Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: rockrr
How about you actually go and read the Confederate Constitution. It does ban it in section 9.

Who said that they were the same thing?

You seemed to indicate that they were.

I never said that the slavers were logical.

Don't be silly. The men who made these decisions were serious and intelligent men. Many took a long time to consider their decision because they were very reluctant to leave the union of which they were so long a part. You don't go start a war over something the president just guaranteed you can keep.

Also, I hope you know that there were quite a few Southern unionist slaveholders, who supported the Union because they desired security. They feared that secession would cause a conflict that would result in the loss of their slaves. If slavery was the only issue one cared about, the to stay in the Union was by far the best choice.

102 posted on 01/20/2015 5:22:43 PM PST by DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies ]


To: DeoVindiceSicSemperTyrannis
How about you actually go and read the Confederate Constitution. It does ban it in section 9.

Fair enough, I think I'll do just that (not that I haven't done so before!)

Article I Section 9(4) No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed.

Hmmm. That means that it will be deemed unconstitutional to pass a law that would interfere in the Peculiar Institution (that's slavery for those in Rio Linda).

Article IV Section 2(1) The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired.

Fancy that. This means that one cornfederate state can't pass laws that infringe on the right to free and unfettered ownership of negros owned by a resident of another cornfederate state.

Article IV Section 3(3) The Confederate States may acquire new territory; and Congress shall have power to legislate and provide governments for the inhabitants of all territory belonging to the Confederate States, lying without the limits of the several states; and may permit them, at such times, and in such manner as it may by law provide, to form states to be admitted into the Confederacy. In all such territory, the institution of negro slavery as it now exists in the Confederate States, shall be recognized and protected by Congress, and by the territorial government: and the inhabitants of the several Confederate States and Territories, shall have the right to take to such territory any slaves lawfully held by them in any of the states or territories of the Confederate states.
Well I do declare! This clause says that any new states that are admitted to the cornfederasy shall be slave states. How 'bout them apples?
105 posted on 01/20/2015 5:58:12 PM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson