of dissolution was ushered in the 1950s with the House Concurrent Resolution 108
passing the congress. This act meant a removal of all state responsibility concerning Indian
society. From then on Indians should be treated as normal US-citizens.

Self-Determination Act and present situation : In 1968 the Indian Self-Determination Act
came into being, an act to return all rights to the Indians. The different kinds of tribes deal
diversely with this change. Some, mostly those who come from the Middle West, try to live
according to their old culture. Those tribes mostly live in poverty because asides from horse-
and buffalo breeding , there are no traditional sources of income left.

Other Indians introduced casinos that are, outside of reservation territory, often forbidden.
Therefore, especially if there is no white competition, those enterprises make millions. These
fortunes are then mostly used in order to improve their tribe's members' social situations or to
repurchase stolen land.

Furthermore, during the last decades lawsuits of Indians (mostly in order to regain land) have
become more and more successful. Today's legal system opens more ways for Indians to address
their former injustices. Their situation is also acknowledged by the present government :
President Obama recently enforced compensatory damages in the amount of 3.4 Billion USD.

3.2 Violation of Law

3.2.1 Violation of Human Rights before the foundation of the USA

The genocide of the Native American : The breaches of human rights began just at the point
the settlers came to America.
Out of the three main streams of incoming settlers only the French , that came from the north,
tried to live in peace with the Indians and traded goods. The other other two main streams (the
Spaniards and the Anglo-Americans) were cruel from the moment they got into contact with the
Indians. The Anglo-Americans began immediately with extincting, thus immediately breaching
the most important human right, the right to life.

Curiously it was Christianity and its tenets that refrained the Anglo-Americans from having

pricks of conscience. They referred to the Bible verses "Therefore go and make disciples of all
nations, baptizing them“ 5 and "Fill the earth and subdue it! Rule over [...] every creature that
moves on the ground “ 6
 - 10 -

These verses legitimated their cruelty and their efforts in killing every Indian that refused
Christianity (therefore violating against freedom of religion).
Often Indian tribes reacted to this bloodshed with the scalping of whites (often innocent
settlers). As a consequence the hatred between whites and the Indians grew and grew.

In order to reduce the numbers of the Native Americans even more, the whites did not only
fight wars against them : Indians were often used as “pawns” to fight along the settlers.
Evidence for this is the Seven Year's War , in which the French fought against the British. In this
war the Indians were used as freelancers that fought on both sides!

Furthermore thousands of Indians were wiped out because of bacterial diseases, such as the
smallpox, that were introduced by the European settlers. As the whites became aware of these
cases, biological warfare (in the first time of history) was used in order to diminish the tribes of
the Indians. Evidence for this is a letter sent by British Colonel Jeffrey Amherst to his superior in
which he mentioned that he would do well using smallpox-infected blankets against the natives.

Another reason for the genocide are the various re-settlements of the Indians. Given that
Indians were hunters and gatherers, vast differences in climate, consistency of land and the
existence of animals caused large numbers of Indians to die because of the difficulties of
adapting to the new circumstances. (The fertile land was solely occupied by the settlers.)

In addition to that buffaloes (their main food source) were often randomly shot by whites.

3.2.2 Violation of Human Rights after the foundation of the USA

When in 1776 the thirteen states declared their Independence from the British Crown, the USA
was founded. Their Constitution was ratified two years later, in 1788, and one year after that
the Bill of Rights , the first ten amendments to the constitution, passed the Congress. These
amendments anchored several human rights in the Constitution of the United States of America
and made them, from that point on, enforceable.
These inalienable rights I'm especially referring to are the “freedom of religion, of speech, of the
press, to assemble, and to petition” 7 , the “right for a fair trial [in civil cases, too]” 8 and the
most famous phrases of the Declaration of Independence life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness.
 - 11 -

After the foundation of the USA settlers came to America in thousands. The government's
strove to live in peace with the Native American inhabitants soon stood in conflict with the fact
that more and more land needed to be sold in order to clear individual debts.
Evidence for this is the Indian Removal Act : its purpose was to make it easier for the incoming
settlers to find new places to live and to deport the inconvenient natives westward of the
Mississippi. This specific law is, by definition, illegal, because Indian tribes were removed from
their proper areas.

