Was slavery the primary cause of the war?

O'Bruadair · Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 4:05 pm Post subject:

Yankeegal,

Don’t get me wrong here. I am certainly not questioning your intelligence in any way. I do however question much of what you have been taught in the course of your “schooling” (and there is a big difference in that and real education). And BTW you are certainly not alone in your opinions but keep
in mind that “conventional wisdom” is not automatically right. (I have found the reverse to be true in most cases)

1st error “There are many opinions regarding the South's "Right" to secede from the Union.”

Many opinions now it is true but look at what legal scholars of the time had to say. The right of secession was never seriously questioned before
1869 (mighty convenient to say so AFTER a war of conquest and subjugation that took the lives of 620,000 Americans, wouldn’t you say?)

"If you bring these leaders to trial, it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not rebellion. His (Jeff Davis') capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason." Salmon P. Chase, Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court
(Appointed by old abe himself BTW)

Here is another quote for you

“Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that
suits them better. This is a most valuable - a most sacred right - a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world.”
Abraham Lincoln, 1848 on the floor of the US congress

Ole abe was talking here of course about the right of Texas to secede from Mexico. Nevertheless, the legal issues in that conflict were almost identical to those in the WBTS 13 years later. My how things changed when abe’s own power and wealth were at stake!

2nd error or at least the implication of one (and this is tied closely to the first)

“But did the south ever really become there own country?”

Well of course if secession was constitutional and legal (not to mention morally right as abe indicated) then ALL the seceding Southern states were free and sovereign States in a legal sense (or what you mean here by “a country”)

3rd error (or at the very least a grand assumption on your part)

“then the south would be another country, and wouldnt be half as great as our beautiful, wonderful, free and powerfull United States of America”

We will never know how things would have played out if the South had been allowed to leave in peace.

I think it illogical though to assume that the USA and the CSA would have remained implacable enemies or even that they would have never considered reunification.

I think we CAN reasonably assume though, that had the original meaning and intent the Constitution remained intact (which is all the South asked for) that neither the United States, the Confederate States nor any political combination of the two would have ever developed the highly centralized government that we have today and we could have avoided many of the problems attendant to the empire that we have today.

If you are wondering I am certainly proud to be an American. I am even prouder to be a Southerner. This said however I can not say that I am always proud of the United States government. A real patriot will not hesitate to say so when his country is (or was) in the wrong. Lincoln and his administration were wrong to wage war on the South. They did so for wealth, power and empire. No other reason.

And BTW congress has not declared a war since WWII. Congress never declared war on the South either! So much for Clause II section eight of the Constituion that gives Congress the exclusive right to wage war.

Lucinda · Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2006 7:31 pm Post subject:

BRAVO! Very well said!

Lucinda

drewfountain · Corporal Joined: 01 Dec 2006 Posts: 2 Location: Atlanta

Hey,
The cause of the war has created some heated debate between many, many people for the last 140+ years. I'll give a few of the many answers I've found:

1. Slavery ... OK. It's become a popular theme for the war, especially during the turn of the century, and the Populist-friendly revisionist historian "intrepeted" history. I agree that Frederick Douglas, William Henry Beecher, and publishers like Garrison supported this theory. I think they had some signigicant influence on Lincoln, too.
Abe was smart, and just like Sam Houston, he know that slavery was near the "end of life" economically, and would eventually fade away. Lincoln was forced into this sucessionist issue. The war began, and there was unifying theme - no solid purpose
to focus this escalating war. (the southern army had more unity, as they were told to follow in their grandfather's footsteps - fighting the tyrrany for independence).

Abe had good sense and used this issue as a lightning rod to bring some unity to the Northern states (and to entrtain the European distractors) by abolishing Slavery. Lincold needed a cause, a purpose for the northern states to fight this war.

