Posted on 04/09/2002 9:35:02 AM PDT by GulliverSwift
You people are in denial. Without the issue of slavery, there would have been no Civil War. I know you try to justify their fight against the federal government, and I think it's good to fight against today's left-wing trash bureaucracy that runs the federal government. But back then slavery was the catalyst that started the whole thing.
In each of the states that seceded, their official document that announced secession referred to slavery as the number one issue.
Now, the average Southern soldier probably didn't think about owning slaves since he sure couldn't afford one. But the average Joe Southerner didn't finance the war. The war was financed by the wealthy class in the South, and they're the ones who had a stake in preserving slavery. The wealthy controlled all the newspapers, the town councils, and the economy, and they're the ones who controlled what people heard and thought.
Lincoln wanted to keep slavery out of future states that would expand in the West, which would create more Congressman from free states that would tip the scales on the Hill. So Southern governments threatened that if Lincoln won the election, they would secede. And sure enough, the seceded.
There's nothing wrong with hating the federal government, the nosy SOBs and DOBs in the bureaucracy feel it's their job to run everything. But that doesn't mean that we also have to agree with what the South did, even if it was against the federal government. I don't want two different United States--two weak countries--especially not one with slaves.
Yes, it was about slavery. Southern states stated that as their official reason, and the wealthy class in the South, the ones with money to pay for the guns and cannons, wanted slavery as well.
You and liberals have something in common. Both believe that it was about "states' rights." Liberal blacks think it was about that because they hate to think that so many white people would want to stop slavery. You Southerners think it was about "states' rights" because you hate to think that so many people fighting against the federal government could ever be a bad thing.
Usually, it's not.
Well, now that you mention it....hehehe...
VIRGINIA
AN ORDINANCE to repeal the ratification of the Constitution of the United State of America by the State of Virginia, and to resume all the rights and powers granted under said Constitution.
The people of Virginia in their ratification of the Constitution of the United States of America, adopted by them in convention on the twenty-fifth day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight, having declared that the powers granted under said Constitution were derived from the people of the United States and might be resumed whensoever the same should be perverted to their injury and oppression, and the Federal Government having perverted said powers not only to the injury of the people of Virginia, but to the oppression of the Southern slave-holding States:
Now, therefore, we, the people of Virginia, do declare and ordain, That the ordinance adopted by the people of this State in convention on the twenty-fifth day of June, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight, whereby the Constitution of the United States of America was ratified, and all acts of the General Assembly of this State ratifying and adopting amendments to said Constitution, are hereby repealed and abrogated; that the union between the State of Virginia and the other States under the Constitution aforesaid is hereby dissolved, and that the State of Virginia is in the full possession and exercise of all the rights of sovereignty which belong and appertain to a free and independent State.
And they do further declare, That said Constitution of the United States of America is no longer binding on any of the citizens of this State.
This ordinance shall take effect and be an act of this day, when ratified by a majority of the voter of the people of this State cast at a poll to be taken thereon on the fourth Thursday in May next, in pursuance of a schedule hereafter to be enacted.
Adopted by the convention of Virginia April 17,1861
[ratified by a vote of 132,201 to 37,451 on 23 May 1861]
Hail Charleston, Hail Boston, Who stinketh the most?!
That particular piece was spot on.
I did some research a few years ago, and I learned that it was NOT about the slaves. It was about the right of the states to govern themselves. Slavery was one of several minor issues, not the major one. Slavery was the issue used by the Union to try and increase recruitment for the war, using the moral high ground. In order to keep more states from siding with the South, Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation which freed the slaves in states of rebellion. There were slave states in the Union, and this proclamation did nothing to free them. In fact, they were not freed until well after the war, by the 14th Amendment I believe.
Now, if it was about slavery, as you suggest, why were these events so late in the war or after the war instead of at the beginning? Do you know that the southern states actually wrote up a list of grievences and sent it to Washington DC, much like the colonists did with King George?
Since the winner writes the history books, I suppose you want us to ignore the 2 years it took to write the Emancipation Proclamation and the next 2 years it took to write the ammendment to the Constitution. All this time, it was legal to own slaves in the states of Maryland, Missouri, and Deleware.
I used to think it was about slavery. Then I did some actual research, not just in the books that I was given but trying to find actual historical documents, and found out I was wrong. Now, I don't take anyting I'm told at face value, until I am able to look it up myself.
Godless, fence-sitting heathens!
You shouldn't make blanket statements about Southerners. It isn't polite.
Slavery was a state institution; it was protected in the Constitution. President Lincoln issued the EP based on his war powers as president. The EP only affected areas in open rebellion not controlled by federal forces.
Lincoln tried a number of gambits to get the shooting to stop.
None of the slave holders in the border states would listen to pans for compensated emancipation, for instance.
Also, the public opinion of the day would not support emancipation until it seemed an important tool to weaken the rebellion. PResident Lincoln was very canny in assessing what the people would accept.
Walt
I'm NOT sharing my recipe for "Southern Fried Cheese Grits" with you.
Not now. Not Ehvah!
Assumption.
Show that in the record.
Walt
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.