But this permanent Indian border that was now granted to the Indians did not prolong either.
Just at the day the so-called “act to regulate trade and intercourse tribes and to preserve peace
on the frontiers“ 9 was passed settlers crossed the Mississippi borders and started founding new
states (Wisconsin, Iowa). Even though military force should have been deployed to remove the
whites from the Indian territory, the government only set the border to the 95th meridian
westward! And even this border did not persist...

During these times, presidents such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson wanted to
assimilate the Indians to western culture, religion and habits. In this way they should be able to
benefit from the whites' expansion.
But when the Americans reached the Pacific Ocean, and the Indians still didn't adhere to the
western ideals, other possibilities had to be found. The idea of reservations ,to protect Indians
from the society, and them to stay there until they were ready for western culture was a further
violation of human rights, the right of freedom.

The land of the Indians was taken away, they had to relocate multiple times, and now they even
had to live in reservations?
In 1851 the United States Congress passed the Indian Appropriation Act, the first law that
authorized reservations to be created in , what is today, Oklahoma. This act posed a violation
against their own Constitution's preamble of granting life and liberty.
Although the purpose of relocating the Indians to reservations was mostly well-meant
(introducing them to a modern way of life), the whites wouldn't have given up their own culture
either!

Until the mid 1880s most Indians lived in reservations.

Now, in order to adapt the Indians to western culture, the Dawes Act of 1887, an act to parcel
reservation territory and give it to each patriarch, came into effect. This may sound good on
 - 12 -

paper; but its purpose was to split up the connection of a tribe, to sever Indian unity and to tear
Indian culture apart! This law was amended in 1905 by the Burke Act , which meant to give the
Indians US-citizenship after a probationary period of 25 years.

The fact that they, who were once said to be the rightful inhabitant nation of America , hadn't
had citizenship yet is unbelievable if judged by modern law.

In 1934, the Indian Reorganization Act passed the congress, an act that finally ended the
distribution of land to each patriarch. The reason for this act was that the Adaptation Policy had
finally failed. The Indians were now given the right to vote on their own democratic constitution
(which is still an imposition of western values).

Only with the House Concurrent Resolution 108 in 1953 coming into force, an era of returning
rights to Indians has started and is yet going on.

3.2.3 Breaches of own Treaties

The government of the USA and its people did not only trespass against basic rights given in
their constitution and their Bill of Rights ; they moreover even violated against treaties they
themselves passed. The Indians called this the “Trail of Broken Treaties“ .
Hereby examples :

• In 1656 Virginian Law declared that the land of the Indians is not for sale.

• In 1778 the 2nd Continental Congress declared the land of the Delawa-Ren in Fort Pitt as
Indian (not American) property.

• In 1779 the six great Indian nations were given a large piece of land “for eternity“; only
two years later this law was breached by erecting a military outpost in this area.

• In 1830 the Indian Removal Act came into effect, removing the Indians west of the
Mississippi, away from their proper land.

• In 1832 the Cherokee Indians succeeded in a legal case concerning the right to live
within the state boundaries of Georgia... but were still expelled.

• In 1867 the US government promised the Kiowa Indians that whites are not allowed to
hunt buffaloes anymore

• In 1868 the treaty of Fort Laramie guaranteed the Dakota Indians that no person is
allowed to settle nor to pass through any territory west of the Missouri River
 - 13 -

Most treaties between whites and natives were also set under conditions that , according to
juridical views of western world, would have been illegal contracts. The reason for this is that
the Indians who signed these treaties were war chiefs, that did not have the right to sell land in
the name of whole tribes. Furthermore all Indians regarded land as inalienable common
property. Their belief is that earth is a creation by a higher being, that has ordered the people to
watch over the land and take care that the earth is not looted or exploited.

Therefore the war chiefs that sold land were often deceived by whites which would revoke the
existence of these treaties.

3.3 Justification (Manifest Destiny)

As I mentioned in my thesis before, the application of International Law is largely difficult.

Therefore I will try to give an outline about "Manifest Destiny“ , the white Americans excuse for
their land-grabs and their attempt for cultural adaptation.

Definition : Manifest Destiny is a term used in the 19 th century to back up the white Americans
means of expansion across the North American continent. Advocates of Manifest Destiny
believed that the expansion was not only ethical but that it was apparent ("manifest") and
inexorable ("destiny") .