After the horrible bloodshed of Shiloh and the Seven Days campaign, Lincoln needed something to unite the northern states, so he used the Emancipation Proclimation to unite and focus the Northen states. In doign so, Lincoln alienated Crittenden, C Jackson, and other leaders of the border states. Also, .... the underground railroad and Dred Scott decision, DV Gabriel/Nat Turner/Jobn Brown slave revolts could also relate to this theme.

2. Echos of the Nullification crisis.
This idea holds a real root of the war. The states came together as union of colonial states, and were accustomed to autonomous rule since their founding. The Federal government was designed by Jefferson, Monroe, Hamilton, Franklin, and those other philosophical theorists of the Enlightenment. They had the goal that the "US" government (federal) would paint "broad strokes" and handle international affairs, and leave the states to govern themselves. In some of Jefferson's late writings, he realized this idea of States nullifying federal mandates could be the undoing of this great experiment.
South Carolina was the most vocal on this issue (pre-1960), and bad seeds were sown from that federal intervention.

3. Steven Douglas (Dr Johansen, Dr Noe, this one's for you)
The whole idea of Popular Sovernity was a real dicotomy - a federal mandate to let the states pick and choose their destiny. This oxymoron if an idea set the spark for war. Thanks to "nthustiastic" eople wanting to influence the outcome (like Quantrill and Bill Anderson) the result was fatal. This split the states even further.
Douglas remained outspoken during the Pierce and Buchannan administratons, and his words burnt more bridges than he built in that decade.

4. Geology and economics. Early steel in western PA, Eastern OH, and coal from WV made it cheaper for railroads to develop in the north. The Iron/Steel production at Tredegar, Union City TN, northern Alabama didn't provide the mass production of their northern counterparts. This caused the socioeconomic development in the Southern states to lag. The majoe Northern cities were closer to each other, making rail lines more profitalbe to build up north. Psycologically, economically, and socially - this had impact on the people of the southern states.

5. Other issues:
Southern aristocrates and fireaters, Northern journalists and the mass publishing of "Uncle Tom's Cabin", immigrant indenturment was becomming more economical than slavery, outspoken state activists like JC Calhoun (SC), R Toombs (GA), JJ Campbell and WC Harris (MS), an oversaturation of cotton to the European markets (1855-1857), ......

I'm workng on another theme - and I'll share more information as I get my information together.

Drew

O'Bruadair · Posted: Fri Dec 01, 2006 9:08 am Post subject:

Pretty good overall analysis. You apparently realize that the underlying causes had to do with who would control the wealth (and ain’t that what ALL wars are really about?)

I would make a couple of corrections in what you said though.

You indicate that Alexander Hamilton along with Jefferson envisioned a federal government that would respect the sovereignty of the States. This is just not so. Hamilton and Jefferson where on opposite sides of this debate and economic/political philosophy from the very beginning. What Hamilton and other prominent yankees wanted was a British style mercantilist economic system that would tax the general population for the benefit of corporations. A powerful highly centralized federal government was necessary to this. It took them another two generations and a fratricidal war to get what they wanted but they got it in the end!

You seem to indicate that Quantrill and Anderson were somehow central to what went on in “bleeding Kansas”. Just not so either. Quantrill was involved in the conflict in Kansas before 1861 but he started out on the abolitionist side and wqs really a pretty minor character until after the war started. Anderson lived in Kansas before 1860 but there is no record at all of him being directly involved in the fighting before the war. What these two partisans became famous for occurred AFTER fort Sumpter.

John Brown and other yankee terrorists had a whole lot more to do with bringing on the war than Quantrill or Anderson.

VTYank09 · Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:41 pm Post subject: Comments

Secession was never seriously questioned before 1869 because it never had to be really. In 1814 New Englanders held the Hartford Convention to protest against "Mr. Jefferson's War" (aka War of 1812) and to discuss secession. Nothing happened though and it was not serious enough. South Carolina threatened it occassionally, but it never became too serious until the years before the Civil War and Lincoln's election.

