"The question is," French said about the view that Madison acquiesced to slavery to found the new nation, "'Is the United States worth the price of slavery.'"

Scholars discuss slavery and Madison's legacy during panel discussion

Amid the praise heaped upon James Madison during his 250th birthday celebration, a panel of JMU and guest scholars addressed an uncomfortable contradiction.

"Freedom has been our anthem since the Revolution, and it was Madison who pulled it out of the chaos and confusion." But despite his genius, Madison also helped sustain "one of the ugliest elements of our past," said Mary Ann French during a panel discussion on slavery.

French, a journalist who is pursuing her Ph.D. in history at the University of Virginia, is tracing the descendants of Montpelier slaves and in April coordinated a descendants' reunion at Montpelier.

During the panel discussion, French and JMU professors Jacqueline Walker, How-ard Lubert and Clarence Geier talked about James Madison's role and historical accounta-bility in helping to uphold the institution of slavery at the founding of the nation as well as the personal advantage he enjoyed as a slave owner.

"James Madison could not have afforded to be a public servant if it were not for

the labor of hundreds of our ancestors," French said. "Without their unpaid work, Madison would never have … become known as the 'Father of the Constitution.'" French said, "Without our ancestors' free labor and sacrifice we might resemble Mexico today."

Also central to the panel discussion was the vital role slaves played in building the nation that held them in bondage - an issue often overlooked by history.

"The life of James' grandfather's generation was hard, violent and brutal," French explained. "They carved a settlement out of the wilds. But despite the ethos of gumption, initiative and stamina of the pioneering settlers, the land was cleared, drained and tamed by enslaved Africans, born and reared in Africa, the Caribbean or in Virginia. They were driven beyond exhaustion by white settlers and overseers for a claim on which they'd staked everything."

The historical oversight comes with a human cost, said history professor Jacqueline Walker. "The damage caused by slavery has been to human relationships," she said. "People sit across from each other in classrooms and restaurants and view each other from a vantage point of suspicion and distrust because the spiritual debt of slavery hasn't been addressed. We have been bereft of a dialogue of truth and conciliation, of forgiveness given and taken."

The panelists noted that Madison was conflicted about slavery, and their opinions varied on the extent to which history should hold Madison accountable or his legacy should suffer for his role in sustaining slavery.

Madison's writings indicate his ambivalence about slavery, French said, but he never freed his slaves and he promoted colonization instead of emancipation. "Was that compassion? Or just evasion of the issue?" she asked.

Walker defined that evasion as determining "how to free slaves so that they do not become a permanent part of American, or white, society."

"Madison's attempts to end slavery ring hollow today," JMU political science professor Howard Lubert conceded in his presentation. But "Madison was human. He had to work within the realm of the possible."

Lubert meant that Madison acquiesced to slavery at the Constitutional Convention in order to gain the agreement that founded the nation. "Madison's contribution to the American enterprise shouldn't be discounted."

Madison may have compromised, Walker said, but his eyes were wide open when he did so. "James Madison was surrounded by slavery. He could not perceive black people as irrelevant to his interests," she said. "At the time of the revolution, James Madison was an active participant in the questions of slavery and race. Slavery and freedom were contemplated, discussed and debated at the Constitutional Convention."

The question, Lubert, said, is "how a constitutionally free society also owned slaves.

It contradicts fundamental Madison principles. I'm not certain we can ever arrive at a satisfactory answer."

"Perhaps Madison hoped that slavery would decline as the nation expanded," Walker offered. "He must have been woefully dismayed."

Sociology professor Clarence Geier said the answer is much more simple. "We tend to overlook the human factor in search of slavery's explanation," Geier said. He cited the atrocities in Kosovo "just last year," the Nazis' mass murder of the Jews of Europe and the United States' use of nuclear bombs against Japan. "We have a remarkable ability to behave badly.

"You must remember," he continued, "there was an assumption then that blacks were biologically inferior. It was not even seen as an issue. … [Whites] believed they had done [Africans] a favor by enslaving them.

"It's amazing how capable we are, how intelligent. But we can't apply the same stand-ards to other human beings," Geier said. "We want philosophical reasons rather than human reasons."

After the formal presentation, members of the audience raised some what-ifs, including whether reparations for slavery would resolve the debt or cheapen the sacrifice made by African-Americans.

"Is there a price that James Madison should pay for being a slave owner?" asked someone from the audience, who wondered whether Madison should be held to a higher standard because he understood and debated the issues of individual freedom with other enlightened individuals at the convention and other key points of founding.

"The reality of slavery flies in the face of meritocracy and equality, so we opt for denial," French said. "We focus instead on positive triumphs.

"Slavery is one of the ugliest elements of our past," she said. "It can neither be swallowed nor spit out. Perhaps by owning up to it we can digest it."

By Pam Brock