Interpretation : There are different ways of interpreting Manifest Destiny but the pivotal idea
is always the same : the people of the USA recognized it as their burden and duty to spread
their, at that time very progressive form of democracy and freedom. To do so they “needed” to
seize the whole country first and then exude their ideas from within. As the Indians did not have
freedom and democracy and furthermore not the means to cultivate the land properly ( →
biblical verses) it was the right of the white Americans, ordained by God, to take this land.

The “Manifest Destiny” in reality was only a simple and cheap way of hiding the truth : the
settlers stole the land from the Indians.
 - 14 -

Picture 1 : Aftermath of “Manifest Destiny” (black-colored : land owned by Indians, white

-colored : land owned by the whites)

4. Slavery
4.1 Overview on Slavery

Slavery in the United States of America was practiced basically from the foundation of the early
thirteen states until the 13th Amendment to the Constitution in 1865 that abolished slavery.
During these times over 12 million African people were shipped to South and North America,
645000 to what is now the United States of America. Today their descendents, the Afro-
Americans, count 37.6 million people and therefore compose the third largest ethnic group
(12.4%) in the United States of America.

Slavery before the foundation of the USA : The first record of African Slavery during colonial
time is dated back to 1619. A British ship under the Dutch Flag had captured 20 Angolan slaves
that were brought to Virginia. Even though those times were later known as “The Great
Migration “ (1618-1623) high mortality rates due to diseases and wars with the Indians resulted
in a need of able-bodied workers. At first the people of Virginia decided to keep the Africans as
indentured servants, laborers who work under a contract (traditionally for seven years) for an
employer. Unlike slaves these workers were only required to work for a limited term specified in
a signed contract. The problem with these kinds of proletarians was that after the stretch of
time most of them were not able to become prosperous.
 - 15 -

In the second half of the 17th century England's economic conditions improved and therefore
way less laborers came to America. New sources of workers had to be found. The solution to
this problem was a gradual progress of transforming indentured workers to slaves. To ensure
the holding of slave workers Virginia passed a law on partus in 1662 , thus making every child of
an enslaved mother a slave, too. The Slave Codes of 1705 went even a step further, declaring
every man imported from non-Christian nations a slave.
In 1735 the trustees of the State of Georgia passed a law prohibiting slavery, that was shortly
legal in the twelve other colonies. Most protesters against slavery were of Scottish origin that
had already stated that “it is shocking to human Nature, that any Race of Mankind and their
Posterity should be sentanc'd to perpetual slavery “ 10
But due to popular support of slavery and skillful lobbying by colonists slavery was practiced in
1750 again.

All in all, during most of the colonist times, slavery was allowed. In the north slaves were mainly
used as house servants or craftsmen, while in the south they traditionally worked in
agriculture.

Slavery after the foundation of the USA : Due to the demand for cotton growing rapidly at
these times, the whites needed more slaves for their farms. Between 1790 and 1860 it is
estimated that over one million slaves were moved from the old south to newly founded states
such as Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana.
As only a minority of the black slaves was moved with their families, most family structures
were torn apart.
Around the turn of the century, tensions between the northern and the southern states began
to emerge. While the south relied on slave workers for their farms, bondage was largely
abolished in the north. As then the government even prohibited further imports of slaves, the
southern demand for slaves could hardly be fulfilled.

The Civil War and the end of slavery : In 1860 Abraham Lincoln, a Republican candidate,
ran for president. The Republicans were in favor of abolishing slavery, and due to the fact that
Lincoln didn't appear on ballots of ten southern states , the election split the nation along
sectoral lines. As a consequence of the southern states' fear of an abolition of slavery and a
industrial domination in the north the Civil War , beginning in 1961, broke out.
With the war ending in 1865 and the north winning, slavery was abolished with the 13 th
amendment to the constitution .
 - 16 -

4.2 Breaches of Law

Legal situation before 1776 : Before the foundation of the United States of America the
colonies' laws were derived from England, the “mother country”. Their charters issued pursuant
to the British Constitution, required obeying English Law including the common law :

"there were no English statute laws [...]. authorizing the holding of slaves, either in
England or in the American colonies," / "the common law of England was incompatible
with slavery, and neither recognized nor permitted its existence." 11

Therefore decisions of high courts did, in most cases, preclude slavery from the thirteen states.
Slavery was mere “practice” and the longer it existed it was regarded by many Americans to be
legal. But this way of argumentation is wrong:

"Quod ab initio non valet in tractu temporis non convalescet.”

