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.
The South Is Accused Of Wanting To Reopen The African Slave Trade...The South Answers
Senator Wigfall of Texas-
"I ask the Senator from Massachusetts [Wilson] has any southern Senator or any southern member of the other House introduced any proposition here that looked to repealing the prohibitory laws against the African slave trade?
[Senator Wigfall supplies the answer-] None..."
"The Senator from Massachusetts...reads extract after extract from resolutions introduced into southern Legislatures, that were laid upon the table or thrown under it, or voted down by overwhelming majorities, and reads extracts from newspapers, and he cannot tell whether they were communications or editorials. He charges the whole South with desiring to reopen the African slave trade...
...I desire to say explicitly that, from the year 1808 to the present time, I am not aware of any effort on the part of the South to reopen the African slave trade...."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Senator Davis of Mississippi-
"With the permission of the Senator from Massachusetts...I merely wish to say that whilst he can produce individuals, whilst he can produce articles from newspapers or from pamphlets advocating the revival of the African slave trade, he can probably go into his own town...and certainly, if he goes to his own port of Boston, he will there find men, too, who would like to revive it and engage in it."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Senator Brown of Mississippi-
"It is mere mockery for gentlemen to pretend that they think the southern people are desirous of reopening the African slave trade...
Those in the southern States in favor of reopening this traffic are a mere handful compared with the great mass of the people...."
"Gentlemen may make some political capital at home out of this question of the African slave trade, but it is humbug capital; it is a kind of capital which no statesman ought be proud of."
Senator Wigfall of Texas-
"I ask the Senator from Massachusetts [Wilson] has any southern Senator or any southern member of the other House introduced any proposition here that looked to repealing the prohibitory laws against the African slave trade?
[Senator Wigfall supplies the answer-] None..."
"The Senator from Massachusetts...reads extract after extract from resolutions introduced into southern Legislatures, that were laid upon the table or thrown under it, or voted down by overwhelming majorities, and reads extracts from newspapers, and he cannot tell whether they were communications or editorials. He charges the whole South with desiring to reopen the African slave trade...
...I desire to say explicitly that, from the year 1808 to the present time, I am not aware of any effort on the part of the South to reopen the African slave trade...." Senator Davis of Mississippi-
"With the permission of the Senator from Massachusetts...I merely wish to say that whilst he can produce individuals, whilst he can produce articles from newspapers or from pamphlets advocating the revival of the African slave trade, he can probably go into his own town...and certainly, if he goes to his own port of Boston, he will there find men, too, who would like to revive it and engage in it." Senator Brown of Mississippi-
"It is mere mockery for gentlemen to pretend that they think the southern people are desirous of reopening the African slave trade...
Those in the southern States in favor of reopening this traffic are a mere handful compared with the great mass of the people...."
"Gentlemen may make some political capital at home out of this question of the African slave trade, but it is humbug capital; it is a kind of capital which no statesman ought be proud of."
I do not recall anyone ever saying that such an attempt was made in the US Congress. An attempt was made under the Confederacy, where it was defeated. Generally, states like VA and MD were making a handsome profit selling slaves to the Deep South and saw the Atlantic Slave Trade a s competition (as well as being opposed on moral grounds in many cases, I imagine). Fire-eaters like Rhett did often argue for it under both the Union and the Confederacy.
I do not recall anyone ever saying that such an attempt was made in the US Congress. An attempt was made under the Confederacy, where it was defeated. Generally, states like VA and MD were making a handsome profit selling slaves to the Deep South and saw the Atlantic Slave Trade a s competition (as well as being opposed on moral grounds in many cases, I imagine). Fire-eaters like Rhett did often argue for it under both the Union and the Confederacy.
Regards,
Tim
Please show us this "attempt...made under the Confederacy."
You make many statements......
...but you give no sources.
Please show us this attempt "made under the Confederacy."
(Time-Saver Hint: There was no attempt.)
