And I am afraid you are wrong that no one proposed (at the convention to draw up the Confederate Constitution) a re-opening of the slave trade. Do a very little research on that and you will come up with a few names who wanted exactly that.
But if you wish to keep on purposefully misreading other posters and what they have said just because you disagree with their conclusions, just remember what Lincoln said.
"Go on with it. If you think you can, by slandering a woman, make her love you, or by vilifying a man, make him vote with you. go on and try it."
I submit you are wasting your time which could be better pursued with actually researching and proving your point rather than trying to score points.
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Unfortunately and sad to say, yes. As we seem to have hijacked this thread concerning the just hanging of the piratical Gordon, ordinarily I would suggest starting a new thread on the question of reopening the African slave trade. However, I am afraid, in fact I am quite sure, that such a discussion cannot be undertaken civilly and the chances of having a tolerable discussion quite nil given its' antecedents. I consider the matter closed and any further discussion useless. Instead I believe I will go out and spend a few minutes banging my head against a brick wall for all the good it could conceivably do. At least this way, I have as much prospect of a rational, intelligent, and cordial discourse as I am likely to encounter under present conditions.
__________________ 'It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag'
Battalion,
....
And I am afraid you are wrong that no one proposed (at the convention to draw up the Confederate Constitution) a re-opening of the slave trade. Do a very little research on that and you will come up with a few names who wanted exactly that.
....
Unionblue
Instead I believe I will go out and spend a few minutes banging my head against a brick wall for all the good it could conceivably do. At least this way, I have as much prospect of a rational, intelligent, and cordial discourse as I am likely to encounter under present conditions.
May I accompany you? Whilst you are banging your head, I will proceed to toss down some adult libations dedicated to the same end -- up the Romans ... or was it "Down with the Tsar"? I forget.
Actually ... yes ... the thread is hijacked and no longer involves the nefarious Captain. But the conclusion is right around the corner with unionblue naming the delegates who proposed re-opening the slave trade (I'm not about to wade through the convention acta to find one.). But the gauntlet has been cast. It is not up to Battalion to prove there were none -- he has provided the wherewithal to find one.
I'll go with "there were very few" but "at least a couple." And this is supposition. None is not logical. Many would be noted. A few is what I will settle on.
Ole
__________________ I never knew a man who wished to be himself a slave. Consider if you know any good thing that no man desires for himself. A. Lincoln
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Enough head banging! Let's just figure this out as the "gentlemen" that we most certainly are!
I don't know if the issue of "reopening of the slave trade" was actually discussed 'in session', you will have to rely on unionblue and/or ewc to answer that question.
It would seem to me almost inconceivable, however, that the idea was not discussed at least informally at Montgomery, with Rhett most likely actively pursuing his agenda.
We do find on Feb. 8, 1861, Mr. Rhett introducing a motion that would strike out total prohibition of the African slave trade as provided in the proposed CSA Constitution, by giving the authority over that issue to the Confederate Congress. James Chestnut (who might reconsider his decisions a few years later while watching in awe the flames of Columbia) also put in his 2 cents, to a similar effect.
******************
"7.30 O'CLOCK P. M.
The first paragraph of the seventh section was read, as follows:
The importation of African negroes from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States of the United States, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.
Mr. Rhett moved to amend the same by striking out all after the
words "of African" and insert the words "negroes and slaves from Africa may be prohibited by Congress."Mr. Chesnut moved to amend the section by substituting for the whole paragraph the following words:
Congress shall have power to prohibit the importation of African negroes and slaves from any foreign country.
****************
Now, that says nothing about "reopening the slave trade", but does suggest that, as ewc says, "There was significant sentiment for opening the African slave trade among Southern delegates at Montgomery".
Significant in what way? In numbers?, or maybe in influence in the name of Rhett?
ewc continues "The fact of the matter is that though by no means a majority of delegates, nor Southerners, favored opening the African slave trade, it was very much a consideration among a group of diehard fire-eaters headed by Robert Barnwell Rhett, the archsecessionist editor of the Charleston Mercury." (I'll agree with that!)
He then goes, maybe, out on a limb by suggesting that the vote was about 'reopening'. I'll leave that for him to say. As to his other sentiments, I am most agreeable.
As for unionblue, who I see has, in the interim as I plod along, posted a Gordon thing; I would not count him out as one who might come up with the goods, so to speak.
