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

To: enumerated

Read Alexande Stephans’ defense of secession. Slavery was THE ISSUE. Additionally the Southern states wanted slavery to expand to the western territories.this clashed with the Western movement from the North. Kansas being the clearest example of what was to come. The Abolitionists may have been the South’s bogeyman, but it was the Free Soilers they feared and despised. They did believe slavery confined to the South would die. Finally much is made of the large %age of Southerners who did not own slaves as showing that slavery had less importance as a cause of secession. But the existence of slaves
allowed the slave owning aristocracy to assert the existence of equality based on color and the possibility of extending slavery to the West created the promise that poor whites could move West and join the slave holding society.


19 posted on 01/29/2024 12:55:30 PM PST by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]


To: xkaydet65

The civil war was about states rights not slavery as most people would like to believe it was.

Lincoln stated explicitly that the war was about holding the Union together.

The North was not prepared to go to war in order to end slavery when on the very eve of war the US Congress and incoming president were in the process of making it unconstitutional to abolish slavery.

Executive Mansion,
Washington, August 22, 1862.

Hon. Horace Greeley:
Dear Sir.

I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune. If there be in it any statements, or assumptions of fact, which I may know to be erroneous, I do not, now and here, controvert them. If there be in it any inferences which I may believe to be falsely drawn, I do not now and here, argue against them. If there be perceptable in it an impatient and dictatorial tone, I waive it in deference to an old friend, whose heart I have always supposed to be right.

As to the policy I “seem to be pursuing” as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt.

I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be “the Union as it was.” If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.

I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free.

Yours,
A. Lincoln.


26 posted on 01/29/2024 1:49:10 PM PST by maddog55 (The only thing systemic in America is the left's hatred of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | 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