An attempt was made to write it into the Confederate constitution, but was defeated in Montgomery. Mr. Rhett was disappointed. IIRR, he also tried to get an amendment for it after the Constitution passed, and was again disappointed.
I wa sure you would like to see this section of SPEECH
OF
T. N. CRUMPLER,
OF ASHE,
ON FEDERAL RELATIONS,
DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, JAN. 10, 1861.
RALEIGH: PRINTED AT THE OFFICE OF THE RALEIGH REGISTER.
1861.
=======
... Again, although all the Southern States are alike interested in the preservation and protection of the institution of slavery, yet, the interest of the cotton States, and our interest in that institution, are in one particular diametrically opposite. Our interest in the slave is his price, theirs his labor. We estimate him by what he will bring in market, they value him for the cotton he can produce. We sell slaves, they buy them. It is to our interest that slaves shall be high, it is to their interest that they shall be cheap. Many persons think that to carry out this favorite idea of getting negroes cheap; the cotton States would like to re-open the African slave trade, and we all know how destructive to the value of our slave property such a measure would be. But we are told now that there is nothing of it. Hands are held up in holy horror at the idea that such a charge should be made. But while I believe a majority of the southern people are opposed to renewing that traffic, I am satisfied there are many politicians in the cotton States who desire it. In support of this I call the attention of the committee to the remarks of Mr. Yancy, in reply to Mr. Pryor, made in the Montgomery Convention about two years since. As my friend from Hertford (Mr. Yeates) has kindly handed me the paper, I will read an extract from Mr. Yancey's speech:
"I insist that there should be no more discrimination by law against the slave trade than against the nutmeg trade. Let it be governed by the law of supply and demand alone. If we do not want the negroes, then do not have them; if we do want them, then we can get them. I think this ought to be governed by that rule.
"But I disagree with my friend from Virginia (Mr. Pryor) as to what would be the effect of any class of persons engaging in this trade. I do not propose to re-establish or re-open the slave trade, but I propose to leave our people free to do just as they please upon this question, and not restrict them by any national law. If any class of capitalists in the South, in New England, or elsewhere, choose to bring a cargo of slaves into a Southern port, that is a right which they ought to be allowed to exercise. Whether they shall sell them or not will depend upon the wants of the community. If we of the South want these negroes, give us the privilege of buying them, whether in Africa, Cuba or Brazil. If we do not want them, then we will not buy them.
"Will this trade depreciate the present value of slaves? I think it is a mistaken idea. It seems to me that the gentleman from Virginia utterly misunderstands the want of the Southern planter, when he seems to think that it was his desire for high prices for slaves. This is a purely Virginia idea. We of Alabama want slaves to be cheap; we want to buy them, not to sell them. It is a Virginia idea that slaves ought to be high. So the African chief would like to have his barracoons of slaves appraised at $2,000 each. But we who want to go there and buy them would like to get them at $50 each. Virginia wants $1,500 each for her negroes, and we want to get them cheaper. My friend from Virginia does not understand the wants of the Southern planter as to labor. He wants the produce of the labor to sell, not the labor itself. It is the value of the produce that is of interest to him, and not the value of the labor that makes that produce. While every one who wants to sell negroes desires a high price for them, the great mass of the planters who buy them are not interested in the high prices of slaves, but are rather interested in getting them cheap."
I leave gentlemen to draw their own inferences from Mr. Yancey's remarks. ...
================
As you can see, Mr. Yancy said he was against re-opening the Atlantic slave trade, but favored letting any who wanted to engage in it to land slaves in the South for sale. Neat logic. All he wanted was to get rid of the laws against it so that Southerners could engage in "Free Trade".
An attempt was made to write it into the Confederate constitution, but was defeated in Montgomery. Mr. Rhett was disappointed. IIRR, he also tried to get an amendment for it after the Constitution passed, and was again disappointed.