__________________ -
"It was a very peculiar time." - Franklin D. Cossitt
Ancestors in USA Army: 6th IA Inf, 11th IL Cav, 1st AL Cav; 122nd NY Inf; 6th MI Cav; 35th MA Inf; 100th IL Inf; 1st CO Inf/Cav; 22nd IN Inf
From the civil war home website on the csa constitution background page. If one scrolls down the page under the section titled The Permanent Constitution, one will read the following in paragraph 22:
"The Confederate Constitution also mirrored, but surpassed, the federal Constitution on the issue of the slave trade by absolutely forbidding the operation of the African slave trade. This was done over protestations of South Carolinians, who wanted the matter left to Congress."
Also, in the second to last paragraph of the page, you will read the following:
"Radicals delayed ratification in South Carolina. Robert Barnwell Rhett, Sr., wanted to amend the document to prohibit any free state from entering the Confederacy. But finally, on April 3, South Carolina ratified by a vote of 138 to 21. The negative votes represented not latent Unionist sentiment but the proslavery extremism in the Palmetto State. After ratification the South Carolina convention proposed amendments to eliminate the three-fifths provision and count all slaves for representation; to prohibit free states from joining the Confederacy; to repeal the constitutional prohibition on the slave trade; and to prohibit the government from going into debt, except in the event of war."
From the book, Look Away! The History Of The Confederate States Of America, by William C. Davis:
"It would take them (the Montgomery Convention) two days to pass the provisional charter, yet pass it they did, almost unchanged in any significant component. There was some debate over exactly what to call themselves, but they settled on Stephen's suggested Confederate States of America. The only real attempt at substantive deletion came when Rhett tried to strike out the prohibition of the African slave trade. He believed that such a proscription on any aspect of slavery was a tacit condemnation of the institution that he regarded as one of divine ordination."
From the book, The Union That Shaped The Confederacy; Robert Toombs & Alexander H. Stephens, also by William C. Davis:
"(while going through the provisional draft of the Confederate Constitution) Then they hit upon the section that prohibited the African slave trade. It was always an emotional issue. To extremists like Rhett, it implied a stigma on slavery itself, which he found intolerable. Indeed, there had been a substantial movement in the early 1850's to reopen the slave trade, and though it had failed, many people still felt sensitive about an issue that touched their sectional pride and honor... and when Rhett attempted to soften the prohibition with an amendment to the existing clause, everyone who opposed a reopening voted to table the measure."
I would also recommend the book, The Counter-Revolution Of Slavery; Politics and Ideology in Antebellum South Carolina, by Manisha Sinha. There is an entire chapter devoted to reopening the African Slave Trade.
As to the source you gave (Provisional Congress of the Confederate States), you can check out pages 35-36 and pages 868-869 to see where Rhett tried to throw out or amend the provisions banning slavery imports and the slave trade.
Maybe wanting it to be there doesn't make it so, but when it is there I am reminded of the old saying, "There are none so blind as those who will not see."
Sincerely,
Unionblue
__________________ "The American people and the Government at Washington may refuse to recognize it for a time but the inexorable logic of events will force it upon them in the end; that the war now being waged in this land is a war for and against slavery." Frederick Douglass
"Loyalty to our ancestors does not include loyalty to their mistakes." George Santayana
Neil, Ole, Sam- your efforts at rehabilitating this topic are much appreciated.
Neil- Fascinating link on Capt Gordon.
__________________ 'It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier, who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag'
The fire-eaters were in a minority at Montgomery, moderates predominated, and moderates were going to make policy. But again, issues held by the fire-eaters were significant, for without the fire-eaters, no secession takes place, and with no secession, no Confederacy. And with a Confederacy born of a radical group, that radical group's policy would matter, whether in the forefront or not, whether adopted or not...
Does it seem to anyone else like this would parallel the influence of staunch abolitionists vis-à-vis moderates in the Union government?
__________________ Chaplain Rob Stroud, USAF Son of SgtMaj Chuck Stroud, USMC Grandson of Private Charles Stroud, USA Great-Grandson of Corporal Chauncey Stroud, Fifth Iowa Volunteer Cavalry
It should go without saying that although I am a proud member of the military, my posts in no way reflect the official policies of the USAF or the United States government.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
As we seem to have hijacked this thread concerning the just hanging of the piratical Gordon, ordinarily I would suggest starting a new thread on the question of reopening the African slave trade. However, I am afraid, in fact I am quite sure, that such a discussion cannot be undertaken civilly and the chances of having a tolerable discussion quite nil given its' antecedents. I consider the matter closed and any further discussion useless. Instead I believe I will go out and spend a few minutes banging my head against a brick wall for all the good it could conceivably do. At least this way, I have as much prospect of a rational, intelligent, and cordial discourse as I am likely to encounter under present conditions.
Linear Mode
