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

To: Non-Sequitur
Good morning.
Amazing what a good night's sleep can do for you, eh.

The excerpts you posted look like something from one of Frank Epperson's web pages.

This particular one was a series of carefully selected documents that dealt with slavery and the Civil War. Nothing else is addressed but slavery so it would seem to support your argument.

The irony is that it supports mine as well.

Cotton was king in the South and abolition would have destroyed the economies of the southern states. The North, as I said had a larger, population and a larger industrial base. They also had their own agricultural base and the South knew it.

Read the words you posted and you see that the Southern firebrands understood that abolition would destroy the south.

The immorality of slavery was unquestionable, but it was economics, not just morality, along with the idea that the slave owning states had the legal right to secede that led to secession. Even on a page with an antislavery agenda this message comes through.

The barrage on Ft. Sumter was to prevent the Federals from rearming and resupplying a position that dominated the waterway. The war had become inevitable by the time the cannon were fired, but slavery was only one issue.

Michael Frazier
209 posted on 03/08/2006 8:40:36 AM PST by brazzaville (no surrender no retreat, well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies ]


To: brazzaville
The excerpts you posted look like something from one of Frank Epperson's web pages.

You are free to post whatever contemporary quotes that support your claims from whatever source you care to locate. I notice, however, that you can't seem to do that.

Cotton was king in the South and abolition would have destroyed the economies of the southern states. The North, as I said had a larger, population and a larger industrial base. They also had their own agricultural base and the South knew it.

Slavery was far more ingrained in southern society than for just agricultural labor. Many slaves, perhaps most did not see a cotton field in their life. They were domestic help and some skilled labor. Men like Thomas Jackson, owner of up to 10 slaves at one time, didn't use them for plantation help. They were maids and cooks and grooms and gardeners. Their economy didn't depend on slave labor, just their leisure.

The immorality of slavery was unquestionable, but it was economics, not just morality, along with the idea that the slave owning states had the legal right to secede that led to secession. Even on a page with an antislavery agenda this message comes through.

I went back and reread every one of those quotes and I don't see any belief in the immorality of slavery. I see men who are convinced that slavery is a necessary good for all the south, and who fully expect slavery to continue for generations. They weren't concerned with economics so much as their society, which was dependent of slavery and its role in defining the proper place for blacks in southern society. None of the men quoted thought slavery should be ended, and I'm not aware of a single southern leader who did.

The barrage on Ft. Sumter was to prevent the Federals from rearming and resupplying a position that dominated the waterway. The war had become inevitable by the time the cannon were fired, but slavery was only one issue. The barrage on Ft. Sumter was to prevent the Federals from rearming and resupplying a position that dominated the waterway. The war had become inevitable by the time the cannon were fired, but slavery was only one issue.

The garrison at Sumter did not take a single hostile action during the more than three months that they were there. On the contrary every hostile action taken was on the part of the southern forces. Lincoln made it clear that his intent was to land food and supplies only, and that men and munitions would be landed only if the resupply was opposed. The south could have had the status quo and pursued peaceful means. They chose not to.

242 posted on 03/08/2006 5:22:06 PM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | 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