308 Political Activity and Resistance to Oppression: From the American Revolution to the Civil War
understood how deeply slavery was enmeshed in American
culture. Nor could the organization convince enough Afri-
can Americans to move to Africa. Th e ACS transported an
average of about 280 African Americans to Africa each year
between 1817 and 1861. State auxiliaries perhaps matched
that number. Such paltry totals were a tiny percentage of
the African American population in the United States. Nat-
ural population growth made sure that colonization would
not make an appreciable diff erence in the slave or free black
populations. Similarly, the ACS did not raise the number of
private manumissions in the South. Most historians agree
that the ACS failed to accomplish its goals.
Th e ACS continued to exist aft er the Civil War, although
it was mainly a caretaker organization. Black nationalists
and other advocates of the back-to-Africa movement, such
as Henry McNeal Turner, built on colonizationist argu-
ments in the late 19th century. Turner, a civil rights activist
and bishop of the American Methodist Episcopal Church,
became increasingly frustrated with discrimination in the
United States and eventually advocated for repatriation.
Although he never formally endorsed the ACS, Turner ar-
gued in favor of colonization. Marcus Garvey, the mercurial
leader of the United Negro Improvement Association of the
early 20th century, also endorsed colonization. Garvey used
his Black Star shipping line to bring African Americans to
Liberia. Even so, colonization remained more of a dream
than a reality. Th e ACS maintained its legal existence until
March 22, 1963, when it was formally disbanded.
See also: Cuff e, Paul; Liberia; Russwurm, JohnRobert GudmestadBibliography
Allen, Jeff rey B. “ ‘All of Us Are Highly Pleased with the Country’:
Black and White Kentuckians on Liberian Colonization.”
Phylon 43 (1982):97–109.
Fox, Early Lee. Th e American Colonization Society, 1817–1840.
Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1919.
Hutton, Frankie. “Economic Considerations in the American
Colonization Society’s Early Eff ort to Emigrate Free Blacks
to Liberia, 1816–36.” Journal of Negro History 68 (Autumn
1983):376–89.
Saillant, John. “Th e American Enlightenment in Africa: Jeff erson’s
Colonization and Black Virginia’s Migration to Liberia, 1776–
1840.” Eighteenth Century Studies 31 (Spring 1998):261–82.
Staudenraus, P. J. Th e African Colonization Movement, 1816–1865.
New York: Columbia University Press, 1961.
Streiff ord, David M. “Th e American Colonization Society: An
Application of Republican Ideology to Early Antebellum Re-
form.” Journal of Southern History 45 (May 1979):201–20.Th e capital was named Monrovia, in honor of James Mon-
roe, who had authorized the naval expeditions that helped
found the colony.
Th e struggles to keep the colony alive naturally inhibited
migration, and the ACS began a campaign to reeducate Af-
rican Americans about the process of colonization. Th e ACS
published the African Repository (1825–1909), which was
fi lled with letters from emigrants, positive descriptions of the
colony, and lists of donors. Th e ACS also increased its fund-
raising eff orts, which it saw as vital to continuing its work. It
pressed the national government for funding, usually with
little success. When Andrew Jackson vetoed the Bonus Bill in
1833, the federal government eff ectively ended any dreams
of funding colonization. Th e Bonus Bill would have used
money from sales of public land to fund colonization.
Th e ACS increasingly turned its fund-raising eff orts to
state governments and private individuals. Virginia, for in-
stance, in 1850 set aside $30,000 annually for fi ve years to
fund colonization. New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and
Maryland also funded the ACS. Life memberships, which
sold for $30, were a popular way to raise money from pri-
vate individuals. Purchasers received a certifi cate with their
purchase, a popular gift for ministers. Th e ACS claimed to
raise $50,000 in 1825 from the sale of such memberships. A
few slaveholders contributed money to the ACS as a stipu-
lation of their wills, which might free their slaves on the
condition they be transported to Africa. Despite the best
eff orts of the ACS, it was chronically short of funds.
Not only did fi nancial problems bedevil the organiza-
tion, but it also faced increasing opposition in both free
and slave states. Some residents of the free states became
increasingly hostile toward the ACS. William Lloyd Gar-
rison, the prominent abolitionist, denounced colonization
as a tool of slaveholders to perpetuate slavery. Th e Anti-
Slavery Society was formed in part to prevent colonization.
More radical ACS members left the organization and joined
various antislavery organizations. Th ese developments con-
fi rmed the fears of many slave owners, who had suspected
all along that the ACS was really an antislavery organiza-
tion. It became more diffi cult for the ACS and its state aux-
iliaries to continue to exist in slave states.
Th e ACS could not function eff ectively in the deepen-
ing sectional crisis. Despite its rhetoric about not threat-
ening slavery, the ACS always maintained a commitment
to ridding the United States of slavery. Colonization, how-
ever, was never a realistic alternative. Its supporters never