That is simply not true. Very little was collected in Southern ports. 
Posted on 07/23/2013 8:18:43 AM PDT by Bon of Babble
Rush Limbaugh would have sided with the confederacy during the Civil War, according to MSNBC analyst Dorian Warren.
Warren, a Columbia professor and fellow at the progressive Roosevelt Institute, explained that Limbaugh “represents the Confederacy. He would have been on that side that went to war around the question of slavery.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
You poor, it must be frightful how the entire world has conspired to rob y’all of you’re rightful place as the preeminent slave power on the planet.
Better luck next time ;-)
Because Federal powers are supposed to be "few and limited"... at least they used to be before TR, Wilson, FDR, Johnson and now Obama came along. States and Municipal governments closer to the people exersising their power, under the limitations demanded by the Bill of Rights was the way it was intended to be.
NO-WHERE in the debates or Federalist papers is there an argument that binds a states pledge in perpetuity. The union is an object of the states NOT the general government or the constitution.
All of the states? Or just some of the states?
If one state has the freedom to seceed for any reason, or for no particular reason at all, do the other states have to freedom to expell any state they wish for any reason they choose?
If that be the case, what purpose does even a "Compact" of the States serve if there is no duty to fellow states?
As to wheater it was created by the States or the People, I again refer to Mr. Madison's 1833 letter.
" It is fortunate when disputed theories, can be decided by undisputed facts. And here the undisputed fact is, that the Constitution was made by the people, but as imbodied into the several states, who were parties to it and therefore made by the States in their highest authoritative capacity. They might, by the same authority & by the same process have converted the Confederacy into a mere league or treaty; or continued it with enlarged or abridged powers; or have imbodied the people of their respective States into one people, nation or sovereignty; or as they did by a mixed form make them one people, nation, or sovereignty, for certain purposes, and not so for others.
The Constitution of the U.S. being established by a Competent authority, by that of the sovereign people of the several States who were the parties to it, it remains only to inquire what the Constitution is; and here it speaks for itself.
It organizes a Government into the usual Legislative Executive & Judiciary Departments; invests it with specified powers, leaving others to the parties to the Constitution; it makes the Government like other Governments to operate directly on the people; places at its Command the needful Physical means of executing its powers; and finally proclaims its supremacy, and that of the laws made in pursuance of it, over the Constitutions & laws of the States; the powers of the Government being exercised, as in other elective & responsible Governments, under the controul of its Constituents, the people & legislatures of the States, and subject to the Revolutionary Rights of the people in extreme cases.
It might have been added, that whilst the Constitution, therefore, is admitted to be in force, its operation, in every respect must be precisely the same, whether its authority be derived from that of the people, in the one or the other of the modes, in question; the authority being equally Competent in both; and that, without an annulment of the Constitution itself its supremacy must be submitted to.
The only distinctive effect, between the two modes of forming a Constitution by the authority of the people, is that if formed by them as imbodied into separate communities, as in the case of the Constitution of the U.S. a dissolution of the Constitutional Compact would replace them in the condition of separate communities, that being the Condition in which they entered into the compact; whereas if formed by the people as one community, acting as such by a numerical majority, a dissolution of the compact would reduce them to a state of nature, as so many individual persons.
But whilst the Constitutional compact remains undissolved, it must be executed according to the forms and provisions specified in the compact. It must not be forgotten, that compact, express or implied is the vital principle of free Governments as contradistinguished from Governments not free; and that a revolt against this principle leaves no choice but between anarchy and despotism.
Do you have any documentation on that?
No, the Radical Republicans wouldn’t have the people that started the insurrection violate the rights of citizens of African heritage.
That is why Reconstruction became more invasive. First southern treachery, then consequences.
In response to southern treachery, honest people just wouldn’t invest there, wouldn’t travel there. So the south became a backwater until the legal system treated people ‘not from there’ fairly. That took a few generations. Southern schools still don’t teach that Hood burned Atlanta.
I don't know if it was set up like that, but from what I understand almost all the tariff duties collected by FedGov™ were from Southern ports. I think I read the Charleston alone collected more tariffs than all the Northern ports combined.
That is simply not true. Very little was collected in Southern ports.
The point is, locals would tar anyone from outside as a carpetbagger. Anyone who cooperated with anyone from outside was a scalawag.
Oh, but one could move from outside, but you would have to bribe one or more local leader of the KKK, and then so long as he/they was placated, you could live. Until he/they wanted more. And more. And more....
That unconstitutional tax on enterprise, lead to ambitious people going elsewhere. People invested in the west, where there may have been little law, but at least law was not uniformly subservient to rampant corruption. And so the south didn’t develop until the tax became lower. Eventually the oil business in Texas flourished, because the KKK wouldn’t/couldn’t mess with roughnecks. Eventually Atlanda became too busy to hate.
It did take a while though.
Southern people today are among the most decent of folks. Greenville NC is in a ‘research triangle’ that finds brilliant people working side by side. My brother got his PHD in Starkville Missippi, and the folks there are brilliant researchers.
People are people, and most are decent enough when they are permitted to be. Sadly the south had insitutions that coerced people to be more cruel than I hope you can imagine. It is good that is over.
Like to see exports....
There was (and is) no tariff on exports. Tariffs are only on imports.
Rush supports the Union in the War between the States.
It wasn't 'people'. It was the Democrat political machine that had total power. Be it 1950s Mississippi or 2013 Detroit, cross it, and you will have big problems. Pay them off, and they will tollerate you -- at least until they want some more.
The Democrat party has always been consistant. If you have money, they want it!
I suppose the Democratic Political Machine was, using the term loosely, composed of people.
Dumbass I’d like to see the amount in dollors of exports from each port. Not tariffs. I know there are no export tariffs.
Apparently your bad day started early...
No, that role was taken over by the Union, and we are now slaves on their plantation, bubba do. And with rewrite artists like you, they will continue. All three of you ill and uninformed self righteous pontificators. Deo Vindice.
And the hand-wringing continues. You poor dear....
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.