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.
Great link, Blue. Fading now, will look at it closely in the morning.
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
We forget the many, many northern merchants, industrialists who personally protested and signed petitions to avoid trouble that would be bad for business as usual.
True...but they changed their tune-
We learn through private sources that there are indications of a marked change of sentiment on the part of those connected with the great commercial interest of New York city. Heretofore that class have been the staunchest upholders of the pro-slavery policy of the Democracy.... But these great interests have become seriously alarmed at the present aspect of commercial affairs....By the adoption of a lower tariff of duties than is in force in the United States, foreign imports are likely to seek the ports of the seceding States, and the commercial supremacy of New York is seriously threatened. This is more than the flunkeys of that city bargained for or expected. The objection to enforcing the laws is daily growing weaker. The very men who clamored so lustily against their execution thirty days ago, now begin to ask, 'Have we a Government?' We shall be surprised if, within the next thirty days, the merchants of New York are not calling loudly upon the Administration to enforce the laws, to blockade the ports of the rebel States, to reinforce the forts, and to disperse the rebels who have taken up arms against the Federal Government.
Chicago Tribune, 27 March 1861
*
...a committee of New York merchants had visited President Lincoln to learn what was to be the policy of the government. There is no way of discovering exactly what was discussed at the conference, but a Washington correspondent, who interviewed the committee after the White House conference, wrote that the merchants had placed great emphasis upon the fact that "the present uncertainty as to the new tariff is destroying trade and legitimate speculation." Then he added:
It is a singular fact that merchants who, two months ago, were fiercely shouting "no coercion" now are for anything rather than inaction. "Let us know what to expect," they say; "if we are to have war we can adjust our business to that condition of things; but if the government lies upon its oars with a high tariff in New York and a low one in New Orleans we are undone." *
* New York Evening Post, 29 March 1861 [the described meeting would be prior to this date]
Philip S. Foner, Business and Slavery, The New York Merchants and the Irrepressible Conflict, p.301.
*
"This Day With President Lincoln" [from this forum] :
29 March 1861
At early morning cabinet meeting President announces decision to reinforce Fort Sumter, S.C. and Fort Pickens.
__________________ POWER & MONEY
"Your New-York bankers and merchants are shrewd people, but I never gave them credit for so much sagacity as when they took the Government Loan. It was not merely patriotism, it was a high stroke of policy. It has saved the Government, and what they will regard as equally important, saved them from a great financial disaster."
Great link, Blue. Fading now, will look at it closely in the morning.
ole
If it is the same one I saw, they never actually conclude the trial. I don't have time to look right now, but this trial would resolve that, if it is the same one.
I am beginning to think that there is much trepidation at the North for a case like this! If I promise not to use the word LIBERAL or COLLECTIVIST or CONSERVATIVE at any point, (my goal is actually to avoid that argument altogether, as not all the jury will be registered Democrats!) would that satisfy? This won't be one of my tirades, or rants. You'll be surprised...
My goal is what the South should have fought for; a draw... a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury.
Neither of the offered editorials show that the greedy north wanted to possess the wealth of the south. They do however demonstrate a current of unease with uncertainty.
Since the secession and formation of the Confederacy, Lincoln had done nothing to assure northern business interests that lower southern tariffs would not interfere with business as usual. (Note that there was no mention of screaming for war to subjugate and take over secesh resources?)
I think they were whistling in the dark. There was little traffic in southern ports except when there was cotton or rice to pick up. Foreign merchant vessels did not deliver to southern ports when there was no hope of filling the holds for a return trip. Check the revenues collected at southern ports compared to just New York. Miniscule.
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
Neither of the offered editorials show that the greedy north wanted to possess the wealth of the south. They do however demonstrate a current of unease with uncertainty.
Since the secession and formation of the Confederacy, Lincoln had done nothing to assure northern business interests that lower southern tariffs would not interfere with business as usual. (Note that there was no mention of screaming for war to subjugate and take over secesh resources?)
I think they were whistling in the dark. There was little traffic in southern ports except when there was cotton or rice to pick up. Foreign merchant vessels did not deliver to southern ports when there was no hope of filling the holds for a return trip. Check the revenues collected at southern ports compared to just New York. Miniscule.
ole
"Let the south go? Let the South go? Where will we get our Revenues? What, then, shall become of my tariff?
A. Lincoln, lamenting the future of a NAFTA-type deal!
Gullible, thy name is Beowulf. Have you explored the origins of the claimed statement? Probably not. Try it some day. When you can speak for yourself instead of parroting the words of your propagandist fellows, you will doubtless gain a few points in the eyesof many.
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
If it is the same one I saw, they never actually conclude the trial. I don't have time to look right now, but this trial would resolve that, if it is the same one.
Your "trial" would resolve nothing. It would have no impact upon the history that has already taken place and has been recorded for all to see and decided for themselves. In other words, it's already a "done deal."
I am beginning to think that there is much trepidation at the North for a case like this! If I promise not to use the word LIBERAL or COLLECTIVIST or CONSERVATIVE at any point, (my goal is actually to avoid that argument altogether, as not all the jury will be registered Democrats!) would that satisfy? This won't be one of my tirades, or rants. You'll be surprised...
There is no trepidation "at the North" for a "case" like this. I assure you, most of the North cares little what we say and do here at this forum. It is you that seems to have the "trepidation" at being denied another soapbox from which to preach the faith from. You can promise all you wish, your past actions and words on this board are a confirmation of what you will say. I am sure the only surprise any of us would feel is if you actually began reading actual history instead of DiLorenzo, and the other preachers of a 21st political agenda or revision of history. Don't blame us for not being interested in further bandwidth being wasted. Just go over your previous posts and live with what you have already stated.
My goal is what the South should have fought for; a draw... a reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury.
An acquittal.
"Your" goal, what the South "should" have fought for;
"Your" trial in other words. No thanks, I can better spend my time watching Star Trek reruns or finding new science fiction stories to read. At least, they would be mildly entertaining and at least have the faint possibility of becoming true one day.
Beowulf
Case dismissed.
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
Charged with high treason, tried and....a freakin' mistrial and no retrial so Davis lives to write his memoirs. I cannot believe that a jury of Northerners would do anything but convict the SOB!
__________________ "Those who forget to remember the past are condemned to repeat it", George Santayana.
Charged with high treason, tried and....a freakin' mistrial and no retrial so Davis lives to write his memoirs. I cannot believe that a jury of Northerners would do anything but convict the SOB!
Yes, fascinating, isn't it? Rather like G.A. Custer, himself! All front end and no back end to these people! Like challenging them to duels in the antebellum South. They decline, and slink away!
CivilWarTalk.com -
A free and friendly Civil War community. 
Linear Mode
