Is it too late for the popcorn?
Posted on 06/02/2009 4:45:48 AM PDT by Davy Buck
No one can deny the importance of slavery to the feud that split the United States, or that the CSA states made protection of slavery one of their central purposes. But the Southern confederacy -- that is, the national government of the CSA -- was no more built on slavery than was the Northern Union . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at oldvirginiablog.blogspot.com ...
Slavery was not "A cause". Slavery was THE cause, the single most important reason for the Southern rebellion. It is the first reason mentioned or referenced in every secession declaration, it is the sole reason given in many of the speeches supporting secession, and without it the South would not have rebelled in the first place. And all your revisionism and name calling and hissy fits and lame-ass attempts to twist screen names into insults will never change that. It only confirms what we already know about lost cause fanatics.
fap-fap-fap....
Yup, you posted while I was typing mine.
I stand corrected: they did mention other causes-- but slavery was always mentioned first.
A very typical Southron response.
Re: Georgia’s Declaration of Causes: The words “Slave” or “Slavery” or “Slaveholding” appear 35 times. The word “tariff” doesn’t appear once.
I pointed out the words that are speaking of the Tariff to you. If you can’t read, I can’t help you.
Interesting question. The answer is that none of the confederate states mentioned slavery as the reason for secession.
Only the states of Texas and Alabama made reference to the "other slave-holding states" in their Ordinance of Secession, but did not cite slavery as the reason for seceeding from the Union. All of the confederate states listed a variety of reasons for seceeding, some more grievous than others, but none listed slavery as the reason for their secession.
Most of the Ordinances of Secession said little more than "We secede." But four states took the time to remember the Declaration of Independence when it said, "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." Those documents overwhelmingly cite slavery and its protection as the reason.
Then read it for yourself:
“Lowest level in years” is not relative to the long term disgruntledness over protetive tariffs.
As Alexander Stephens talked of the tariff in his November 1860 speech before the Georgia legislature:
"The next evil that my friend complained of, was the Tariff. Well, let us look at that for a moment. About the time I commenced noticing public matters, this question was agitating the country almost as fearfully as the Slave question now is. In 1832, when I was in college, South Carolina was ready to nullify or secede from the Union on this account. And what have we seen? The tariff no longer distracts the public councils. Reason has triumphed. The present tariff was voted for by Massachusetts and South Carolina. The lion and the lamb lay down together-- every man in the Senate and House from Massachusetts and South Carolina, I think, voted for it, as did my honorable friend himself. And if it be true, to use the figure of speech of my honorable friend, that every man in the North, that works in iron and brass and wood, has his muscle strengthened by the protection of the government, that stimulant was given by his vote, and I believe every other Southern man. So we ought not to complain of that...Massachusetts, with unanimity, voted with the South to lessen them, and they were made just as low as Southern men asked them to be, and those are the rates they are now at."
If tariff rates were set as what Southern congressmen and senators wanted them to be at then how could they be a long-term disgruntlement? And those rates had been set low over the previous decade, not over 2 or 3 years.
According to government documents referenced by Stephen Wise in his book "Lifeline of the Confederacy: Blockade Running During the Civil War", in the year prior to the rebellion over 95% of all tariff revenue was collected at Northern ports. New York alone collected 12 times as much as the 11 busiest Southern ports combined. Any increase in tariffs hit Northern consumers as hard or harder than Southern consumers. So why would the South rebel over a tax that hit them lightly, if at all?
Promises? Now for the whole story ...
Benning (after whom Fort Benning was named) was appointed by the secession convention of Georgia, not by the Confederacy. He couldn’t speak for the Confederacy much less make promises in their name. The Georgia Secession Convention adjourned on January 29, 1861 before the seceding states had even met in Montgomery to form the Confederate government. Now from Benning himself to the Virginia Secession Conference:
I have been appointed by the Convention of the State of Georgia, to present to this Convention, the ordinance of secession of Georgia, and further, to invite Virginia, through this Convention, to join Georgia and the other seceded States in the formation of a Southern Confederacy. This, sir, is the whole extent of my mission. I have no power to make promises, none to receive promises; no power to bind at all in any respect.
Benning’s opinions on possible future tariff concessions to Virginia didn’t sway the Virginia secession convention. They voted secession down on April 4. But then on April 15, Lincoln called for 75,000 troops to invade the South. As a result of that call for an invasion force, the Virginia Secession Convention voted to secede on April 17.
bump
There is a difference between yankees, damn yankees...and friends.
There’s also a difference between Lost Cause Losers and southerners. So, what’s your point?
Obviously not, LOL!
But if tariffs were such a sore point with your rebel leadership why would one of them promise whatever protectionist tariffs that Virginia wanted, set as high as they wanted?
Promise? What promise? He said he couldn't make a promise. Work on your reading comprehension.
One thing is clear from this. Taking advantage of your sister states with a protectionist tariff that favored you didn't appeal to Virginia. After all, they weren't a Yankee state that might do such a thing.
Good grief!
Don’t you know the difference?
A yankee is one who visits the south, and goes home.
A damn yankee is one who is from MA/NY/NJ etc., relocates to the south, and brings their politics with them.
A FRIEND doesn’t have any boundaries...they are conservatives no matter where they were born and raised.
“There’s also a difference between Lost Cause Losers and southerners. So, what’s your point?”
So...what’s your point?
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.