Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: x
There is a lot of truth in what you say, though it is not the entire story. Rhett and Yancy were tremendously frustrated by the fact that they were never given any real power even though they were significant in shaping Southern popular opinion.

I believe all the evidence supports the proposition that Davis and Stephens were quite sincere in their opposition to secession, though their personal incentives were as you state. I do not believe they were chosen in Montgomery because of their ability to appeal to Europe as moderates. The delegates were propertied folks who wanted "sound" people running the government, and Rhett and Yancey didn't make that category.
185 posted on 11/07/2003 6:07:35 PM PST by labard1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies ]


To: labard1
You are right about the frustrations that fire-eaters, like Rhett and Yancey felt at not being given real power in the Confederacy. I was talking more about the influence that they had in the months leading up to secession. Not every Southerner was reluctant and melancholy about leaving the union. Some, including leaders, were positively enthusiastic, and without them, history might have been different.

It was not just foreign countries that needed to be convinced by selecting more moderate leaders: there was also the Upper South, the Border States, Northern Democrats and conservatives and those in the CSA who weren't in favor of secession. I don't know how radical or moderate the convention or Congress that selected Davis was. It does tend to happen in revolutions that the most radical agitators who make the revolution are passed over when heads of government are chosen. It may be that cooler heads prevailed at Montgomery. Then again, it may be that pragmatic grounds motivated even some of the more passionate and enthusiastic secessionists to choose someone who was perceived as being more moderate.

It looks like Stephens, an old Whig, did oppose secession, but here we have Jefferson Davis's November 10, 1860 letter to Robert Toombs, written a few days after the election. Davis urges on purely practical grounds that the cotton states coordinate their actions, so that no state secede too early before it was clear that others would support it. Some arguments for caution and deliberation in late 1860 may just have been delaying tactics until Southern political leaders got all their ducks in a row, not indications of indecision, deep reflection or emotional torment. Doubtless, Davis felt regrets on leaving the Union, but he was also able to think quite cooly about what he and his state were doing.

206 posted on 11/08/2003 8:56:35 AM PST by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


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