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

To: BroJoeK; bushpilot2
The higher percent of slaves, the more secessionists and visa versa, the lower percent of slaves (i.e., Western Virginia), the greater percent of Southern Unionists.

It's certainly true that most Appalachian counties had few slaves and weren't for secession. And it's true that planter-dominated South Carolina drove the secession movement early on.

I was going more by the vote in the 1860 election. Delta counties in northwest Mississippi had very high black and slave populations, but went with the moderate Constitutional Union candidate, John Bell, rather than the secessionists' favored candidate, Breckenridge.

I took that as an indication that secessionist sentiment was also weak there, but it may have just been a political thing, since those counties were a Whig area. Maybe the big planters were all too willing to go from backing the moderate unionist candidate to supporting secession.

I notice that Davis, the other MS senator and one of the state's wartime governors came from outside of the Delta, but the other was from the area, and that nearby East Tennessee was heavily for secession. So I guess this is all something to rethink.

106 posted on 10/20/2017 1:51:32 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies ]


To: x
x: " nearby East Tennessee was heavily for secession. "

Eastern Tennessee was heavily Unionist, persecuted by Confederates and protected by Union troops.
Like Western Virginians, East Tennesseans considered secession from their state, but did not accomplish it.

Might that be what you meant?

111 posted on 10/24/2017 4:36:21 AM PDT by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | 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