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

To: PeaRidge
The answer is Congress.

Well, that is obviously false. Name the acts, besides the Fugitive Slave Act, that impinged upon the rights of the states.

No. Nicolay called in it in 1881. The SC secession document regarding the federal government dealt with fear of what MIGHT happen, not what HAD happened. They were afraid slavery would be legislated out of exstance in the very body they created and had dominated for so long. And that is why they bolted. It's all a bad joke.

Walt

227 posted on 12/22/2001 5:11:33 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies ]


To: WhiskeyPapa
Well, you can try to discount what they "thought" might happen, but here is the document describing what was about to happen:

REPUBLICAN NATIONAL PLATFORM ADOPTED AT CHICAGO, 1860

Resolved, That we, the delegated representatives unite in the following declarations:

1. That the history of the nation, during the last four years, has fully established the propriety and necessity of the organization and perpetuation of the Republican party,...

2. That the...Union of the States, must and shall be preserved.

3. That to the Union of the States this nation owes its unprecedented increase in population,...and we hold in abhorrence all schemes for Disunion, ...and we denounce those threats of Disunion, in case of a popular overthrow of their ascendency, as denying the vital principles of a free government, and as an avowal of contemplated treason, which it is the imperative duty of an indignant People sternly to rebuke and forever silence.

4. That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the States, and especially the right of each State to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively is essential to that balance of powers on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depends; ...

7. That the new dogma, that the Constitution, of its own force, carries Slavery into any or all of the Territories of the United States, is a dangerous political heresy, at variance with the explicit provisions of that instrument itself, with contemporaneous exposition, and with legislative and judicial precedent; is revolutionary in its tendency, and subversive of the peace and harmony of the country.

8. That the normal condition of all the territory of the United States is that of freedom; That as our Republican fathers, when they had abolished Slavery in all our national territory, ordained that "no person should be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law," it becomes our duty, by legislation, whenever such legislation is necessary, to maintain this provision of the Constitution against all attempts to violate it; and we deny the authority of Congress, of a territorial legislature, or of any individuals, to give legal existence to Slavery in any Territory of the United States.

9. That we brand the recent re-opening of the African slave-trade, under the cover of our national flag, aided by perversions of judicial power, as a crime against humanity and a burning shame to our country and age; and we call upon Congress to take prompt and efficient measures for the total and final suppression of that execrable traffic.

10. That in the recent vetoes, by their Federal Governors, of the acts of the Legislatures of Kansas and Nebraska, prohibiting Slavery in those Territories, we find a practical illustration of the boasted Democratic principle of Non- Intervention and Popular Sovereignty, embodied in the Kansas-Nebraska bill, and a demonstration of the deception and fraud involved therein.

12. That, while providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties upon imports, sound policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development...

15. That appropriations by Congress for River and Harbor improvements...

16. That a Railroad to the Pacific Ocean is imperatively demanded...

,

238 posted on 12/22/2001 7:24:05 AM PST by PeaRidge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies ]

To: WhiskeyPapa
It seems our resident one trick pony is at it again. Just for fun, here are some thoughts for him to chew on...

"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. To avoid misconstruction of what I have said, I depart from my purpose not to speak of particular amendments so far as to say that, holding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable." - Abraham Lincoln speaking a the Inauguration of the 16th President of the United States, March 4, 1861

The amendment about which he was speaking that had been passed by an all yankee congress (the southern senators and representatives had almost entirely left washington by that time) only two days earlier....

"Article Thirteen. "No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."

APPROVED, March 2, 1861. Source: U.S., Statutes at Large, Treaties, and Proclamations of the United States of America, vol. 12 (Boston, 1863), p. 251.

"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race." - Lincoln, 8/17/1858.

"You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them by living among us, while ours suffer from your presence.... It is better for us both, therefore, to be separated." - Lincoln, speaking to a group of former slaves 8/1862

240 posted on 12/22/2001 11:14:03 PM PST by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | 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