The Second, Ninth & Tenth Amendments

[cash]

Originally Posted by aphillbilly

Really? That is funny because my source is Helper's book itself.

------

I don't think what you posted came directly out of Helper's book, to wit:

"In the year 1857, an individual named Hinton Rowan Helper, who had been forced to leave his native State, North Carolina, in disgrace, published a book, of which he was the reputed author, entitled "The Impending Crisis," The book recommended direct warfare on Southern society, "be the consequences what they might." It was so extravagant in tone, and so diabolical in its designs, that it was at first generally supposed to be the work of a fool or a madman. No one could believe that any sane or civilized person really entertained any such devilish purposes as it professed.--What, however, was the surprise of the public when the book was actually adopted by the Republican party as a campaign document, and its atrocious principles endorsed by SIXTY-EIGHT Republican members of Congress and all the influential members of the party! Below will be found an abstract of the principles it advocated, taken from the large edition of the work, published by A. B. Burdick, No. 145 Nassau street, N. Y., 1860, and the names of their endorsers, &c:"

It doesn't seem probable to me that Helper would refer to himself as "an individual named Hinton Rowan Helper."

Nor does it seem probable that Helper would claim he was advocating "direct warfare on Southern society."

Regards,
Cash

Originally Posted by cash

------

I don't think what you posted came directly out of Helper's book,

Nor does it seem probable that Helper would claim he was advocating "direct warfare on Southern society."

Regards,
Cash

1. We unhesitatingly declare ourselves in favor of the immediate and unconditional Abolition of Slavery.--Page 26.
2. "We cannot be TOO HASTY in carrying out our designs."--Page 33.
3. "No man can be a true patriot without first becoming an Abolitionist."--Page 116
4. Against slaveholders, as a body, we (that is, the Republican signers and endorsers) wage an EXTERMINATING WAR.--Page 120.
5. Slaveholders are nuisances, and it is our imperative duty to abate nuisances; we propose, therefore, to EXTERMINATE SLAVERY, that which strychnine itself is less a nuisance.--Page 139.
6. Slaveholders are more criminal than COMMON MURDERERS--Page 140.
7. All slaveholders are under the shield of a perpetual license to murder.--Page 141.
8. It is our honest conviction that all the pro-slavery slaveholders, who are alone responsible for the continuance of the baneful institution among us, deserve to be at once reduced to a parallel with the BASEST CRIMINALS that lie fettered within the cells of our public prisons.--Page 158.
9. Were it possible that the whole number (of slaveholders) could be gathered together and transferred into four equal gangs of LICENSED ROBBERS, RUFFAINS, THIEVES, AND MURDERERS, society, we feel assured would suffer less from their atrocities than it does now.--Page 158.
10. Once and forever, at least so far as this country is concerned, the internal question of slavery must be disposed of. A SPEEDY AND ABSOLUTE ABOLISHMENT of the whole system is the true policy of the South, and this is the policy which We propose to pursue.--Page 121.
11. Slaveholders! It is for you to decide whether we are to have justice peaceably or by VIOLENCE, for WHATEVER CONSEQUENCES may follow, we are determined to have it, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.--Page 128.
We Unfurl Our Banner to the World.
Inscribed on the banner which we (W. H. SEWARD, HORACE GREELEY, and the other endorsers,) herewith UNFURL to the world, with the full and fixed determination to stand by it or DIE BY IT, unless one of more virtuous efficacy shall be presented, are the mottoes which, in substance, embody the PRINCIPLES as we conceive should GOVERN us.
The Mottoes on Our Banner.
1. Thorough organization and independent political action on the part of non-slaveholding whites of the South.
2. Ineligibility of slaveholders; never another vote to the trafficer in human flesh. 3. No co-operation with slaveholders in politics, no fellowship with them in religion no affiliation with them in society.
4. No patronage to slaveholding merchants; no bequest to slave waiting hotels; no fees to slaveholding lawyers; no employment to slaveholding physicians; no audience to slaveholding parsons.
5. No recognition to pro slavery men, except as ruffians, outlaws, and criminals.
6. Immediate DEATH to SLAVERY, or if not immediate, unqualified proscription of its advocate during the period of its existence.--Pages 155 and 156.
7. Thus, terror engenderers of the South, have we fully and frankly defined our position: we have no modifications to propose, no compromises to offer, nothing to retract, Frown, sirs, fret, foam, prepare your weapons, threat, strike, shoot, stab, bring on civil war, dissolve the Union, nay, annihilate the solar system if you will--do all, this, more, less, better, worse, anything--do what you will, sirs, you can neither foil nor intimidate us; our purpose is as firmly fixed as the eternal pillars of Heaven; we have determined to ABOLISH SLAVERY, AND SO HELP US GOD, ABOLISH IT WE WILL.--Page 187.


