Reviewed by: Moral Contagion: Black Atlantic Sailors, Citizenship, and Diplomacy in Antebellum America by Michael A. Schoeppner Joseph P. Reidy (bio) Moral Contagion: Black Atlantic Sailors, Citizenship, and Diplomacy in Antebellum America. By Michael A. Schoeppner. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2019. Pp. 252. $59.99.) Among the historical works on the relationship between African-descended people and the sea, W. Jeffrey Bolster’s Black Jacks: African [End Page 401] American Seamen in the Age of Sail (1997) continues to command respect for its interpretive insight and stylistic grace. In one particularly effective chapter, Bolster explores the perilous interactions between free seamen of color and the institution of slavery by focusing on the Negro Seamen Acts, which the states along the southern Atlantic and the Gulf coasts enacted from the 1820s through the 1850s. Despite their differences, these laws all required the confinement of black seamen whenever they entered port, a form of quarantine nominally designed to prevent the visitors from spreading sedition among the enslaved population. Michael A. Schoeppner’s Moral Contagion builds effectively on Bolster’s work and that of scholars such as Philip M. Hamer, Harold D. Langley, and Martha S. Putney, upon which Bolster relied. At one level, Moral Contagion may be approached as a thorough legal history of the acts and their impact, but it is much more. By focusing closely on challenges to the laws, Schoeppner tells two tales. One traces the off-again, on-again attempts by commercial interests for whom the laws posed an inconvenience and by government officials—in Washington, assorted northern states, and the British Foreign Office—for whom the laws presented jurisdictional disputes over the limits of a state’s authority. The other story follows black sailors who, with their families, home communities, and assorted allies, claimed citizenship rights that superseded the laws and therefore rendered their enforcement invalid. These largely unheralded activists pressed their claims via mass meetings, letters to editors, and petitions to government officials at every level. Their advocacy helped to make “national citizenship and federal citizenship rights an important element of antebellum constitutional thought and politics” (213). The history of the Seamen Acts begins in South Carolina following Denmark Vesey’s abortive insurrection of 1822, when state lawmakers mandated the incarceration of free black seamen while their ships were in port. A group of prominent citizens, styling themselves the South Carolina Association, first lobbied for passage of the law and then worked to guarantee its strict enforcement. For the next three decades, the association actively stoked the ideological fires, employing such episodes as publication of David Walker’s Appeal in 1829, the abolitionist mail campaign in the mid-1830s, and northern opposition to the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850, to demonize black seafarers as threats to the social order that rested on slavery. Over time, other coastal states jumped on the quarantine bandwagon in response to perceived threats, and Cuba did too. Schoeppner perceptively surveys the experience of British sailors, both before and after abolition in the British West Indies. At various points in time, officials invoked the Commercial Convention of 1815 to protest the [End Page 402] laws, often citing commercial or diplomatic concerns but never squarely challenging the abridgement of the sailors’ rights as free persons. Instead, consuls tried to achieve local amelioration (including by obtaining the release, in one case, of a ship’s officer of African ancestry and, in another, of a female steward who had been sexually assaulted by a jailor). Most strikingly, the British Foreign Office left unquestioned Attorney General Roger B. Taney’s 1833 opinion in support of the South Carolina law on the grounds that black subjects of the British Crown were not recognized as citizens when the convention was signed. Taney’s view that “constitutional modernity was strictly a Caucasian accomplishment” (90) intended for the sole benefit of Caucasians, Schoeppner caustically observes, guided his jurisprudence steadily from then through the Dred Scott case of 1857. Northern states also found federal authorities unsympathetic to claims that the acts violated federal authority over maritime commerce and flouted constitutional protections of the rights that citizens of any one state enjoyed in the several states—most notably, freedom. When Massachusetts...
Read full abstract