The Civil War News & Views Open Discussion Forum - Archive

Re: Answering Craig
In Response To: Re: Answering Craig ()

George,

"1. Really? I'll have to check that out. I thought they banned the import of slaves from all countries but one."

There are a few of places where protection of slavery was directly introduced into the Confederate Constitution.

For instance:

Article IV, Section 2, Sec. 2. (I) 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.

AND

Article IV, Section 2, (3) No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs,. or to whom such service or labor may be due.

AND

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 Sates; 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 be 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.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/csa/csa.htm

2. Ah but remember the letter Lincoln forged and sent to the Confederates? I believe it stated something similar to " the president intends to re-supply and re-enforce---"

Well, to "re-supply" and even "re-enforce" an already established military position is more of a defensive, not offensive, move...particularly if that position is surrounded by hostile artillery batteries. Anderson's men were already in South Carolina at the time of secession. They actually retreated to Ft. Sumter as a more defensible location when that state took the unprecedented, preemptive and proactive move of secession.

"I also believe that Lincoln refused to meet with peace delegates."

Yes, I believe Lincoln refused to recognize peace delegates as legitimate representatives.

"3. The law against secession was only assumed also."

Well, I wouldn't say "law," but I would agree that resistance to Southern secession was based on a different interpretation of the Constitution.

"4. Well if the restrictions were placed on the states, secession was not one of them, however the rights over the regulation of slaves was given to them."

Yes, but making a confederation with other states, coining money, raising a military, etc., were not allowed by the Constitution.

"In fact wasn't one of the reasons that the Southern states started seceding was because the new territories were not allowed to choose whether they would be free or slave?"

No. In fact, by 1860 the Kansas-Nebraska Act was still in place and the Dred Scott decision had declared that Congress had no authority to deny slavery from any of the territories. Lincoln and the Republicans announced their intention to reverse this, but at the time of secession, slavery was not outlawed from the territories.

"Since your take is simply your interpretation wouldn’t you say it is possible that you are wrong?"

Sure, I could be wrong. But when talking about secession, the only way to really be wrong is to argue that it was absolutely legal or illegal in 1860. The matter was not legally established in 1860 and 1861, and the Southern states chose military force to back up their attempts to secede. The federal government willingly accepted that challenge. Thus, the issue was decided on the battlefield...and the South lost.

Messages In This Thread

Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Fort Sumter and amphibious operations
Re: Fort Sumter and amphibious operations
Re: Fort Sumter and amphibious operations
Re: Fort Sumter and amphibious operations
Re: Fort Sumter and amphibious operations
Re: Fort Sumter and amphibious operations
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Re: Answering Craig
Who was convicted of treason?? *NM*
Changing the question?
Re: Changing the question?
Re: Changing the question?
Re: Changing the question?
Re: Changing the question?
Absolutely no case...repeat from Dec. 17th, 2006
Re: Absolutely no case...repeat from Dec. 17th, 20
Re: Changing the question?
Ex Post Facto
Re: Ex Post Facto
Re: Ex Post Facto
Re: Changing the question?
Re: Changing the question?
Re: Changing the question?
Re: Changing the question?
Re: Answering Craig
Try this link
Re: Try this link
Thanks George. *NM*