I wa sure you would like to see this section of SPEECH
OF
T. N. CRUMPLER,
OF ASHE,
ON FEDERAL RELATIONS,
DELIVERED IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, JAN. 10, 1861
Regards,
Tim
How does the speech of "T. N. Crumpler of Ashe" refute anything in the initial post of this thread?
"The Senator from Massachusetts...reads extract after extract from resolutions introduced into southern Legislatures, that were laid upon the table or thrown under it, or voted down by overwhelming majorities..."
How does the speech of "T. N. Crumpler of Ashe" refute anything in the initial post of this thread?
"The Senator from Massachusetts...reads extract after extract from resolutions introduced into southern Legislatures, that were laid upon the table or thrown under it, or voted down by overwhelming majorities..."
I didn't say that it did. It does show, however and IMHO, the ludicrous nature of this sifting for specific statements when the intent and actions are well known.
Mr. Yancey, well-known secessionist lawyer and politician, says in the quote that he does not advocate the re-opening of the international slave trade. He just wants to get rid of the laws against it. If other people then engage it and land slaves to be sold, he'd like to be able to make up his mind whether or not he would like to buy them.
This is, of course, silly verbiage. For comparison, substitute the word "murder" for slave. He would not want to authorize murder, oh, no. But he would want to get rid of the laws against murder so that other people could engage in the if they wanted to. He'd also like to be able to decide for himself if he wanted to buy any of their services -- but oh, no, he's not for allowing murder himself. Yancy is merely evading responsibility for saying he wants to re-open the slave trade, that's all.
Yancey was not in Congress at the point he made the speech. He had been before that, but he was not there in 1858. So Davis and these other gentlemen of the Congress were right, he was not making such proposals on the floor of the national legislature. He certainly was talking about them, though, and a lot of other people of his persuasion were as well.
You can find discussions of the attempts to revive the international slave trade in George Rable, The Confederate Republic (Chapel Hill: UNC Press, 1994).
, pp51-53 and Thomas B. Alexander and Richard E. Beringer, The Anatomy of the Confederate Congress (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1972)., p98.
You might also want to take a look at CRANKS, LIBERTARIANS, AND ZEALOTS: AN EXAMINATION OF OPPOSITION TO JEFFERSON DAVIS IN THE PROVISIONAL AND FIRST CONFEDERATE CONGRESSES A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in The Department of History by Tereal Wayne Edmondson B.A., Louisiana State University, 2002
I've seen it many times in other sources as well. At a guess, you'll find comment on it in "A Government of Their Own" by Davis.
The movement to re-institute the international slave trade wasn't strong. Doing so would cause problems for relations with the British, and also for the states like Virginia that the original states wanted to entice into the Confederacy.
You can find discussions of the attempts to revive the international slave trade in George Rable, The Confederate Republic (Chapel Hill: UNC Press, 1994).
, pp51-53 and Thomas B. Alexander and Richard E. Beringer, The Anatomy of the Confederate Congress (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 1972)., p98.
You might also want to take a look at CRANKS, LIBERTARIANS, AND ZEALOTS: AN EXAMINATION OF OPPOSITION TO JEFFERSON DAVIS IN THE PROVISIONAL AND FIRST CONFEDERATE CONGRESSES A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in The Department of History by Tereal Wayne Edmondson B.A., Louisiana State University, 2002
I've seen it many times in other sources as well. At a guess, you'll find comment on it in "A Government of Their Own" by Davis.
The movement to re-institute the international slave trade wasn't strong. Doing so would cause problems for relations with the British, and also for the states like Virginia that the original states wanted to entice into the Confederacy.
Regards, Tim
In the Confederate Congress there was debate about the wording of the law against the African slave trade...
...debate concerning the penalty for its violators.....
...but there was NO proposal...to reopen...the African slave trade.
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
The South Is Accused Of Wanting To Reopen The African Slave Trade...The South Answers 
Linear Mode
