Replies

"Well stated, in general, and I appreciate that there were sectional differences and economic tensions which played into the south's decision to secede."

I might remind you that in 1860, one-half the population of the state of South Carolina was negro. Practically the entire white population of Haiti had been killed in the slave rebellion there.

"Your comments about the fear of a slave rebellion certainly rang true."

Keep in mind that for more than 30 years, there were those in the North that were actively attempting to get the negro population to rise and kill the whites.

The John Brown affair is said by some to be the beginning of the formation of the Southern Militia.

"A college professor I was talking to a couple of years ago said that there's growing study of that aspect, with a lot of original letters and sources turning up showing just how paranoid that south had become, with masters essentially locking themselves away every night with a pistol under their pillow for fear of their own slaves."

It was not exactly paranoia. This is an original letter from a family in South Carolina:

A mister John L. Roberts, a resident of the upper part of South Carolina was reportedly murdered by his slaves on December 27, 1841. The following letter from H.W. Roberts to Lewis Roberts tells of this event.

Lewis Roberts,
Crosby P. O., Ms

Postmarked and cancelled Feb 9th
State of Mississippi, Kemper County,

“Dear Uncle and Aunt,

I take my pen in hand to inform you of one of the most horrible circumstances ever perpetrated by human cruelty, it is of the murder of Uncle John L. Roberts, whose fate we lament as a relative dear to us all, but it becomes us to submit with reverance to the decrees of Almighty Provider.

“ That dreadful occurrence took place on the night of the 27th of December last, only two days after I had left for home, it was on a Saturday. I left his house and on the succeeding Monday Night that he was slain by his Negroes, while asleep, the particulars of that horrible affair I have not space to relate now.

Suffice it to say he was slain in the most barbarous manner by his own Negroes, who after they had beaten him, in the most cruel manner, with clubs, to death they hauled him about one mile and a half, took him out and carryed him about one hundred yards, threw him down beside a tree, took his braines & rubbed them on the tree to make the neighbors think he had been killed by his mare, he lay here near a week before he was found, the neighbors wrote to me as soon as they found, but having directed the letter to a wrong office I never received it, but merely heard of it by common rumor, which has been very recently.

“The Negroes have been arrested and sent to prison…”

W. F. Roberts.
South Carolina, Fairfield District, January 27th, 1842.

"But you consistently fail to credit the north with any sort of idealism."

I am not going to waste time speculating on that topic.

"For instance, you say 'some wanted secession in order to become free of the controls instituted by the Federal government upon the people of the South to gain control of its raw materials.' In the version of history you present, the north's motivations are always base and money-grubbing."

When it came time to send the military, it was the base, tariff-grubbing Lincoln that made the decision.

"Navigation Acts aren't designed to benefit American commerce and shipping in general, but are a scheme to line the pockets of a few wealthy New Englanders."

Those laws were initially enacted to protect fledging American enterprise of the early 1800s, with the support of many in the South. Hamilton had lauded a system of manufacturing and shipping in the North, supported by the raw materials of the South.

Over years, it evolved to the schemes you described.

"New York's well-sited port and entrepreneurism become sinister."

With the aid of the Commerce Department's Navigation Laws and the Warehousing Acts, the NY system came to dominate the import/export industry.

"Surely the fact that men volunteered for service in the north in such numbers must point to some sort of idealism beyond simply trying to gain control of the south's raw materials and force them to use New York warehouses and New England ships."

See "Uncle Tom's Cabin", the fictional account of slavery.

"Maintaining Sumter and Pickens was Lincoln's responsibility under the Constitution. They were federal property by deed."

Sorry, he may have been responsible to the people for the preservation of the Constitution, but he had no military responsibility. And they were Federal property by ceed, not deed. The Union paid no money for the land. It was given to the Union for its use of protection of the states, not the attack of the states.

"And the call for volunteers and the establishment of the blockade came after Sumter had been fired upon."

And Sumter was fired on after the Federal Warship Harriet Lane blockaded the Harbor of Charleston.

"At that point, the south was seen as being in rebellion."

And the South saw the North as breaking the protections of the Constitution by sending ships and troops to the South and being in a state of war at the time Lincoln dispatched the armada.

"Again, the numbers of men flocking to the colors after Sumter points to something more idealistic than mere economic dominance."

Irrelevant point. Lincoln issued the call, and he was doing so to gain something. What do you think it was?

The Union paid no money for the land. It was given to the Union for its use of protection of the states, not the attack of the states.

I'm sorry, I guess I missed the part where Ft. Sumter fired on Charleston first.

And Sumter was fired on after the Federal Warship Harriet Lane blockaded the Harbor of Charleston.

We've gone around on the Harriet Lane before, with you refusing to accept that it was standard practice for revenue cutters to fire a shot across the bows of unflagged ships to make them hoist their colors. The Nashville promptly raised the stars and stripes and went on her way. Not exactly a blockade. And there's no evidence that this action was even known to the gunners of Charleston, much less the cause of their action.

Irrelevant point. Lincoln issued the call, and he was doing so to gain something.

What was FDR attempting to gain when he declared war on Japan? What was President Bush attempting to gain when he invaded Iraq? When Americans are attacked, presidents are supposed to do something. And the call for volunteers wasn't to economically oppress the south and take control of their natural resources. It's akin to saying Bush invaded Iraq for the oil.

I am not going to waste time speculating on that topic.

Exactly my point.