Alabama Governor's Slavery Blunder

CBS News ^ | 4/5/05

[Zeroisanumber]

Slavery wasn't one of the causes, it was the cause. Confederate revisionists be damned.

[PeaRidge]

"The status quo of plantation agriculture dependent on slavery."

The status quo of the US Treasury was dependent on slavery.

"The sure were, so long as we're clear that they were talking about their slaves."

Since slavery was legal, it did not matter.

"Couldn't have the Yankees doing something as ridiculous as hindering slavery, could we?"

That would have been illegal.

"And promptly installed the big government, constitution trashing regime of Jefferson Davis, with his control of industries, interference with states rights, and seizure of private property."

Invasion and war cause problems for any new country unprepared and ill-motivated to war. The greatest interference to states rights was Lincoln launching ships and armies of war across state boundaries to overthrow legally elected governments.

"Unilateral secession, as practiced by the southern states, was illegal."

You have tried to argue that for more than four years, and have been unsuccessful. Go sell that somewhere else.

[PeaRidge]

I think bawk stands for bloviators appalled at Wlat's kibosh.

[PeaRidge]

"I also read that Pickens was elected by a secret ballot of the State Legislature, not by the people in a general election."

At that time the state's congress elected the governors, as required by state law.

"And to be a member of the SC legislature, you had to own slaves"

That is so ridiculous I won't even bother to ask for a source.

[PeaRidge]

"And more than one historian has looked at the speeches and documents of the time and stated unequivocally that the single most important reason for the southern secession was defense of their institution of slavery"

Here is a quote from the leading secessionist of the time:

"The one great evil from which all other evils have flowed, is the overthrow of the Constitution of the United States. The Government of the United States is no longer the government of a confederate republic, but of a consolidated democracy. It is no longer a free government, but a despotism. It is, in fact, such a government as Great Britain attempted to set over our fathers, and which was resisted and defeated by a seven years struggle for independence."

[PeaRidge]

"And thousands have stated unequivocally, that slavery was the cause"

Ah, yes, the logical fallacy of appeal to a higher authority based on numbers. Won't work here Ditto Head.

[PeaRidge]

"It was Davis who ordered the first shots fired at the flag, not Lincoln. Lincoln responded exactly the way his oath of office required him to respond."

If your order of logic is 'who fired first' is at fault, then you would have to choose the Harriet Lane, the federal warship representing Abraham Lincoln.
There was nothing in Lincoln's oath that allowed him to conduct war without the permission of Congress.

[Non-Sequitur]

Here is a quote from the leading secessionist of the time...

Here's another. "What was the reason that induced Georgia to take the step of secession? This reason may be summed up in one single proposition. It was a conviction, a deep conviction on the part of Georgia, that a separation from the North-was the only thing that could prevent the abolition of her slavery."

[Non-Sequitur]

If your order of logic is 'who fired first' is at fault, then you would have to choose the Harriet Lane, the federal warship representing Abraham Lincoln.

No, you would have to choose the southern batteries that fired on the Rhoda Shannon a few weeks before firing on Sumter. Or the firing on the Star of the West even earlier.

[Non-Sequitur]

If your order of logic is 'who fired first' is at fault, then you would have to choose the Harriet Lane, the federal warship representing Abraham Lincoln.

No, you would have to choose the southern batteries that fired on the Rhoda Shannon a few weeks before firing on Sumter. Or the firing on the Star of the West even earlier.

[Heyworth]

That is so ridiculous I won't even bother to ask for a source.

That would be the 1861 South Carolina constitution, although technically you could either own ten slaves or have a certain amount of real estate free and clear:

Qualification of Representatives.

