In the early 19th century, abolitionists were mainly fighting slavery for their civil rights and freedom. On top of this back ground information, we got to know that when the lawyer is arguing about Flora’s freedom rights, he was arguing about how the right of her husband is larger than the slave owner instead arguing solely for the freedom about Flora; therefore we can conclude that the nuance in the 19th century was interesting and significant for us to investigate more of these events since it was a nationwide culture, or mindset at the time, not only happening in a specific region. Northampton in Massachusetts had its own history about the civil rights movement in the mid 19th century. The Northampton Historic Society states that members of the Northampton Association of Education and Industry established a utopian – it seems that they are way too optimistic about the issue – community that everybody is treated equal regardless of sex, color or condition, sect or religion. They also had regular lecturers like Frederick Douglass to speak of civil rights movements. However, things did not go down like they imagined. Since they were especially united around the issue of the abolition of slavery and therefore less focused on the part of individual woman rights and freedom, eventually the association failed to exist over time since nuance on treating woman rights and slavery still existed heavily in a men-focused society although they felt the most ”equality of feeling” in the association, it still did not reach the level of freedom and rights they were looking for. Since nuance existed and similar events should have had taken place all over the country because it was one of the most significant issues in the 19th century, it is reasonable that we could find similar historical events or organization in the town of Suffield’s history and investigate more from the organization into the Flora case and possibilities in the case.
As we further investigate into these cases and explore the conflict between slavery abolition and woman suffrage in the 19th century, we need high order thinking skills to navigate these investigations. For example, the fact that the famous lawyer Strong argued for Exeter in the court by saying Exeter’s rights as a husband owning his wife is greater than the right of a slave owner owning a slave. This example displayed that the lawyer ignored woman’s rights in order to win the case, and the reason behind is worth thinking, why was he doing so? Was it because sometimes the goal to win is higher than anything include integrity and consciousness?
Northampton Historic Society: