The Real Cause of Secession

Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

WJC

Major General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,820
***Posted as Moderator***
Please limit posts to discussing the "real cause of secession".
State your opinion: this is not a courtroom with strict rules of evidence, but it helps to provide any evidence you have to support your opinion.
If you don't like the direction the discussion is taking, move along. Report any perceived violations of our Rules: do not become embroiled in pointless arguments.
 

NH Civil War Gal

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 5, 2017
Messages
3,659
Inevitably, there was going to be a reckoning. South Carolina was a few years away from being 80 percent slave, the 1870 census could have found the white population as low as five percent. As South Carolinian politicians & private individuals stated unequivocally & often, the fate of the French in Haiti would be theirs. Nightmarish terror of the their inevitable demographic oblivion was very real & fueled South Carolina's slaveholder's existential need for a way out. Why did they believe that independence was their only route to salvation? That, I don't know the answer to.
I hadn't thought of South Carolina this way before. Thank you for this. I wonder what would have happened. It certainly would have been a unique situation.
 

NH Civil War Gal

1st Lieutenant
Forum Host
Joined
Feb 5, 2017
Messages
3,659
In professional historical circles, it accepted fact that the Civil War was caused by the egocentric hubristic offspring of the phylopiestic slaveholding families in South Carolina. The whole miserable business was brought on by a few thousand hyper-privileged individuals. Absent their juvenile demand that they always have their own way, there would not have been a Civil War. Period, end of discussion.
Exactly - thank you for stating this, this clearly.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Red Baron

Private
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
95
What about the parts of the CSA Constitution that protect slavery? Can you post them?
Thanks for your response.
First, how was the Federal government supposed to separate the major slave holders from those who owned only a few slaves or none? Second, the extra-legal action that you propose is not done except by tyrannical governments.
Finally, the idea that non-slaveholders or that holders of only a few slaves played no part in the slave society is preposterous. Whether one was a slaveholder or not, he still had to serve on the local slave patrol. He lived in an environment of constant fear of a slave uprising. He shared in the economic benefits of the slave economy.
Most southern whites were simply small farmers. Many Southerners resented the hoarding of land and wealth. Do you forget that Northerners owned slaves? Therefore northerners also benefited economically from slavery.
Aren't you also forgetting that northern bankers profited greatly from loans to planters? Was this justified?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Red Baron

Private
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
95
This is a thread that is not on other forums I participate in. Why are counterfactual threads like this tolerated? Red Baron has obviously done his homework. Instead of discussing issues raised by secession, he is having to post a calendar, he shouldn't have to do that. Basic facts are not debatable. We should be using our time Discussing actual historical events.
I didn't post the calendar , someone else did. But they forgot the date of the Morill tariff
 

Red Baron

Private
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
95
This is a thread that is not on other forums I participate in. Why are counterfactual threads like this tolerated? Red Baron has obviously done his homework. Instead of discussing issues raised by secession, he is having to post a calendar, he shouldn't have to do that. Basic facts are not debatable. We should be using our time Discussing actual historical events.
Fact...March 2,1861-Morill Tariff was passed
 

Rhea Cole

Corporal
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
350
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Most southern whites were simply small farmers. Many Southerners resented the hoarding of land and wealth. Do you forget that Northerners owned slaves? Therefore northerners also benefited economically from slavery.
Aren't you also forgetting that northern bankers profited greatly from loans to planters? Was this justified?
You are correct, some northerners did own slaves. A remarkable number of mostly mulatto daughters of plantation owners owned slaves. Their fathers had freed them & sent them to New York for education & to live in peace. The girls were given title to plantations &'the slaves that worked them. The largest slaveholding family in the US lived in Philadelphia. You can read about them in Fannie Kimbel's journal. They went broke. The sale of their slaves became known as the 'Crying Time'. However, even when slavery was legal before the revolution, one man in Georgia owned more slaves than there were up north. Even before they were freed, there never were enough slaves in Northern states to matter. It was Southerners who wanted secede, northern mill openers were very happy with things as they were.
Perhaps you can expand on your banking comment. Don't banks exist to loan money at interest? How could that start a war?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Red Baron

