[Phlyer]

Those official documents gave slavery as the reason for secession.

I did look that up, and while I'll quibble to the extent that in at least some of them, slavery is only one of the reasons given, it nonetheless figures prominently in the ones I found.

Of course, those writing the articles of succession were a tiny fraction of the population of the Southern states, and in most cases had a vested interest in keeping slaves that was not shared by the main population. But that's what they wrote.

That leads to the question of why would all of those non-slave-owning citizens march off to die for something they didn't have anyway? I think it's still true that for most of the Southern population, high tariffs on imported goods, even restrictions to prevent the importation at all of the tools of industrialization (which would show up as prices for items that had to be obtained from the North, and therefore impact all of the citizens) would be a more compelling reason to separate. But you definitely provided evidence that at least some of the 'contemporary Southern writings - which is what I asked for - did focus on slavery. Thanks for the insight.

I think there is a strong feeling among many that the State's Rights issue has been underplayed, for all that slavery (per your evidence) was an important issue. It's exemplified in the "Gettysburg" movie where Longstreet says (at least in the movie, "We should have freed the slaves and *then* fired on Fort Sumter."

By the way, I disagree with that as well. As I said, I'm a Constituionalist and that would not have been the Constitutionally-sound approach either. But the South was getting screwed, and on a lot more issues than slavery. They needed to do something.

[Tired of Taxes]

Thank you for your response.

"That leads to the question of why would all of those non-slave-owning citizens march off to die for something they didn't have anyway?"

Some time ago, I ended up in a long discussion here on this topic, and it forced me to look further and learn more. What I found challenged what I'd long believed. For example, I long believed that slaveholders were a teeny-tiny percentage of the population and that impoverished Confederate soldiers were forced to fight a war for the wealthy few. But, in checking further, I came across articles that said the percentage of slaveholders was larger. In addition to plantation owners with many slaves, some families would purchase, say, one slave, and small-time farmers might hold a few slaves. So, even the people who did not personally "own" a slave often were connected to people who did - sometimes in their own families. The purchase of a slave was a big investment, so one reason slaveholders did not want to free their slaves was financial.

Another reason was that generations of people were accustomed to a way of life that involved slavery, and they didn't want it to change. Plus, as the Southern Democrats (who controlled those states) declared in their written reasons for secession, they feared what might happen if the slaves were freed. There were still some slaves held up North at the time (if what I read is correct), but in a couple of southern states, the slaves outnumbered the free people.

Some people believe they seceded over a tariff, but I don't recall seeing a tariff mentioned specifically in writing as a reason for secession. But, Southern Dems could see their power in the federal government would diminish, if more "free" states were admitted to the union.

Below are the links I kept for the official documents. As you noted before, these documents give slavery as the main reason for secession. Then, when the CSA wrote its constitution, they enshrined slavery in it. Crazy. Sheesh, those poor slaves...

Secession Acts of the Thirteen Confederate States

Declarations:

South Carolina
Mississippi
Georgia
Texas

Resolutions:

Arkansas
Alabama
Tennessee