Civil War History - Secession and PoliticsWas it Slavery, or was it States Rights? Perhaps it was the election of Lincoln? What were the real reasons for Southern Secession and what were the political issues in this time of war? Find your answers here in the Secession and Politics Disussion.
I have been re-reading a few of James M. McPherson's essays. Here are some points he makes in one of them.
From 1789 to 1861:
- The Presidency was a Southern slaveholder 2/3rds of the time
- 2/3rds of the Speakers of the House had been a Southern slaveholder
- 2/3rds of the presidents pro tem of the Senate had been a Southern slaveholder
- 20 of 35 Supreme Court Justices were Southerners
Now it was pretty obvious that was changing. Slavery was gone North of the Mason-Dixon Line (well, almost; there were about 36 slaves in one county of NJ in 1860). Population growth would ensure lesser Southern power in the House. A Republican had just been elected President. Slavery in Maryland and Delaware was waning away, Kentucky was turning more towards Chicago and Pittsburgh and New York than towards New Orleans.
Still, when you come down to it, the election of 1860 was not an overwhelming victory for the Republicans. They lost a few seats in one house and gained a little in the other. They had a President elected with 40% of the vote and minorities (very close, but still minorities) in both houses of Congress. There wasn't a single Republican on the Supreme Court (although there was a new opening for a Justice in Virginia after a death). The possibilities for legislative and judicial stalemate, even if Lincoln wished to try bulldozing some law through, appear excellent.
Lincoln has not even reached Washington yet, and will not take ioffice until March 4, 1861. Seven slave states had already seceded. Others had secession conventions already in session, watching for the slightest sign they should do something.
That being the case, just what was the justification for the extreme rush with which the Southern states seceded? What had Lincoln done that caused these acts?
__________________ "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
Trice,
I see that your thread goes unanswered.
Do not be surprised if it remains so.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
No surprise. I simply like to bring these things up every once in a while. I think the deafening silence of the replies says something.
Oh yeah: the House of Representatives adjourned the day after the inauguration. The Senate stayed around a few weeks to advise and consent on appointments, then they adjourned as well. The next session was scheduled for December of 1861, which is why Lincoln had to call an emergency session for July 4th after Ft. Sumter was attacked.
Trice,
I see that your thread goes unanswered.
Do not be surprised if it remains so.
Sincerely,
Unionblue
Quote:
Originally Posted by trice
No surprise. I simply like to bring these things up every once in a while. I think the deafening silence of the replies says something.
Oh yeah: the House of Representatives adjourned the day after the inauguration. The Senate stayed around a few weeks to advise and consent on appointments, then they adjourned as well. The next session was scheduled for December of 1861, which is why Lincoln had to call an emergency session for July 4th after Ft. Sumter was attacked.
Regards,
Tim
Hmmmm......
All the grievances in regard to the slavery issue had been in place for some time...
So why now?
The only issue on the horizon-
The Tariff...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Be sure to check out my "Contraband Camps" and "Re-Peopling" threads.....
Whew, that was a nail-biter. Battalion you were late on that one. Where were ya fer cryin' out loud?
__________________ "In this great struggle, this form of Government and every form of human right is endangered if our enemies succeed. There is more involved in this contest than is realized by every one." Abraham Lincoln - August 18, 1864 Speech to the 164th Ohio Regiment
Hmmmm......
All the grievances in regard to the slavery issue had been in place for some time...
So why now?
The only issue on the horizon-
The Tariff...
Actually, Fire-Eaters like Rhett spoke up in the SC Convention on secession to insist there was absolutely no problem on the tariff, that every member of the SC congressional delegation had voted for it, and that the gentleman raising the issue would have voted for it as well if he had been a congressman.
Over in GA, future Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens rose to address the secession convention there on the tariff. He insisted it was a non-issue, that the current tariff was absolutely as low as the South had wanted it to be.
So since the leaders of the secession and soon the Confederacy believed that the tariff was a non-issue, why would you think so?
And since the Republicans did not control either house of Congress after the 1860 election, how was any objectionable tariff going to get passed?
And if you can answer those questions, answer the original one: why the hurry? Since nothing had been done, nor would be soon, to aggravate the situation, why did the seceding states resort to seizure, threats of force, and finally force itself? What were they so afraid of?