The Lincoln quote from 1848, I love it. Did you know he restates these same ideas in his First Inaugural Address? Lincoln believed that people had the right to form their own govt. when they disagreed with the current form. He also believed that states should control their own domestic affairs. Lincoln stated that he would not interfere with slavery where it already existed in the South because he believed the Constitution did not give him the power to do so. He said this even before 1860. He also stated that he would not interfere with the South and their choice to secede because he believed that a lawless invasion of an armed force into any state was the gravest of crimes. Let me say this again, he would not invade or use force in any way against the South.

With that being said however, Lincoln also said and believed these things. He believed that the Constitution would defend and maintain itself, and Lincoln would only do what the Constitution allowed him to, he would do his duty. Lincoln believed that he was to serve the present country in which he came into. He would preserve, protect, and defend that country. Lincoln stated that his powers as President would be utilized, "to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the government..." This includes Fort Sumter which was attacked by the South. Lincoln stated in his address, "You can have no conflict without being yourselves the aggressors." I do not agree with the statement that Lincoln and his admin. were wrong to "wage war on the South" and that they only did it "for wealth, power, and empire." The South brought this on itself. It is just as guilty as you believe the North is at the very least.

Also in his address Lincoln believed that the future of the country was up to the people. If the Northern people wanted to preserve the Union, they would fight for it. He said in your hands is this issue of a civil war, not in mine. He was right.

As to the Southern states forming their own country, Lincoln looked at this issue too. He believed that the seceding of the Southern states would only be setting a precedent for the future,

"If the minority will not acquiesce, the majority must, or the Government must cease. There is no other alternative, for continuing the Government is acquiescence on one side or the other. If a minority in such case will secede rather than acquiesce, they make a precedent which in turn will divide and ruin them, for a minority of their own will secede from them whenever a majority refuses to be controlled by such minority. For instance, why may not any portion of a new confederacy a year or two hence arbitrarily secede again, precisely as portions of the present Union now claim to secede from it? All who cherish disunion sentiments are now being educated to the exact temper of doing this."

My last point...okay, Congress did not declare war on the South. The CSA's Constitution is almost identical to the U.S.'s except for a few changes. So the South did not declare war on the United States either. And BTW Clause II Sec. 8 does not give Congress the right to wage war...its the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. You might want to take a look at Sec. 8 Clause 15 & 18 though. 15 is about the right to suppress insurrections which is what this war turned into after the South attacked the federal property that was Fort Sumter. And you might have heard about the 18th: the "necessary and proper clause" or the "elastic clause". This pertains to the rights of Congress but they weren't in session, they couldnt stop Lincoln from issuing the call for troops because it would have taken them too long to be summoned back. Lincoln acted, he responded to the situation and the nation was in a state of emergency, it had been attacked. What else could he have done? What would we have done when faced with these decisions?

O'Bruadair · Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:13 pm Post subject:

Huh?

Patently obvious here that you and ole abe both are arguing both sides of the point to try and cloud the issue.

“He also stated that he would not interfere with the South and their choice to secede because he believed that a lawless invasion of an armed force into any state was the gravest of crimes. Let me say this again, he would not invade or use force in any way against the South.”

"If the minority will not acquiesce, the majority must, or the Government must cease. There is no other alternative, for continuing the Government is acquiescence on one side or the other.”

Well?

Which is it?

You can’t have it both ways!

Either secession was unconstitutional or it was not! Ole abe’s chief justice said it was NOT even AFTER the issue had been decided by a bloody and illegal war!

VTYank09 · Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:08 pm Post subject: Explanation

We're not arguing both sides. It may come off that way but if you really look at what he's saying and think about it, it makes sense. This is what I think Lincoln was saying, in plain English.

Lincoln is basically saying this: the Southern states have the right to secede, break away and form their own government etc. I'm not going to stop you, I wont interfere with you in any way. I wont send an invasion force or force you back into the Union. BUT, I am going to protect and defend the present Union (all the land and territory belonging to the Federal govt.) which I came into as President, its my duty. "To hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the govt." Continuing on, Lincoln is saying I'll leave you alone in peace, but if you want a war, I'll give you a war. If you want to attack U.S. soil, then I have no choice but to defend it. I hope this is more clear. Read his First Inaugural Address, it might make things more clear.