Seems pretty easy to understand to me. How can one read that and not see it is not only probable that not only Helper but the Republicans intended nothing more than to "direct warfare on Southern society." but a bold in one's face fact. In his own words.

My point on sourcing is that there is not a single thing in my post that is not directly backed up by Helper's own words. I know. Because I have actually researched his work myself. Repeatedly. The vitrolic tome was designed for one single purpose. To rid the US of slaves and blacks. Not for moral reasons but finacial. If you doubt the veracity of my statements of my research then by all means, read his work. My source 'about what the book was about' is Helper.

I need not attempt to defend the fact Helper was a vile human being. He did that job admirably himself. John Sherman's own brother chatised him for his involvement with him. And at a time when the nation was being split, the 36th congress spent much of it's time addressing Sherman and Helper. Sherman refusing to disavow his support for Helper. And the Republican approval was clear when the man was given ambassadorship by his liege lord.

Feel free to reply but I will be away from the board a while. I need a break.

[unionblue]

Tommy,

I have no doubt what you have posted in your post above (post #182) comes directly from the Hinton Rowen Helper.

But could you please address Cash's post #181 and tell us if this paragraph comes directly from the original Helper book or is it a preface of some other author at a later date? Cash's post cannot be taken for anything else.

Unionblue

Neil

My reply cannot be taken for anything else either. Cash Declared "Sorry, but your source is inaccurate about what the book was about."

Which is completely wrong and I know it.

As I said 'My point on sourcing is that there is not a single thing in my post that is not directly backed up by Helper's own words.'

Shall I post Helper's entire book here to prove it? Is that what it will take? So the effort here is to quibble?

My post comes from many sources. I included nothing from any source that is not directly corroborated by Helper himself. So the ultimate source is none other than Helper. And I stand by it. Other than possibly typographical errors or minor inconsistancies there in not a single untruth in it. Not one. Either in fact or ideaology. If you, or Cash, or anyone else has issues with my the integrity of the facts, please, by all means, counter them. Show me where Helper is not " advocating "direct warfare on Southern society.""

With this...I'm outta here. See ya'll ...........sometime.

[cash]

Seems pretty easy to understand to me. How can one read that and not see it is not only probable that not only Helper but the Republicans intended nothing more than to "direct warfare on Southern society." but a bold in one's face fact. In his own words.
-------------------
That's a complete mischaracterization of what Helper was saying. He was talking about a "war" on slavery and slaveholders by the nonslaveholding white southerners.

Regards,
Cash

Originally Posted by cash

That's a complete mischaracterization of what Helper was saying. He was talking about a "war" on slavery and slaveholders by the nonslaveholding white southerners.

No. It is not. The only mischaracterization is that ending slavery, spreading fear, and destroying an entire economy is not a war on a society. But my point is that the Republicans, not Helper, used this book. Paid hard cash to have, at a minimum, 100,000 copies printed and given away free. Not to the South. But to northern voters. Doing everything they could to inflame the country. Without the Republicans using it, the book was a total flop. Helper was not walking around giving the book away to Southrons. The 'poor white trash' as I recall he refers to the non slave holding South had no interest in his bogus statistical babblings nor his vitrolic diatribes. But it sure served the Republican purpose. It let everyone know their goals.

[Georgiana Jewell-Roberts]

Helper’s “Impending Crisis” is available online at the MOA site.

http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/...T7224.0001.001

Here as well.

http://docsouth.unc.edu/nc/helper/helper.html

[cash]

Helper's prescription was for southerners to get rid of slavery and slaveholders. You mischaracterize his book when you claim otherwise.

Regards,
Cash

Originally Posted by cash

Helper's prescription was for southerners to get rid of slavery and slaveholders. You mischaracterize his book when you claim otherwise.

Just out of curiosity. Where did I claim that?