Regards,
Tim
And if you can answer those questions, answer the original one: why the hurry? Since nothing had been done, nor would be soon, to aggravate the situation, why did the seceding states resort to seizure, threats of force, and finally force itself? What were they so afraid of?
That's a question I've long been asking now and then, but I've not expressed it quite so well.
The only answer I can come up with is that certain powers wanted to govern (I really mean rule). When they couldn't achieve ascendence through the ballot-box (I have great faith in the ultimate good sense of the unseen, silent, common people), they determined to take it. It wasn't really slavery they had in mind, but they used it skillfully to make a division and create a country of their own, ruled by an aristocracy with themselves and their families as the nobility. They considered themselves superior and therefore in the right. They rejected the idea of the rule of law and the cooperation of a body of diverse peoples to the benefit of all.
Yes. Overly simplistic. But I've seen nothing yet that provides a different answer.
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
It went quiet on your two threads because you again reference sources that seem to have nothing to do with you initial premise when you start a thread.
Numbers alone do not a debate make. In fact, it became a bit confusing after a couple of posts of yours on those threads and when you were asked what you were trying to prove, YOU are the one who went quiet.
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
I suppose it was 'Now or Never', as they witnessed the tide turning on slavery. The election of a Republican (equated with Abolitionist), to the powers that be, was the last straw.
??
__________________ -
"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
Essentially, the Southern ruling class- the Southern, slave-holding, planter elite- were no fools; they could see clearly the writing on the wall. Theirs was basically a minority static system, with little room for growth, and based for good or ill on maintaining the institution of slavery- an institution more and more under attack. They knew that against a burgeoning and ever more powerful and industrial North, showing every indication of become even larger and more powerful, their voice and hold on power could only continue to diminish. Until.... very conceivably, in fact, certainly, the worst happenned. Already, their ability to expand slavery, necessary to maintain the status quo of slave to free state representation in the Senate, was seriously impinged; the stronger the North became, the less likely the territories would be open to the expansion of slavery- heck, that battle was the same one being fought since the beginnings of the republic. Reliance would have to be made on conquest into Cuba or Latin America, which again would depend on acquiescence from the North, a contingency less and less likely to happen as the North already wanted no new acquisitions which could expand slavery.
So the Southern planters saw themselves between a rock and a hard place, against a more virulent opposition than ever, and indeed an entire and powerful political party in their entire opposition... and they had seen these states of affairs coming down the pike for at least two generations. In fact, to them, it looked the country was doing an admirable ostrich with his head in the sand schtick. Their warnings and lamentations had all gone unheeded and ignored, and mounting stridency had only served to further alienate the North and make themselves even more entrenched and strident-even their friends in the North were getting edgy.
On top of all this, the once- powerful hold the Southern planter aristocracy had on the country was only going to weaken and every loss, no matter how slight, could only continue to add up and would never be regained. Their other instrument of political power, the Democratic Party was as well becoming less malleable to Southern wants and needs and its' principle spokesman by the 1850s, Stephen Douglas, had already demonstrated he could care less about what they wanted. Was, in fact, quite willing to take the fight to them. What's more, with all this, the clout and influence of the Democratic Party was waning and that of the freesoilers and Republicans seemingly steamrolling.
And that all leads to not only loss of political power, but to what that power in the hands of the planters protected- the economic and social system on which the foundation of their plantation system was constructed. What these Southerners were trying to protect was their whole culture and way of life. Slavery was not only the bedrock of their economical life, but the means by which this savage, or so perceived, underclass was controlled. Without it, no plantations, no uniform supremacy of the white skin, no aristocratic planter class, in fact, no them- the Southern political, hence cultural, leaders. With the threat to slavery, all the other dangers were magnified, and their very existence imperiled.
All said, I can understand full well why the South revolted when and as she did. As for timing, to delay was only to prolong the inevitable and with only a continuing weakening condition to boot, they were never going to be stronger than they now were. The time was right; if elements in the South could accept Lincoln and the Republicans, or even work with them, all hopes of any chance at a Southern nation where the planter aristocracy could continue to hold the reins would be exceedingly dim. To preserve their grip on the South, (which to give these men their due, they equated, not without some justice, the South to themselves) independence needed to happen sooner rather than later.
I would like to add too that although I understand why the South would want to break away and would attempt it, I do not agree it was right or legitimate. But that they tried, well as an independent and freeborn American, I can only admire them for doing it.
__________________ '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'
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Why secede now? 
Linear Mode