        Section 15. No person shall be eligible to a seat in the House of Representatives unless he is a free white man, of the age of twenty-one years, and hath been a citizen and resident in this State three years previous to his election. If a resident in the Election District, he shall not be eligible to a seat in the House of Representatives unless he be legally seized and possessed, in his own right, of a settled freehold estate of five hundred acres of land and ten negroes; or of a real estate of the value of one hundred and fifty pounds, sterling, clear of debt. If a non-resident, he shall be legally seized and possessed of a settled freehold estate therein of the value of five hundred pounds, sterling, clear of debt.

http://docsouth.unc.edu/southcar/south.html

[Ditto]

If your order of logic is 'who fired first' is at fault, then you would have to choose the Harriet Lane, the federal warship representing Abraham Lincoln.

The Harriet Lane fired at an unflagged ship enetring US waters, just as any Coast Guard cutter would do today. Standing orders that date to Washington's presidency. But Jeff Davis issued a direct order to fire on Sumter and the American flag.

[PeaRidge]

While you are carefully reading commentary from Georgia, here is another for your perusal:

“(The Northern States) have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, and refused to comply with their constitutional obligations to us in reference to our 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."

[Ditto]

There was nothing in Lincoln's oath that allowed him to conduct war without the permission of Congress.

And you would be wrong once again. See the Militia Act of 1792.

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That whenever the laws of the United States shall be opposed or the execution thereof obstructed, in any state, by combinations too powerful to be suppressed by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, or by the powers vested in the marshals by this act, the same being notified to the President of the United States, by an associate justice or the district judge, it shall be lawful for the President of the United States to call forth the militia of such state to suppress such combinations, and to cause the laws to be duly executed. And if the militia of a state, where such combinations may happen, shall refuse, or be insufficient to suppress the same, it shall be lawful for the President, if the legislature of the United States be not in session, to call forth and employ such numbers of the militia of any other state or states most convenient thereto, as may be necessary, and the use of militia, so to be called forth, may be continued, if necessary, until the expiration of thirty days after the commencement of the ensuing session.

[PeaRidge]

"No, you would have to choose the southern batteries that fired on the Rhoda Shannon a few weeks before firing on Sumter. Or the firing on the Star of the West even earlier."

So, you too are a proponent of the first to fire is guilty school of logic.

The Star of the West arrived at the bar in Charleston on January 9, 1861.

But holding to your logic, the Union Army was first to fire the war opening shots by shooting at Floridians the day before. United States troops stationed at Ft. Barrancas, Pensacola Bay, Florida did the nasty act of starting a shooting war.

That is, according to your logical standards.

[PeaRidge]

You neglect the original comment:

"And to be a member of the SC legislature, you had to own slaves."

The article you quote does not make that proof.

[Ditto]

OK Pea, allow me to translate the Southern euphemisms (the custom was to avoid using the word SLAVE whenever possible) since you obviously don't know what the code words are.

“(The Northern States) have endeavored to weaken our security, to disturb our domestic peace and tranquility, [Abolitionists such as John Brown calling for slave rebellions] and refused to comply with their constitutional obligations to us in reference to our property, [Northern states resisting returning run away slaves or officially ignoring the Underground Railroad to Canada]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. [Lincoln and the Republicans promising to end the expansion of slavery to the West]"

That quote, rather than helping you argue for your Lost Cause Mythology that it wasn't about slavery, actually destroys your argument. It was all about slavery!

[Ditto]

The article you quote does not make that proof.

You are struggling, Pea. Do you know of any SC legislatures who didn't own at least 10 slaves?

[PeaRidge]

"The Harriet Lane fired at an unflagged ship enetring US waters, just as any Coast Guard cutter would do today."

The ships' captains of the US Coast guard at the time, did not have standing orders to fire at unflagged ships. They did have the right to board to see if revenue laws were being broken. Since the Harriet Lane crew did not board, the reason for the firing must not have been inspection.

She was initiating an unauthorized blockade, and act of war, and in doing so, fired the first shot of the war.

[Ditto]

The ships' captains of the US Coast guard at the time, did not have standing orders to fire at unflagged ships.

Sure they did. Unflagged ships were considered to be Pirates.