Private
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
95
Most southern whites were simply small farmers. Many Southerners resented the hoarding of land and wealth. Do you forget that Northerners owned slaves? Therefore northerners also benefited economically from slavery.
Aren't you also forgetting that northern bankers profited greatly from loans to planters? Was this justified?
Union blue I will do better than that... I will post the entire CSA constitution and all of the real reasons for succession will be clearly outlined. Hint:just look at the reforms designed to restrain the Lincolnian crony capitalism that followed the war.
I am quite sure that you and others here have never bothered to read it.
 

Rhea Cole

Corporal
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
350
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Union blue I will do better than that... I will post the entire CSA constitution and all of the real reasons for succession will be clearly outlined. Hint:just look at the reforms designed to restrain the Lincolnian crony capitalism that followed the war.
I am quite sure that you and others here have never bothered to read it.
I have the Confederate Constitution, Articles of secession & the circulars provided by the seceding states to their inhabitants explaining why they had seceded at my side. I even have the very insightful study done by the Pew Institute that shows as much as 70% of the reasons given by the delegates referred to slavery. All of them are beside my keyboard as I write this. Every one of them is festooned with postit note markers. Having reread the Confederate Constitution two days ago, I am comfortable saying that neither secession or slavery is addressed in that document. So, as you may conclude, I am freshly read up on the real reasons given by the secessionists for what they did. As Alexander Stephens so elequently put it, the Southern Confederacy was the only nation ever created with slavery as the cornerstone of its existence. Can't be clearer than that. I agree with him.
 

Rhea Cole

Corporal
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
350
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Here is something that we should all take note of. Searching For Black Confederates a book published in September, is a remarkably well researched dive into the claim that large numbers of slaves were willing combatants in the Confederate army. I have only grazed through a friend's copy. The evidence is unambiguous as to where that idea came from, who perpetuated it & when.
What I found really remarkable were the online campaigns to get people who had not read the book to give bad reviews on Amazon. The posts themselves & a magazine article exposing the smear campaign's authors make especially eye opening reading. The last thing I need is another Civil War book, but I am going to have to order this one.
After you all have read Searching For Black Confederates do let us know what you have found. It will be a really great reference for further conversation.
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

Rhea Cole

Corporal
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
350
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Most southern whites were simply small farmers. Many Southerners resented the hoarding of land and wealth. Do you forget that Northerners owned slaves? Therefore northerners also benefited economically from slavery.
Aren't you also forgetting that northern bankers profited greatly from loans to planters? Was this justified?
Actually, there is 1860 census data that you can look up yourself. The remarkable slave maps issued by the census bureau shows the number of slaves & their percentage of the population in a brilliant way. The entire south & individual states are available online.
 

Red Baron

Private
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
95
You are correct, some northerners did own slaves. A remarkable number of mostly mulatto daughters of plantation owners owned slaves. Their fathers had freed them & sent them to New York for education & to live in peace. The girls were given title to plantations &'the slaves that worked them. The largest slaveholding family in the US lived in Philadelphia. You can read about them in Fannie Kimbel's journal. They went broke. The sale of their slaves became known as the 'Crying Time'. However, even when slavery was legal before the revolution, one man in Georgia owned more slaves than there were up north. Even before they were freed, there never were enough slaves in Northern states to matter. It was Southerners who wanted secede, northern mill openers were very happy with things as they were.
Perhaps you can expand on your banking comment. Don't banks exist to loan money at interest? How could that start a war?
Yes banks exist to loan money, but it is just as immoral to loan money to slaveowners....no matter what or where they are geographically. The cartel of bankers had and still have no morals,or loyalty
. I mean they have been financing both sides of many wars for hundreds of years. Would you not agree?
 

Rhea Cole

Corporal
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
350
Location
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Yes banks exist to loan money, but it is just as immoral to loan money to slaveowners....no matter what or where they are geographically. The cartel of bankers had and still have no morals,or loyalty
. I mean they have been financing both sides of many wars for hundreds of years. Would you not agree?
Since when is it immoral to loan money to people engaged in a legal business?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,063
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Most southern whites were simply small farmers.

