Never Caught, the Story of Ona Judge: George and Martha Washington's Courageous Slave Who Dared to Run Away; Young Readers Edition

While opposition to slavery gained most of its momentum in the 19th century, its roots began much earlier. Some opposition to slavery was religiously based: The Quakers led the way in asserting opposition to enslavement for religious reasons. They staunchly argued against the immorality of its practice. Because of their tenets of the equality of all people and opposition to war and violence, Quakers successfully banned slavery in Pennsylvania in 1780; they were among the first to petition the US government to abolish slavery in 1790. As the 1800s began, more Northern states followed suit.

Abolitionists came from a variety of demographics, consisting of both white men and women as well as formerly enslaved Black people. Notably, there were differing opinions about how abolition should occur. For instance, in 1816, an organization called the American Colonization Society established a colony in land secured in western Africa for the rehoming of American enslaved people. For the next three decades, those freed from slavery were sent in groups—they were often families—to the small area of land that would later become Libya. Other abolitionists ranged from asserting all enslaved people should be given immediate and total freedom to arguing for gradual freedom, which could include a period of indenture-hood or freedom granted when an enslaved person reached a specific age. As the 1830s began, the abolition movement began in earnest. Its rise in popularity is attributed by many historians to the religious movement termed the “Second Great Awakening.” This was a period—led by revivals by Protestant churches—that encouraged a renewed believe in the moral underpinnings of Christianity, including equality of all people.

In addition to religious opposition to the practice, slavery became a political issue. A large aspect of the debate focused on how to handle slavery in territories that had not yet been granted statehood. Some political groups favored a single law that applied to the entire nation. Others endorsed states’ rights, asserting that individual state governments should be free to determine the legality of slavery within its respective state. This debate was primarily sparked by the Missouri Compromise in 1820—a law that admitted Missouri into the union as a slave state while also granting Maine statehood as a free state. It also divided the area acquired in the Louisiana Purchase in half, granting slavery in the southern half but outlawing it in the northern portion. This act of attempting to balance the number of free states and slave states would continue until the Civil War.

Specific legislation would enrage abolitionists, however—one particular point of contention was the Supreme Court’s decision on the case of Dred Scot in 1857. Scot, an enslaved man who had escaped to a free state, was ruled as legally “a slave” and, further, deemed not a citizen with rights but a piece of property. While the movement was largely a peaceful one, by the 1850s, some abolitionists argued violence was justified. Abolitionist John Brown led a raid on a federal arsenal in 1859 with a plan to arm enslaved people in an insurrection. His plan failed, and Brown was hanged. Some considered him a domestic terrorist, while others lauded him as a hero. This kind of fever pitch would ultimately continue until the state of South Carolina seceded from the Union in 1860 to protect its right to continue slavery, thus sparking the American Civil War.