That which is bad in its commencement improves not by lapse of time.

”Quod initio non valet, tractu temporis non valet.”

A thing void in the beginning does not become valid by lapse of time.

Legal situation after 1776 : When the colonies became independent from their motherland
the USA did not make slavery legal, no : in fact their constitution said otherwise :

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they

are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life,

liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. “ 12

De facto important legal cases , such as Commonwealth v Aves , cited the Declaration of
Independence to prove slavery to be illegal. As a matter of fact, out of all state constitutions in
1789, not even one state of had established, nor recognized slavery.
 - 17 -

Even the Bill of Rights stated rights clearly in favor of “peacefully” abolishing slavery.

The Fifth Amendment even states that

"No person shall be […] deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

Due process of law includes an indictment, trial by jury and judgment rendered in open court.

The Sixth Amendment furthermore guarantees the right to speedy trial, and to jury trial, rights

from the English common law. However, in reality slaves were being held without jury trial at
all, much less “speedy”'

The Eight Amendment precludes "cruel and

unusual punishment."

Unfortunately, in reality sadistic behavior by

slave traders and slave owners often happened.

Picture 2.: Peter, a man who was

enslaved in Baton Rogue, Louisiana,
1863 whose scars resulted from
violent abuse by a plantation overseer

4.3 Justifications

There were mainly two justifications for slavery by anti-abolitionists.

The first justification was that slavery was regarded as a “necessary evil”. It was feared that
freeing the slaves would have more harmful social and economic consequences than the
continuation of slavery.

“We have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice
is in one scale, and self-preservation in the other.” 13

At these times some politicians also mentioned that a society in which multiple ethnicities live
freely together would not work!
 - 18 -

The second reasoning was that bondage was recognized as a “positive good” :
As the agitation against slavery from the north became stronger, apologies from the south got
more faint. It was brought up that slavery is a well-working scheme of labor control.
John C. Calhoun said in his famous speech in the congress that

“in every civilized society one portion of the community must live on the labor of
another; learning, science, and the arts are built upon leisure; the African slave, kindly
treated by his master and mistress and looked after in his old age, is better off than the
free laborers of Europe; and under the slave system conflicts between capital and labor
are avoided. The advantages of slavery will become more and more manifest, if left
undisturbed by interference from without, as the country advances in wealth and
numbers."

4.4 Aftermath (Lynchings)

Even though the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America abolished
slavery, Afro-Americans were not necessarily treated equally from then on. Especially in the
South a lot of anger rose because they did not only lose the war, their former slaves were now
even allowed to vote. Violence rose even more at the end of the century, after several southern
states (in which the Democrats regained power) passed new legislation which effectively
disenfranchised most blacks and many poor whites, established segregation of public facilities
by race, and separated blacks from common public life and facilities. The most severe form of
violence against black people at these times were the so-called “lynchings”, extrajudicial
“punishments” , in which black persons were tracked down by vigilantes, self-appointed
commissions (Ku Klux Klan) or by a mob of white people and then hung. In this way nearly 5000
black people were killed during 1860 and 1890. The reasons for these murders were to
intimidate the black community and to discourage the freedmen from voting, working or getting
educated. Although lynching posed a severe violation of their own Constitution it was non-
actionable and not punished. Even important politicians such as Benjamin Tillmans , the
governor of South Carolina and later United States Senator defended the lynchings!

“We of the South have never recognized the right of the negro to govern white men, and
we never will. We have never believed him to be the equal of the white man, and we will
not submit to his gratifying his lust on our wives and daughters without lynching him. “
 - 19 -

Picture 3 : Two black persons hung by the mob on August 7, 1930

Even though some suggestions to introduce anti-lynching legislation came up in the early 20th
century, the Solid South always blocked these bills from passing the Congress.
The frequency of the lynchings dropped largely during 1930 and 1950, but in the 1960s they
rose again as a resistance to the black civil rights movement. Only when at this point courts
started to punish lynchings its number declined largely.