True.

Many Southerners resented the hoarding of land and wealth.

They did? Where did you get this idea? Didn't most Southerners, like the rest of Americans, want something more, something better for their children? Didn't they want the good things of life and aspire to them?

Do you forget that Northerners owned slaves?

Nope.

Therefore northerners also benefited economically from slavery.

In comparing the number of actual slaves held by Northern Free States compared to the millions held in the Southern Slave States, you're going to have to admit to a bit of a difference in numbers and impact on the separate regional economies. The North did benefit from Southern slavery in the form of cotton exports to foreign nations, as it was the number one cash crop for the nation at the time.

Aren't you also forgetting that northern bankers profited greatly from loans to planters? Was this justified?

No, I'm not forgetting the price of doing business with bankers when requiring a loan to do business. But what was so strange about this? Where were the Southern banks at this time? Do you think they would be more understanding, less demanding of profit than the Northern banks? How much did Northern banks make off Southern planters? Do you have a source that tells you in actual figures? Where did you first hear the theory of Northern banks profiting greatly from loans to planters?
So far as I can tell from your above and previous posts, these are merely your opinion, still unsupported by any facts which you have yet to present. If you could present such facts supporting your opinions, it would go a long way in proving your personal opnion.

Unionblue
 

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,063
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Union blue I will do better than that... I will post the entire CSA constitution and all of the real reasons for succession will be clearly outlined. Hint:just look at the reforms designed to restrain the Lincolnian crony capitalism that followed the war.

You don't have to bother if you do not wish to do so. I've read the CSA Constitution many times and have found it to be for more restrictive to States rights than Lincoln ever dreamed of.

I am quite sure that you and others here have never bothered to read it.

You should be very careful when you make such blanket statements as the one you give about being sure "you and others have never bothered to read" the Confederate Constitution. First, your making an assumption that makes you appear uninformed and one who has done no research or homework on this forum's search engine or by clicking on the avatar of a forum member, such as my own.

If you had and then checked under my "postings" section of my personal page, you would see the posts I have made about the CSA Constitution long before you even showed up at this forum.
A bit of advice.

Research saves a lot of time and typing and requires fewer insults to get one's point across.

Sincerely,
Unionblue
 

Red Baron

Private
Joined
Nov 12, 2019
Messages
95
So far as I can tell from your above and previous posts, these are merely your opinion, still unsupported by any facts which you have yet to present. If you could present such facts supporting your opinions, it would go a long way in proving your personal opnion.

Unionblue
Nicholas Biddle was Rothschild's point man and was the president of the second national Bank of the U.S. Charles Dahlgrin was President of the Natchez,Ms branch. Just to name one planter that he financed: He loaned Charles Dahlgrin money to establish the Dunleith plantation in Natchez. The house is would cost approximately 5 million today to build, this does not even account for the land and slaves that were financed.
Do you believe that the bank gave an interest free loan of such magnitude?
Do you believe that this was the only plantation financed by Northern bankers?
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!

unionblue

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Member of the Year
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
30,063
Location
Ocala, FL (as of December, 2015).
Nicholas Biddle was Rothschild's point man and was the president of the second national Bank of the U.S. Charles Dahlgrin was President of the Natchez,Ms branch. Just to name one planter that he financed: He loaned Charles Dahlgrin money to establish the Dunleith plantation in Natchez. The house is would cost approximately 5 million today to build, this does not even account for the land and slaves that were financed.
Do you believe that the bank gave an interest free loan of such magnitude?
Do you believe that this was the only plantation financed by Northern bankers?
@Red Baron ,

A SOURCE for your above claims, the book (Title, Chapter, page number) or website or blog, you got this above information.

When you post the above without sources or reference, all anyone can see is YOU giving an unsourced opinion.

Unionblue
 
Fewer ads. Lots of American Civil War content!
JOIN NOW: REGISTER HERE!
Top