OK, so can you please you point me to a source that confirms that Lincoln arrested the entire Maryland legislature in September 1861 and which details the statewide referendum on secession that Baldwin talks about? Thanks in advance.
Do you disagree with the part regarding the "Emancipation" Proclamation? Because if you go and read the actual document you will find that it specifically leaves out the slaves in Union states, the only ones Lincoln could have really freed.
Constitutionally Lincoln could not. Lincoln could free the slaves in the South because the Confiscation Acts, passed by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court, allowed the government to seize private property without compensation if that property was being used to support the rebellion. So he issued the Emancipation Proclamation. He could not legally free the slaves in the North because slavery was not unconstitutional. It took the 13th Amendment to end slavery. I'm surprised that you were unaware of all that.
Do you disagree with the facts regarding the tariff issues of the time? If so you should research the issue more and read what people of the time had to say on it..."
Yes, let's see what people of the time had to say on it.
"Texas abandoned her separate national existence and consented to become one of the Confederated States to promote her welfare, insure domestic tranquility [sic] and secure more substantially the blessings of peace and liberty to her people. She was received into the confederacy with her own constitution, under the guarantee of the federal constitution and the compact of annexation, that she should enjoy these blessings. She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association." -- Texas Declaration of Causes for Secession
"Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin. That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove." -- Mississippi Declaration of the Causes of Secession
"The South had always been solid for slavery and when the quarrel about it resulted in a conflict of arms, those who had approved the policy of disunion took the pro-slavery side. It was perfectly logical to fight for slavery, if it was right to own slaves." -- John Singleton Mosby
"What was the reason that induced Georgia to take the step of secession? This reason may be summed up in one single proposition. It was a conviction, a deep conviction on the part of Georgia, that a separation from the North-was the only thing that could prevent the abolition of her slavery." -- Speech of Henry Benning to the Virginia Convention
The only issue of contention remaining was the 40% Federal sales tax on Southerners, which required a compulsory Union to collect.
Except that there was no 40% tax on Southerners. Not in 1860. Not ever.
After the South had been forced back into the (now) compulsory Union under the 40% tax rate, Federal tax revenues mushroomed 300% to $170 million per year. Before the war, while the South was in the Union under the 20% tax rate, revenues had been $50 million per year. Source: U.S. Census Bureau Balance of Payments And Foreign Trade: 1821-1945 (Page 248)
Even if correct, you're saying this was a reason for the South leaving in 1860?
The South's reasons for leaving is immaterial to the North's refusal to allow it for any reason.
The Salient question is this; Do people have a right to leave?
Our founding document, the Declaration of Independence, says "yes."
I think you kicked his @$$. You’ve obviously done your homework.
;’)
No problem. Here ya go.
Here is one article about it from the Maryland state site: Arrest of the Maryland Legislature, 1861
This site also has a lot to say regarding the arrests
Abraham Lincoln and Maryland
He could not legally free the slaves
Of course he couldn't. And since he had no power over the other country he was fighting, his proclamation did nothing to free anybody. It was a mere gesture to help sway Europe away from siding with the Confederacy by making his war of aggression out to be righteous cause.
Regarding the reasons for the war, I think you missed this part of one of my previous posts:
Only 5 of the 13 Confederate States mentioned slavery issues in their Secession Ordinances, i.e., the return of fugitive slaves, slavery in the U.S. territories and Federal abolition. By leaving the voluntary Union, these States abandoned all claims regarding the first two and the issue of Federal abolition was entirely eliminated as a cause of war by Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address and the Corwin Amendment. The only issue of contention remaining was the 40% Federal sales tax on Southerners, which required a compulsory Union to collect.
Except that there was no 40% tax on Southerners. Not in 1860. Not ever.
Because they left before the taxes could be raised. They knew the Lincoln and his northern friends were planning on pushing it through, and they knew they didn't have enough legislative force to stop it. February 15, 1861 in Pittsburgh, U.S. President-elect Lincoln affirmed his priority for passage of a high tariff after his inauguration on March 4:
“The condition of the treasury at this time would seem to render an early revision of the tariff indispensable. The Morrill (tariff) Bill, now pending before Congress, may or may not become a law. If, however, it shall not pass, I suppose the whole subject will be one of the most pressing and important for the next Congress.”
In 1860 South Carolina had declared that
“The British parliament undertook to tax the Colonies, to promote British interests. Between taxation without any representation, and taxation without a representation adequate to protection, there was no difference.” “And so with the Southern States towards the Northern States, in the vital matter of taxation, they are in a minority in Congress.” “The people of the Southern States are not only taxed for the benefit of the Northern States, but after the taxes are collected, three-fourths (75%) of them are expended at the North.” (Paragraphs 5-8)
Lincoln further declared in his Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861 his stance on slavery and his reasons for war if war broke out:
“The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the government [four Federal tax collection forts], and to collect the duties and imposts [import tax]; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.” (Paragraph 21)
“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” (Paragraph 4)
“I understand a proposed (Corwin) Amendment to the Constitution has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. Holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.” (Paragraph 32)