Now this would include Fort Sumter, it is the property of the Federal govt. I will restate what Lincoln said, "You can have no conflict without yourselves being the aggressors".

About my second quote, you totally took part of it out of context to argue your point that me and Old Abe want it both ways. This is not so. Look at the quotation in its entirety. Lincoln is speaking to the South and is saying this. In plain English, if you break away from the Union you'll only be setting a precedent and might divide yourselves and ruin each other. By this he means, whats to stop a part of the Confederacy (for example lets say South Carolina, Georgia, and North Carolina) from breaking off on its own when they dont like a certain action taken by the Confederate government or something? You're only teaching people that its okay to just break off anytime you disagree with something instead of trying to come to a compromise.

That is what he was saying in that long second quote. Those first couple of sentences you took, this is what he is saying: if the minority (the South) will not consent, then the majority (of the country) has to. If the majority of the country wont consent to the govt., then we do need to scrap this one and try something else/new.

I know that their language can be confusing alot of times. I have trouble with it myself. All we can do is look at it and offer our interpretations, what we think they're saying. This all depends on our own opinions as individuals of course. How we interpret whats being said depends on our personal opinions of the matter. So this is my interpretation and you are certainly entitled to see it in another light. But I hope I have made what I was trying to say clearer.

Best,
VTYank09

O'Bruadair · Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:14 am Post subject:

BTW you are wrong about the Confederate congress not declaring war also! I thought so when you added that bit of erroneous information but took me a while to run down the specifics”. (Heaven forbid that I might mistakenly give the wrong chapter and verse and give room for more distraction from the real point here)

Does this make you wonder what else that your politically correct education may have been wrong about?

As for that main point it was whether or not Lincoln was legally justified in waging war on the South.

He was not of course and that is obvious (regardless of the “context)

“No. 106.] AN ACT"

Recognizing the existence of War between the United States and the Confederate States; and concerning Letters of Marque, Prizes and Prize Goods.
WHEREAS, The earnest efforts made by this Government to establish friendly relations between the Government of the United States and the Confederate States, and to settle all questions of disagreement between the two Governments upon principles of right, justice, equity and good faith, have proved unavailing by reason of the refusal of the Government of the United States to hold any intercourse with the commissioners appointed by this Government for the purposes aforesaid, or to listen to any proposals they had to make for the peaceful solution of all causes of difficulty between the two Governments: and whereas the President of the United States of America has issued his proclamation making requisition upon the States of the American Union for seventy-five thousand men for the purpose, as therein indicated, of capturing forts and other strongholds within the jurisdiction of and belonging to the Confederate States of America, and has detailed naval armaments upon the coasts of the Confederate States of America, and raised, organized and equipped a large military force to execute the purpose aforesaid, and has issued his other proclamation announcing his purpose to set on foot a blockade of the ports of the Confederate States: and whereas, the State of Virginia has seceded from the Federal Union and

