Bump.
Posted on 06/28/2017 11:20:43 AM PDT by Sopater
My "Rewriting American History" column of a fortnight ago, about the dismantling of Confederate monuments, generated considerable mail. Some argued there should not be statues honoring traitors such as Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Jefferson Davis, who fought against the Union. Victors of wars get to write the history, and the history they write often does not reflect the facts. Let's look at some of the facts and ask: Did the South have a right to secede from the Union? If it did, we can't label Confederate generals as traitors.
Article 1 of the Treaty of Paris (1783), which ended the war between the Colonies and Great Britain, held "New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States." Representatives of these states came together in Philadelphia in 1787 to write a constitution and form a union.
During the ratification debates, Virginia's delegates said, "The powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression." The ratification documents of New York and Rhode Island expressed similar sentiments.
At the Constitutional Convention, a proposal was made to allow the federal government to suppress a seceding state. James Madison, the "Father of the Constitution," rejected it. The minutes from the debate paraphrased his opinion: "A union of the states containing such an ingredient (would) provide for its own destruction. The use of force against a state would look more like a declaration of war than an infliction of punishment and would probably be considered by the party attacked as a dissolution of all previous compacts by which it might be bound."
America's first secessionist movement started in New England after the Louisiana Purchase in 1803. Many were infuriated by what they saw as an unconstitutional act by President Thomas Jefferson. The movement was led by Timothy Pickering of Massachusetts, George Washington's secretary of war and secretary of state. He later became a congressman and senator. "The principles of our Revolution point to the remedy — a separation," Pickering wrote to George Cabot in 1803, for "the people of the East cannot reconcile their habits, views, and interests with those of the South and West." His Senate colleague James Hillhouse of Connecticut agreed, saying, "The Eastern states must and will dissolve the union and form a separate government." This call for secession was shared by other prominent Americans, such as John Quincy Adams, Elbridge Gerry, Fisher Ames, Josiah Quincy III and Joseph Story. The call failed to garner support at the 1814-15 Hartford Convention.
The U.S. Constitution would have never been ratified — and a union never created — if the people of those 13 "free sovereign and Independent States" did not believe that they had the right to secede. Even on the eve of the War of 1861, unionist politicians saw secession as a right that states had. Rep. Jacob M. Kunkel of Maryland said, "Any attempt to preserve the union between the states of this Confederacy by force would be impractical and destructive of republican liberty." The Northern Democratic and Republican parties favored allowing the South to secede in peace.
Northern newspapers editorialized in favor of the South's right to secede. New-York Tribune (Feb. 5, 1860): "If tyranny and despotism justified the Revolution of 1776, then we do not see why it would not justify the secession of Five Millions of Southrons from the Federal Union in 1861." The Detroit Free Press (Feb. 19, 1861): "An attempt to subjugate the seceded States, even if successful, could produce nothing but evil — evil unmitigated in character and appalling in extent." The New-York Times (March 21, 1861): "There is a growing sentiment throughout the North in favor of letting the Gulf States go."
Confederate generals were fighting for independence from the Union just as George Washington and other generals fought for independence from Great Britain. Those who'd label Gen. Robert E. Lee as a traitor might also label George Washington as a traitor. I'm sure Great Britain's King George III would have agreed.
In your reading of the biographies, did you ever come across any information indicating Lincoln was a white supremacist?
No, none.
I know you and I have not always seen eye-to-eye on everything.
Can we at least agree on Professor Walter E. Williams logical conclusion: “Confederate generals were fighting for independence from the Union just as George Washington and other generals fought for independence from Great Britain. Those who'd label Gen. Robert E. Lee as a traitor might also label George Washington as a traitor. I'm sure Great Britain's King George III would have agreed.”
I love Professor Williams.
No.
Yes. Prior to the Civil War, the country was usually referred to as "These United States." Afterward, "The United States" became standard.
The reason I ask about possible white supremacy views of Lincoln is because of what he said in at least one of the Lincoln-Douglas debates: "I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races,that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
That really does sound like a white supremacy viewpoint.
Did I ever make any claim of a “moral cause” in the North’s handling of a rebellion? Don’t think I did.
I am sure Lincoln was conflicted regarding slavery and race relations. But he also ultimately issued the Emancipation Proclamation and pushed through the 13th Amendment.
I grow tired of those who pick away at Lincoln, try to make him out to be a racist and a bad man. He was a good man and a good president.
Earlier you had your flame-proof jammies on and ready for an evening of bashing racists, but already you “grow tired” of those who question Lincoln's racist past.
Can you tell us more about the good kind of racists? Are those the ones that kill bad racists?
“Did I ever make any claim of a “moral cause” in the North’s handling of a rebellion? Don’t think I did.”
I think you and I agree the North was not fighting for a moral cause. Most likely they were fighting for the economic and political best interests of the northern states. Follow the money.
And that was the same reason the original northern states voted to enshrine slavery in the U.S. constitution.
Let’s continue to work together to get the word out.
Let’s review.
What main reason did the secessionist leaders give for seceding from the United States?
I have talked to you before about using Lincoln quotes deceptively. You should apologize and then present at least the full paragraph. And then maybe try putting it in context. And how it was used in a rebuttal in a debate with Stephen Douglas. You might also provide the year. The true greatness of the man is beyond your powers of comprehension. In today’s lingo one might refer to Abe as a racist, or, someone like you, as a white supremacist, but they would be judging Abe by today’s standards. What you are missing and what I have tried to tell you before, is that despite Abe’s personal view on blacks, he knew that slavery was wrong. He hated slavery. Sure, if Douglas was going to make slavery legal all across the country, Abe would certainly not want to be the “enslaved”. Abe did make those statements about blacks, and then humorously made much the same argument at Douglas personally (that is, that Douglas was not Abe’s intellectual equal either). He did say that Douglas ignored the basic humanity of blacks, and that slaves did have an equal right to liberty. Now, that may seem unbecoming to you, that a man would have and express such hatred. You have been shown many, many Abraham Lincoln quotes in which he expresses his hatred for slavery. It all falls on deaf ears. You are a Lincoln hater. Abraham Lincoln, hated slavery, anytime, anywhere. Even if it was of an inferior “race” by a superior “race”. Abe believed that all men were created equal and with the same rights (whether he personally liked those men or nor). On the flip side we have the pro-slavers. Maybe they loved the blacks. Is that what you are trying to say?
Abraham Lincoln was probably the most pragmatic man to ever occupy the Oval office. Lincoln said all along that the objective was to restore the Union. So be it. The rest of your statements are pure drivel, unsubstantiated by any real facts.
I think fighting for your country against the forces of a rebellion trying to tear it apart is a moral cause.
Measured by today's standards? Yes. Please point out a single person of the times who was not?
Can you admit that you have absolutely no problem with white supremacists as a whole, and are upset by only one single white supremacist from the 19th century? Just curious.
Bump.
"Why I du declare, it's my old friend Sambo, course you'll fight for us, lend us a hand, old hoss,du!"
Guess what. They didn't.
Massachusetts courts ruled slavery illegal in the 1780s. By 1800 (if not sooner) no one was held as a slave in the state.
They didn't pass laws against slavery in later years for the same reason there aren't laws against cannibalism in the US (except in Idaho).
Nobody was doing it, and you'd be violating other laws if you tried (sort of makes you wonder why an anti-cannibalism law was needed in Idaho).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.