Posted on 11/19/2018 8:39:26 AM PST by EveningStar
Sorry. I forgot you are the one that doesn't like stand-up with edge.
“So even if you believe the state’s had a right to secede (and I don’t), these actions prior to that are treason.”
The Southern view after secession was that the states were sovereign.
Prior to secession, the Southern view was that the states were sovereign - and had the right and duty to protect their liberties.
It is now widely denied, but the states created the federal government; and states later created other states. The federal government is an agent of the states and, in the original version of the constitution, the federal government was given limited, enumerated powers.
Of course today, the federal government has the power to use force to overturn state mud flap regulations, enforce federal scaffold toe board standards, and to stop states from passing laws to protect unborn (humans).
“There is no possibility that skilled machinists would have to compete with slave labor.” BS, the work force at Tredegar was over 40% slave. Some of these slaves, after years of working there had become machinists, jig & Fixture men, molders and pattern makers. If you were a Northern pattern maker, or molder, what chance was there at Tredegar, they had slaves that were skilled pattern makers and molders. Do you think the only thing slaves did was sweep the floor and dump the trash. Those skilled slaves were key to the continued success of the business.
Otherwise all of your other descriptions show no martial actions and were carried out peacefully by Southern authorities.
“it’s not what the Southern Aristocrats thought, it’s what the Northern Industrialists who might see them as a threat, thought”
BS again. it was not the free farmer with 40 acres and a mule that led secession. It was the landed gentry cotton planters with large slave work forces that saw a threat.
They were fearful that the Lincoln administration would move to liberate their labor force. Without that labor force, their fortunes made from cotton may disappear. They were just as self centered, self serving and parochial as any of the “Northern Industrialists”
My postings to you on the decade of Southern growth was not intended to be a boastful comparison of the sections, but to bring truth to the inaccurate generalizations you have been offering as premises for your critical assertions.
Colonel William Chase of the Florda Militia approached fort Barrancas on the 8th of Jan and demand the Government forces there surrender to his command. Sufficient provocation to fire on them in defense of military post. Considering that Florida didn’t secede until the 10th, this was an act of treason on the part of Colonel Chase.
Compared to the North or to the major countries in Europe, the South was an industrial light weight. The figures prove that. I will fess up to exaggerating the fact and apologize for that. But the fact is the South remained farm country at best. It was the agricultural mind set of the region that probably inhibited a more vigorous diversification of the Southern Economy.
Would be interested in your source for that. Thanks.
That is very kind of you to say. I lost my wife recently and have not been active here.
Thanks for the list. Every one of those cowardly acts was an act of insurrection for which the perpetrators should have been convicted and hanged.
The source for the American Figures are the 1860 Census.
first reply in error. The source for the information at Fort Barrancas was from A CWTI article Apr 1994 Vol. 33 issue 2.
I am sorry to hear of your lost. You have my condolences.
After the Civil War cotton growing acreage continued to expand for many decades, including in states where it was long established.
For example, in 1860 the total for US cotton was about 4 million acres planted.
By 1930 Mississippi alone planted 4 million acres.
Today the US plants about 12 million acres, producing 17 million bales, far more bales per acre than past centuries.
Thank you
Here DiogenesLamp continues to fantasize motives for why Northern Democrats abandoned their erstwhile Southern allies and joined Republicans in opposing Confederate aggression against the United States.
But Democrat worries were not the first concerns of Lincoln's Republican administration.
They only help explain why the Union was able to remain relatively united, despite our usual partisan divides.
The bottom line is that Confederates could have done more to encourage Northern Democrat opposition to "Lincoln's War", beginning, for example, here:
I would like to read that article. Do you know of a way to locate it. Thanks again.
No, disposed of my 30 year collection of CWTI a couple of years back. The cite is from hand written notes taken from the issue. The only reason I kept it was that some years ago, I had a Navy school to go to at Pensacola, and had an opportunity to look around Fort Barrancas. Kept notes on articles talking about places of CW significance that I had actually visited.
Google William Henry Chase and his name appears in several articles about the forts Pickens and Barrancas.
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.