Page 23
entered into a convention of alliance offensive and defensive with the Confederate States, and has adopted the Provisional Constitution of the said States, and the States of Maryland, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas and Missouri, have refused, and it is believed that the State of Delaware and the inhabitants of the territories of Arizona and New Mexico, and the Indian territory South of Kansas, will refuse to co-operate with the Government of the United States in these acts of hostilities and wanton aggression, which are plainly intended to overawe, oppress and finally subjugate the people of the Confederate States: and whereas, by the acts and means aforesaid, war exists between the Confederate States and the Government of the United States, and the States and territories thereof, except the States of Maryland, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, Missouri and Delaware, and the territories of Arizona and New Mexico, and the Indian territory South of Kansas: Therefore,
SECTION 1. The Congress of the Confederate States of America do enact, That the President of the Confederate States is hereby authorized to use the whole land and naval force of the Confederate States to meet the war thus commenced, and to issue to private armed vessels commissions, or letters of marque and general reprisal, in such form as he shall think proper, under the seal of the Confederate States, against the vessels, goods and effects of the government of the United States, and of the citizens or inhabitants of the states and territories thereof: Provided, however, That property of the enemy (unless it be contraband of war) laden on board a neutral vessel, shall not be subject to seizure under this act: And provided further, That vessels of the citizens or inhabitants of the United States now in the ports of the Confederate States, except such as have been since the 5th of April last, or may hereafter be, in the service of the government of the United States, shall be allowed thirty days after the publication of this act to leave said ports and reach their destination; and such vessels and their cargoes, excepting articles contraband of war, shall not be subject to capture under this act during said period, unless they shall have previously reached the destination for which they were bound on leaving said ports.
SEC. 2. That the President of the Confederate States shall be and he is hereby authorized and empowered to revoke and annul, at pleasure, all letters of marque and reprisal which he may at any time grant pursuant to this act.

Page 24
SEC. 3. That all persons applying for letters of marque and reprisal, pursuant to this act, shall state in writing the name and a suitable description of the tonnage and force of the vessel, and the name and place of residence of each owner concerned therein, and the intended number of the crew; which statement shall be signed by the person or persons making such application, and filed with the Secretary of State, or shall be delivered to any other officer or person who shall be employed to deliver out such commissions, to be by him transmitted to the Secretary of State.
SEC. 4. That before any commission or letters of marque and reprisal shall be issued as aforesaid, the owner or owners of the ship or vessel for which the same shall be requested, and the commander thereof for the time being, shall give bond to the Confederate States, with at least two responsible sureties not interested in such vessel, in the penal sum of five thousand dollars, or if such vessel be provided with more than one hundred and fifty men, then in the penal sum of ten thousand dollars, with condition that the owners, officers and crew who shall be employed on board such commissioned vessel, shall and will observe the laws of the Confederate States, and the instructions which shall be given them according to law for the regulation of their conduct, and will satisfy all damages and injuries which shall be done or committed contrary to the tenor thereof, by such vessel during her commission, and to deliver up the same when revoked by the President of the Confederate States.
SEC. 5. That all captures and prizes of vessels and property shall be forfeited and shall accrue to the owners, officers and crews of the vessels by whom such captures and prizes shall be made, and on due condemnation had shall be distributed according to any written agreement which shall be made between them; and if there be no such written agreement, then one moiety to the owners and the other moiety to the officers and crew, as nearly as may be according to the rules prescribed for the distribution of prize money by the laws of the Confederate States.
SEC. 6. That all vessels, goods and effects, the property of any citizen of the Confederate States, or of persons resident within and under the protection of the Confederate States, or of persons permanently within the territories and under the protection of any foreign prince, government or state in amity with the Confederate States, which shall have been captured by the United States, and which shall be recaptured by vessels commissioned as aforesaid, shall be restored to the lawful owners, upon payment by them of a

Page 25
just and reasonable salvage, to be determined by the mutual agreement of the parties concerned, or by the decree of any court having jurisdiction, according to the nature of each case, agreeably to the provisions established by law. And such salvage shall be distributed among the owners, officers and crews of the vessels commissioned as aforesaid, and making such captures, according to any written agreement which shall be made between them; and in case of no such agreement, then in the same manner and upon the principles hereinbefore provided in cases of capture.
SEC. 7. That before breaking bulk of any vessel which shall be captured as aforesaid, or other disposal or conversion thereof, or of any articles which shall be found on board the same, such captured vessel, goods or effects shall be brought into some port of the Confederate States, or of a nation or state in amity with the Confederate States, and shall be proceeded against before a competent tribunal; and after condemnation and forfeiture thereof shall belong to the owners, officers and crew of the vessel capturing the same, and be distributed as before provided ; and in the case of all captured vessels, goods and effects which shall be brought within the jurisdiction of the Confederate States, the district courts of the Confederate States shall have exclusive original cognizance thereof, as the civil causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction; and the said courts, or the courts, being courts of the Confederate States, into which such cases shall be removed, and in which they shall be finally decided, shall and may decree restitution in whole or in part, when the capture shall have been made without just cause. And if made without probable cause, may order and decree damages and costs to the party injured, for which the owners and commanders of the vessels making such captures, and also the vessels, shall be liable.
SEC. 8. That all persons found on board any captured vessels, or on board any re-captured vessel, shall be reported to the collector of the port in the Confederate States in which they shall first arrive, and shall be delivered into the custody of the marshal of the district, or some court or military officer of the Confederate States, or of any state in or near such port who shall take charge of their safe keeping and support, at the expense of the Confederate States.
SEC. 9. That the President of the Confederate States is hereby authorized to establish and order suitable instructions for the better governing and directing the conduct of the vessels so commissioned, their officers and crews, copies of which shall be delivered by the collector of the customs

Page 26
to the commanders, when they shall give bond as provided.
SEC. 10. That a bounty shall be paid by the Confederate States of $20 for each person on board any armed ship or vessel belonging to the United States at the commencement of an engagement, which shall be burnt, sunk or destroyed by any vessel commissioned as aforesaid, which shall be of equal or inferior force, the same to be divided as in other cases of prize money; and a bounty of $25 shall be paid to the owners, officers and crews of the private armed vessels commissioned as aforesaid, for each and every prisoner by them captured and brought into port, and delivered to an agent authorized to receive them, in any port of the Confederate States; and the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized to pay or cause to be paid to the owners, officers and crews of such private armed vessels commissioned as aforesaid, or their agent, the bounties herein provided.
SEC. 11. That the commanding officer of every vessel having a commission or letters of marque and reprisal, during the present hostilities between the Confederate States and the United States, shall keep a regular journal, containing a true and exact account of his daily proceedings and transactions with such vessel and the crew thereof; the ports and places be shall put into or cast anchor in; the time of his stay there and the cause thereof; the prizes he shall take and the nature and probable value thereof; the times and places when and where taken, and in what manner he shall dispose of the same; the ships or vessels he shall fall in with; the times and places when and where he shall meet with them and his observations and remarks thereon; also, of whatever else shall occur to him or any of his officers or marines, or be discovered by examination or conference with any marines or passengers of or in any other ships or vessels, or by any other means touching the fleets, vessels and forces of the United States, their posts and places of station and destination, strength, numbers, intents and designs; and such commanding officer shall, immediately on his arrival in any port of the Confederate States, from or during the continuance of any voyage or cruise, produce his commission for such vessel, and deliver up such journal so kept as aforesaid, signed with his proper name and hand-writing, to the collector or other chief officer of the customs at or nearest to such port; the truth of which journal shall be verified by the oath of the commanding officer for the time being. And such collector or other chief officer of the customs shall, immediately, on the arrival of such vessel, order the proper officer of the customs to go on board and take an