The fact that lynching, an act clearly violating against the constitution's preamble , the eight and
the fourth amendment, was not punished until the late 1960s poses a severe legal scandal and
questions the authority and the effectiveness of American Law in general!

5. Conclusion

Although I have named many violations of different kinds of laws done by white men that make
the existence of the United States of America at least very doubtful, I can now hardly come to a
solution in which I declare the United States of America as illegal and demand their dissolution.
The status quo, as the states exist nowadays, is undeniable. Anyone who claims otherwise does
not bear in mind that a breakup of the United States of America would hardly benefit anyone,
no : exactly the contrary would occur.

The exploitation of the black people and the Native Americans, that through discrimination still
reaches in our modern times does however pose juridical means of compensation. The
existence of demands for compensatory damages for former or recent disadvantages are
 - 20 -

therefore comprehensible. International organizations, such as the AIM (American Indian

Movement), have gained more and more support by international activists during the last few
decades and their lawsuits have often been successful in international courts, given the facts
I've mentioned in my thesis.

Even though the pain of former generations cannot be made undone, we , the people, can work
on stopping such issues from occurring again. Therefore my appeal, that is very idealistic, is that
every civilization should always meet another with a bilateral convergence, that includes the
understanding and respecting of each others culture, religion and way of life.
 - 21 -

Annotations

1
Houghton Mifflin Company (2006)
2
Tecumseh of the Shawnees ( Brown, D. , Bury my heart at Wounded Knee p. 1)
3
Brown, D. , Bury my heart at Wounded Knee p. 2
4
Brown, D. , Bury my heart at Wounded Knee p. 2
5
Matthew 28: 19
6
Genesis 1: 28
7
Bill of Rights : 1st Amendment
8
Bill of Rights : 6th Amendment
9
Brown, D. , Bury my heart at Wounded Knee p. 6
10
Petition of the Inhabitants of New Inverness to His Excellency General Oglethorpe, 5th point
11
Lawrence Henry Gipson, L.H. , The Coming of the Revolution 1763-1775 p 4.
12
United States Declaration of Independence
13
“Wolf by the ears speech” - Thomas Jefferson
http://wiki.monticello.org/mediawiki/index.php/Wolf_by_the_ears

Picture 1 : http://faculty.umf.maine.edu/~walters/web%20104/Indian%20res%20map.jpg
Picture 2 : http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/50/Cicatrices_de_flagellation_su
r_un_esclave.jpg
Picture 3 : http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/ThomasShippAbramSmith.jpg
 - 22 -

Index

1. Books :

1.1 Brown, D.: Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, without location, printed by Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 197318
1.2 Beile, W.: Learning English Green Line 6 BY , Donauwörth, printed by Ludwig Auer,
2002
1.3 Blaisdell, B.: Great Speeches by Native Americans , without location, printed by
General Publishing Company (Canada), 2000
1.4 Sieper, R.: The student's companion to the U.S.A. , Kempten , printed by Allgäuer
Zeitungsverlag , 19792
1.5 Mancini, R.: Der Wilde Westen, without location, printed by Gondrom Verlag , 1992
1.6 Fleming, P. R.: Die Nordamerikanischen Indianer , Slovenia , printed in Slovenia,
19922

2. Magazines :

2.1 Stolberg, S.: Apologies for Lynchings, and Other Crimes of U.S. History, in:
Süddeutsche Zeitung , 2005, NYT part p. 6

3. Internet :

3.1 http://www.uni-protokolle.de/Lexikon/Indianerpolitik_der_USA.htm
28.01.10 15:02
3.2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law 28.01.10 15:04
3.3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights 28.01.10 15:06
3.4 http://medicolegal.tripod.com/slaveryillegal.htm 28.01.10 15:08
3.5 http://www.welt-der-indianer.de/geschichte/suenden.html 28.01.10 15:22
3.6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus 28.01.10 15:24
3.7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_Americans_in_the_United_States “” 15:26
 - 23 -

Declaration of authorship

„Ich erkläre hiermit, dass ich die Facharbeit ohne fremde Hilfe angefertigt und nur die im
Literaturverzeichnis angeführten Quellen und Hilfsmittel verwendet habe.“

…......................................., den …........................... 2010 ….......................................

(Ort) (Datum) (Unterschrift)