Unraveling abolition ::legal culture and slave emancipation in Colombia /

"It is criminal selfishness to seek liberty and independence from Spain for ourselves, if we wish not to grant it to our slaves." With these stern words, the lawyer Félix José de Restrepo addressed his colleagues, the delegates to the first General Congress of the Republic of Colombia, in 1821. As the delegates worked out the new republic's constitution and foundational laws, Restrepo invited them to consider the problem of slavery: were slaves, like other humans, "children of Adam" and thus eligible for equal rights? Were "whites" entitled to dominate "blacks"? Was any government that upheld slavery a "criminal" government by definition? Should independence from Spain automatically lead to liberty for slaves? As the South American independence movement reached its climax, Restrepo forcefully developed clear-cut questions. But would they find clear and forceful answers, as many slaves and some free people hoped? In 1821 Restrepo defended freedom over slavery on behalf of humanity, religion, and the decorum of the nascent country. He introduced a manumission bill, ostensibly aiming to end coerced labor. It is indispensable to "annihilate slavery," he insisted. In Restrepo's view, the General Congress represented the ideal opportunity to restore enslaved individuals to their human "dignity" while giving neighboring countries an example of "justice." Ending slavery, moreover, would dignify the revolution against Spain, guaranteeing future economic and political stability for the new republic. Restrepo asserted that it remained a contradiction to pray to God for deliverance from foreign tyrants while keeping thousands of people in captivity. Providence, he predicted, would throw Colombia back into the hands of Spain "if we refuse to exercise mercy with our brothers"-