Posted on 06/27/2004 12:37:31 PM PDT by VRWCer
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:16:50 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Delaware would have been part of the "second wave" of seceding states (e.g. Virginia or Tennessee), which reacted after the Confederacy began the war by joining the new nation. Since at that time neighboring Maryland had already been occupied by federal soldiers, there must have been a strong sense amongst the pro-slavery faction in Delaware that their position would be strategically hopeless. Furthermore, there was obviously a strong pro-Union faction in the tiny state, as it sent nine regiments to the federal forces.
did you bother to actually read my post #26????
slavery, once again (SIGH!) was ONLY important to the slaveOWNERS. hardly anybody else cared about the "peculiar institution", period, end of story.
over 98% of southern soldiers, sailors & marines were NOT slaveowners (in point of fact, their average GROSS ASSETS were less than US $ 25.00 in 1860! ours was a PEASANT REVOLT/ARMY!) and did not fight for the slave-owning minority to own slaves. this was particularly true of the 100,000 plus black Confederate volunteers! (if the war was to preserve/spread the "peculiar institution", what were THEY fighting for????)
free dixie,sw
Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, and arguably Missouri were all slave states that stayed in the Union.
"...Still forbearing, still hoping, still striving for peace and union, we waited until a section President [Lincoln], nominated by a sectional convention, elected by a sectional vote--and that the vote of a minority of the people--was about to be inducted into office, under the warning of his own distinct announcement that the Union could not permanently endure "half slave and half free"; meaning thereby that it could not continue to exist in the condition in which it was formed and its Constitution adopted. The leader of his party (William H. Seward) [of the Republican party], who was to be the chief of his Cabinet, was the man who had first proclaimed an "irrepressible conflict" between the North and the South, and who had declared that abolitionism, having triumphed in the Territories, would proceed to the invasion of the States. Even then the Southern people did not finally despair until the temper of the triumphant party had been tested in Congress and found adverse to any terms of reconciliation consistent with the honor and safety of all parties."
"No alternative remained except to seek the security out of the Union which they had vainly tried to obtain within it. The hope of our people may be stated in a sentence. It was to escape from injury and strife in the Union, to find prosperity and peace out of it."
--Jefferson Davis, "The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government" (1881)
Off topic.
For those of you that enjoy Civil War reading, I just finished Newt Gingrich's "Grant comes East" over the weekend.
I highly recommend it, especially if you enjoyed the Shaara's triology. Its a page turner.
Grant Comes East is the sequel to Gingrich's alternate history novel Gettysburg. A significant portion of Gettysburg actually takes place right near my home in Carroll County, Maryland.
Absolutely - the Baltimore Riots of '61 were proof of that.
Well, here for example is the text of the South Carolina ordinance of secession. This ordinance states that South Carolina is seceding from the Union, that it is doing so to protect its rights upon which the federal government is (or, rather, threatened to) infringing, and that those rights were the right to hold slaves. Furthermore, the state was particularly annoyed at the northern states' attempts to subvert the Fugitive Slave Act. Read it for yourself.
Oddly enough there doesn't seem to be anything in there about "taxes" or "economic control", excepting taxes on slaves. Either the secession convention didn't consider these factors as important as slavery, or you're engaging in revisionist history.
Why did the North go to war? To preserve the Union, moron!
How peculiar! Most of the histories I've read have stated that the South began the war when the Confederate state governments tried to seize United States property and began shelling it. You must have access to the lost accounts of Fort Sumter firing on Charleston. Will wonders never cease.
Well, I tried, but your syntax really doesn't make it very easy. It's "chattel", by the way.
FYI - Lincoln wanted to keep Ft. Sumter (which had no other strategic value) as a "gate keeper" to insure he collected import taxes off goods entering into SC. Once again you have missed the underlying reasoning. You go on thinking your PC Yankee line of crap. You of the North brought the whole nation into slavery to Washington DC, when you defeated the Southern Forces. Thank Lincoln for the first income tax, the first Trials by tribunal and etc. However by celebrating what you think was a righteous cause, you denied the very document that is the cornerstone of American values. A hint here bozo, it isn't the Constitution. Even the Founders believed that the preponderance of power should reside with the States. They didn't want the strong central government knowing full well it was ripe for corruption and tyranny to prevail.
I think James Madison (a Virginian) said it best - " If there be a principle that ought not to be questioned within the United States, it is, that every nation has a right to abolish an old government and establish a new one. This principle is not only recorded in every public archive, written inevery American heart, and sealed with the blood of a host of American martyrs; but it is the only lawful tenure by which the United States hold their existence as a nation." - 1793
And for your further edification " Our Governmental System is established by a compact not between the Government of the United States, and the State Governments; but between the States, as sovereign communities, stipulating each with the others, a surrender of certain portions of their respective authorities, to be exercised by a Common Government, and a reservation, for their own exercise, of all their other authorities." - 29 June 1821
That goes both ways. One might also point out that whole sections of the confederacy might have seceded if the Davis regime had not imposed martial law and arrested all pro-Union citizens that they could find.
Minority rules bump.
Furthermore, there was obviously a strong pro-Union faction in the tiny state,
And thus you counter-argue your own point. Delaware knew the fight was one for Union (i.e. political control), and not one against slavery.
LOL!!
A significant portion of Gettysburg actually takes place right near my home in Carroll County, Maryland.
I'm not far away.....Howard County.
Perhaps you should check your constitution; subverting the FSA was abrogation of constitutional responsibility and was clearly not left within the bounds of state power.
You must have access to the lost accounts of Fort Sumter firing on Charleston. Will wonders never cease.
I'll let nolu chan mop the floor with you over this one...
;^)
Look what you started ;-)
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.