Page 27
account of the officers and men, the number and nature of the guns, and whatever else shall occur to him on examination material to be known; and no such vessel shall be permitted to sail out of port again until such journal shall have been delivered up, and a certificate obtained under the hand of such collector or other chief officer of the customs that she is manned and armed according to her commission; and upon delivery of such certificate, any former certificate of a like nature which shall have been obtained by the commander of such vessel shall be delivered up.
SEC. 12. That the commanders of vessels having letters of marque and reprisal as aforesaid, neglecting to keep a journal as aforesaid, or wilfully making fraudulent entries therein, or obliterating the record of any material transaction contained therein, where the interest of the Confederate States is concerned, or refusing to produce and deliver such journal, commission or certificate, pursuant to the preceding section of this act, then and in such cases the commissions or letters of marque and reprisal of such vessels shall be liable to be revoked; and such commanders respectively shall forfeit for every such offence the sum of $1,000, one moiety thereof to the use of the Confederate States, and the other to the informer.
SEC. 13. That the owners or commanders of vessels having letters of marque and reprisal as aforesaid, who shall violate any of the acts of Congress for the collection of the revenue of the Confederate States, and for the prevention of smuggling, shall forfeit the commission or letters of marque and reprisal, and they and the vessels owned or commanded by them shall be liable to all the penalties and forfeitures attaching to merchant vessels in like cases.
SEC. 14. That on all goods, wares and merchandise captured and made good and lawful prizes of war, by any private armed ship having commission or letters of marque and reprisal under this act, and brought into the Confederate States, there shall be allowed a deduction of 33 1-3 per cent. on the amount of duties imposed by law.
SEC. 15. That five per centum on the net amount (after deducting all charges and expenditures) of the prize money arising from captured vessels and cargoes, and on the net amount of the salvage of vessels and cargoes re-captured by private armed vessels of the Confederate States, shall be secured and paid over to the collector or other chief officer of the customs, at the port or place in the Confederate States at which such captured or re-captured vessels may arrive, or to the consul or other public agent of the Confederate

Page 28
States residing at the port or place not within the Confederate States at which such captured or re-captured vessel may arrive. And the moneys arising therefrom shall be held and are hereby pledged by the government of the Confederate States as a fund for the support and maintenance of the widows and orphans of such persons as may be slain, and for the support and maintenance of such persons as may be wounded and disabled on board of the private armed vessels commissioned as aforesaid, in any engagement with the enemy, to be assigned and distributed in such manner as shall hereafter be provided by law.
APPROVED May 6, 1861.

RobertLee · Posted: Wed Dec 13, 2006 6:25 pm Post subject: States rights

States rights is argued the main reason the south went to fight, but it was also because because they wanted the particular right to have slaves. Many great pieces of historical fiction proove that Exclamation

chief_joseph · Posted: Tue Dec 19, 2006 4:05 pm Post subject:

Rob Lee,

humpf..well..wasn't it the same for the Unions to back themselves up with the states rights ? Wink

CSA + USA, both did cherry-picking on that papers.
And yes, slavery was a certain institution of a 1/4 more or less of southern guys.
You cannot set a roof in saying your 2 little arguements going to have a basement.
It is anyhow recommended to dig deeper..really.
Conflicts ever being held of two parties.
The main thing that you US boys and girls are trying to figure out is - who the Holy Lord is to be blamed on that war.
Let me tell you that nobody will find out the truth. And such as then it should tell you the same I was saying some lines above about conflicts.

Think about it buddy Wink

yg1332ellsaline · Corporal Joined: 10 Jan 2007 Posts: 1 Location: kansas

chief_joseph · Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 4:33 pm Post subject:

@yg1332ellsaline,
good pointed in short words I must say.
Oh BTW..sorry that KC Chiefs did not get to the PlayOffs Wink

ban-one · Corporal Joined: 16 Feb 2007 Posts: 8

i dont know all things about the north and the south slavery or not all i can say is what gives a presedent the power to raise troops against his own people no matter if that state chooses to seperate from the union i believe a state has that right and should if it wants to

Scott_002002 · Sergeant Joined: 26 Feb 2007 Posts: 13

charge_of_glory · Captain Joined: 01 Aug 2006 Posts: 136

I always find the whole debate about no representation interesting. Why didn't they vote their people into government and try to change things? there were a lot of people in the South. I think they could've made a change if they really put their minds to it.

No one had authority over anybody. The government is made up of people from every state. Maybe the Southern leaders just din't do enough. Question all leaders, not just the ones you don't like.

As for today, who cares is a Northerner moves down South? We're one united land, and we should move where we please. Southerners come up here, but do we mind? No, of course not. I also don't see how the Northerners that moved are trying to change the South. Look at the facts instead of just spitting out whatever you feel. Trust me, you'll go farther on here if you use logic.