Posted on 12/22/2019 4:23:47 AM PST by Bull Snipe
"I beg to present you as a Christmas gift the City of Savannah, with one hundred and fifty heavy guns and plenty of ammunition and about twenty-five thousand bales of cotton." General William T. Sherman's "March to the Sea" was over. During the campaign General Sherman had made good on his promise d “to make Georgia howl”. Atlanta was a smoldering ruin, Savannah was in Union hands, closing one of the last large ports to Confederate blockade runners. Sherman’s Army wrecked 300 miles of railroad and numerous bridges and miles of telegraph lines. It seized 5,000 horses, 4,000 mules, and 13,000 head of cattle. It confiscated 9.5 million pounds of corn and 10.5 million pounds of fodder, and destroyed uncounted cotton gins and mills. In all, about 100 million dollars of damage was done to Georgia and the Confederate war effort.
That was the psyche of the South in 1860. The social goal was to own land, slaves, and grow cotton. That was the route to wealth and success.
It's worth noting that at least two of the four States mentioned reserved the right of secession, in writing, when they ratified the Constitution...
Your writing, in terms of a flailing Christmas fulmination, is quite good.
And your sense of history is like that of a filament that has burnt out. Neither is useful and both are not too bright.
That is simply a fabrication and misrepresentation. In other words, a lot of BULL.
The Morrill Tariff passed the House with ease in May of 1860 despite virtually unanimous opposition by every southern member.
Senator Hunter exerted every bit of parliamentary strength he could to delay the vote in the Senate until after the election hoping for the slim chance that enough votes would emerge to block it.
They did not and had every single southern member stayed in the Senate and voted against the Morrill Tariff, the best case scenario they could have hoped for was a tie, in which case Vice President Hamlin would cast the deciding vote in favor.
Why stay in a union that was slowly strangling your ability to survive?
“There were only so many crystal chandeliers and Paris gowns that plantation owners could buy”
The only overseas imports purchased by the South in 1860 was coffee and clothing.
Another Fake X fact.
Yes it passed the House in May 10 1860. It did not pass the Senate until Feb 20 1861. After a conference committee with the house to iron out some minor differences the Senate passed the Morrell Tariff Act, March 2 1861
In the Senate 24 yes votes, 14 no votes and 12 abstentions.
5 of the abstentions were southern Democrats. Had the senators of the 7 seceding states remained in the Senate, that would have probably been 14 more no votes. The bill would have failed.
“Vice President Hamlin would cast the deciding vote in favor”
Until March 4 1861 John C. Breckenridge was the Vice President of the United States.
And you sound like a typical liberal that claims all the founding fathers were just a bunch of rich old slave owning white men that really didn’t believe what the Declaration of Independence stayed; “that all men are created equal”.
Most of the founding fathers realized that slavery was incompatible with the ideals expressed in our founding. However they believed at the time that it was more important to have all the states be part of the United States, so they had to compromise; primarily with Georgia and South Carolina being the most vocal supporters of slavery. Don’t believe me? Look at the words of the founders themselves.
“It being among my first wishes to see some plan adopted, by which slavery in this country may be abolished by law.” - George Washington Letter to John Mercer, September 9, 1786
“I wish from my soul that the legislature of this State could see a policy of a gradual Abolition of Slavery.”
- George Washington: letter to Lawrence Lewis, August 4, 1797
“Every measure of prudence, therefore, ought to be assumed for the eventual total extirpation of slavery from the United States.... I have, throughout my whole life, held the practice of slavery in... abhorrence.”
John Adams: letter to Evans, June 8, 1819
“It is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished. The honor of the States, as we as justice and humanity, in my opinion loudly call upon them to emancipate these unhappy people. To contend for our own liberty, and to deny that blessing to others, involves an inconsistency not to be excused.”
-John Jay: to R. Lushington - March 15, 1786
“Would any one believe that I am master of slaves by my own purchase? I am drawn along by the general inconvenience of living without them. I will not — I cannot justify it, however culpable my conduct. I will so far pay my devoir to Virtue, as to own the excellence and rectitude of her precepts, and to lament my want of conformity to them. I believe a time will come when an opportunity will be afforded to abolish this lamentable evil. Everything we cam do, is to improve it, if It happens in our day; if not, let us transmit to our descendants, together with our slaves, a pity for their unhappy lot, and an abhorrence of Slavery. If we cannot reduce this wished-for reformation to practice, let us treat the unhappy victims with lenity. It is the furthest advancement we can make toward justice. It is a debt we owe to the purity of our religion, to show that it is at variance with that law which warrants Slavery.”
-Patrick Henry letter to John Alsop Jan13, 1773
My point exactly. The North had three times as many people and four times as many free people as well as a colder climate. It’s likely that they imported more coffee and clothing/textiles and other goods, and no amount of chandeliers or ball gowns, or whips, chains, and shackles imported by the small class of wealthy planters was likely to offset that. Now stop embarrassing yourself.
The south wanted to keep the institution of slavery. They were rightfully defeated. If the south had freed the slaves and then fired on Ft. Sumter History would have turned out differently and the South would have had the moral authority.
Thankfully the racists running the Southern Government lost.
Well, they didn't.
During 1860 the imports of the South were valued at $331 million; those of the North at $31 million.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761557415/Confederate_States_of_America.html
Probably is not history. You are using non-sequiturs to try to impress your buddies.
In summary, during that year the Port of New York took in $233.7M, of which $203.4M were subject to tariffs ranging from 4 to 30%. During that same period, all other U.S. ports combined received $128.5M in imports, of which $76.5M was subject to tariff. So the Port of New York, by itself, handled almost two-thirds (64.5%) of the value of all U.S. imports, and almost three-quarters (72.7%) of the value of all tariffed imports
Source (and hey, my link actually works)
It's very unlikely that most of those imports made their way South.
At least I am factually correct.
“. . . they believed at the time that it was more important to have all the states be part of the United States, so they had to compromise; primarily with Georgia and South Carolina being the most vocal supporters of slavery. Don’t believe me?”
I believe you. Many people at the time of the founding said they opposed slavery. The only reason slavery was enshrined in the United States Constitution at all was because the 13 original slave states believed it was in their own economic and political best self interest.
Otherwise: No!
“The south wanted to keep the institution of slavery. They were rightfully defeated.”
If the South was fighting for slavery, who was fighting against slavery?
After January 1 1863, Every slave in those states in rebellion against the United States became de jura free. Where ever the Union Army went after that date, slaves became not only de jura but de facto free persons. By the end of the war, the Union Army freed about 3 million slaves.
Does that give you an idea of who was fighting to end slavery?
And after that, President Lincoln added yet another slave state to the most powerful slave nation in North America - the United States.
Brings to mind the observation of the London Spectator: “The Government liberates the enemy’s slaves as it would the enemy’s cattle, simply to weaken them in the coming conflict . . . the principle asserted is not that a human being cannot justly own another, but that he cannot own him unless he is loyal to the United States.”
Be that as it may. Just answering your question. Motivation has little to do with the act. The Union Army freed 3 million slaves.
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.