[donmeaker]

you wanted some original documents. Here are the first few paragraphs from the Georgia Declaration of causes of secession. Now recall this is the fine southern gentlemen who, in their complaint state that the Republican party is an anti slavery party.

http://sunsite.utk.edu/civil-war/reasons.html

I figure this pretty much shoots holes in your position that the anti slavery notion began in the north after several military defeats, and in response to the potential of European intervention. The southern plantation aristocracy seems to me to have sensed the antislavery purpose in the Republican party before the war began.

I am waiting to hear your apology.


Georgia
[Copied by Justin Sanders from the Official Records, Ser IV, vol 1, pp. 81-85.]
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery. They have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property, and by the use of their power in the Federal Government have striven to deprive us of an equal enjoyment of the common Territories of the Republic. This hostile policy of our confederates has been pursued with every circumstance of aggravation which could arouse the passions and excite the hatred of our people, and has placed the two sections of the Union for many years past in the condition of virtual civil war. Our people, still attached to the Union from habit and national traditions, and averse to change, hoped that time, reason, and argument would bring, if not redress, at least exemption from further insults, injuries, and dangers. Recent events have fully dissipated all such hopes and demonstrated the necessity of separation. Our Northern confederates, after a full and calm hearing of all the facts, after a fair warning of our purpose not to submit to the rule of the authors of all these wrongs and injuries, have by a large majority committed the Government of the United States into their hands. The people of Georgia, after an equally full and fair and deliberate hearing of the case, have declared with equal firmness that they shall not rule over them. A brief history of the rise, progress, and policy of anti-slavery and the political organization into whose hands the administration of the Federal Government has been committed will fully justify the pronounced verdict of the people of Georgia. The party of Lincoln, called the Republican party, under its present name and organization, is of recent origin. It is admitted to be an anti-slavery party. While it attracts to itself by its creed the scattered advocates of exploded political heresies, of condemned theories in political economy, the advocates of commercial restrictions, of protection, of special privileges, of waste and corruption in the administration of Government, anti-slavery is its mission and its purpose. By anti-slavery it is made a power in the state.....

[donmeaker]

This post shows the importance of antislavery behavior in the decision of South Carolina. the post is related to that previously. Now recall, this is not lying damn yankees, but the fine southern gentlemen of the legislature, who didn't care about slavery at all, but were rather, the people you say were devoted to southern libery. (Dixie was a song written in NYC, by the way.) These were

"The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution. The States of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New York, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa, have enacted laws which either nullify the Acts of Congress or render useless any attempt to execute them. In many of these States the fugitive is discharged from service or labor claimed, and in none of them has the State Government complied with the stipulation made in the Constitution. The State of New Jersey, at an early day, passed a law in conformity with her constitutional obligation; but the current of anti-slavery feeling has led her more recently to enact laws which render inoperative the remedies provided by her own law and by the laws of Congress. In the State of New York even the right of transit for a slave has been denied by her tribunals; and the States of Ohio and Iowa have refused to surrender to justice fugitives charged with murder, and with inciting servile insurrection in the State of Virginia. Thus the constituted compact has been deliberately broken and disregarded by the non-slaveholding States, and the consequence follows that South Carolina is released from her obligation. "

Note: the argument is that S.Carolina is released from her obligation to the whole, because of the antislavery activity of some states with in their own borders. Of course it would not be appropriate to say that the northern states were free of obligation to pay tariffs because some federal money was spent supporting slavery, or policing the sea lanes by which cotton was exported.

[stand watie]

as the slaveholders never comprised more than 6% of southerners and their documents were NOT official documents, hardly anyone, north or south,either read them or cared what they said, an intelligent person must conclude that the cited documents were UNimportant to the causes of the war for dixie freedom. may i suggest that you do a search of my previous posts last year, to see the comments of academics, who are experts in this particuliar field.

i'm not inclined to retype all that data again.

in point of fact, the so-called "causes of secession" were "discovered" in the 1960s by the most hatefilled, arrogant & south-HATING revisionists out of the poison-ivy league.

in TRUTH, there was no discovery, as knowledgeable scholars had known about the documents for 130 years and DISMISSED them as the rantings of a few slaveholders.

such dismissal by scholars was CORRECT, imVho. had the few slavers published "mary had a little lamb", it would have been just as important to an understanding of the causes of TWBTS.

free dixie,sw