Stephen Kantrowitz, More than Freedom: Fighting for Black Citizenship in a White Republic, 1829-1889

Boston black activists in the nineteenth century were more than just abolitionists, like they are often portrayed. Instead, they sought to establish their rights as “colored citizens” so that they could truly be members of the United States. Stephen Kantrowitz’s More than Freedom sheds light on these black activists and their integral role in shaping citizenship and society in the North.

The meaning of citizen was elusive in decades leading up to the Civil War and the decades immediately following. Black activists fought to define the term in a manner that called for equality and recognition regardless of race. They called themselves “colored citizens”—what Kantrowitz contends was an oxymoron considering colored men were perceived as inferior and unfit for citizenship. Despite their “free” status, they did not have access to the privileges of citizenship and protection by the United States government like whites. Nevertheless, their alliance with white antislavery activists helped them move forward in publicizing their demands of equality before the law. Kantrowitz argues, “[t]hrough their independent mobilization and their interracial alliances, black activists made antislavery a means as well as an end: a way to free fugitives, to win laws securing their own liberties, and to demonstrate that . . . . they could play important roles in struggles whites were accustomed to thinking of as their own” (74).

It is important to note, however, that even though black activists typically had similar goals, they were not always unified in their methodology for achieving these goals. Debates existed between black activists in several situations. One such debate revolved around the Smith School and whether it should be racially integrated or exclusively for black children. Education was understood as the primary means of “elevation” for blacks, but there were disagreements about the most effective way to educate black children. There were similar tensions in dealing with fugitive slaves, freemasonry, slave rebellions, military service, and political actions—to name a few.

One of my qualms with More than Freedom is that at times it appears that Kantrowitz is using Boston to represent the broader geographical region of the North. This is problematic because, as even Kantrowitz points out, Boston was one of the more liberal Northern cities. It had a large free black population and influential white activists, like William Lloyd Garrison, on their side. Moreover, though Kantrowitz details how free blacks rallied behind their activist leaders, he focuses only on a handful of black activist leaders. It is difficult to get a sense of whether or not similar leadership existed elsewhere in the North and if so, did they also have the mass support of free blacks in their city? Were free blacks in other cities as actively involved in establishing their rights as “colored citizens” and protecting runaways?

More than Freedom is an excellent case study of activism in Boston but it does not place it in the larger context of the Northern United States. Thus, one must take care not to homogenize black activism in the North based on the history of activism in Boston.