You offer very weak arguments.
Re 2. There is firm evidence that slave labor was used.
Re 3. The vote happened. Your caveats and red herrings not withstanding.
Re 6. You re framed the question and used speculation...a non-rebuttal.
Re 7. I do not use non-sequiturs.
Re 9. Statement is well documented. Your Cabinet reference is a red herring.
It's always fun reading your stuff, Pea. It's always most amusing.
Re 2. There is firm evidence that slave labor was used.
And I don't doubt it. But given when the other two universities were founded and their locations is it likely that slave labor wasn't used in construction of their facilities, too? Like I said, the answer is most likely "All of the above". The vote happened. Your caveats and red herrings not withstanding.
As did the resumption of slave imports into South Carolina, since it wasn't a ban but a temporary halt. Your misidentification of the intent of the legislation not withstanding.
You re framed the question and used speculation...a non-rebuttal.
Not speculation, Pea, but facts which contradict your claim.
Re 7. I do not use non-sequiturs.
You do all the time, Pea. Wood's loss was directly related to his pro-secessionist stand. The two facts are related.
Statement is well documented. Your Cabinet reference is a red herring.
You linked the cabinet, Pea. The connetion is your's.