Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: lentulusgracchus
The issue I was addressing was the South's continuing interest in territorial expansion with an eye on the propagation of slavery. As I posted a few minutes ago, their 1861 constitution provided for the protection of slavery in new territories. If the South had not anticipated expansion, or had given up on propagating slavery outside the boundaries of the existing Confederacy, then why is that verbiage there?
527 posted on 11/20/2004 9:26:04 PM PST by capitan_refugio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 470 | View Replies ]


To: capitan_refugio
If the South had not anticipated expansion, or had given up on propagating slavery outside the boundaries of the existing Confederacy, then why is that verbiage there?

They may have included some language about New Mexico (assuming they could detach it from the United States Territories, not a given), but my central point remained undisturbed, that the South gave up on all the big Mountain West territories and the northern Plains States. Your quotation of the California adventure is interesting and no doubt historically accurate, but please notice that the plan was adventitious -- literally over-the-transom -- and not something long held in view by the CSA.

The South resigned its interest in most of the Territories and didn't make expansion an issue any more, after Lincoln's election.

554 posted on 11/21/2004 3:10:08 AM PST by lentulusgracchus ("Whatever." -- sinkspur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 527 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson