Was there really a majority for secession in the south?

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,790
Location
los angeles ca
Really. I have a framed reproduction copy of the South Carolina Ordinance of Secession handing on the wall, there is no mention of slavery.
It certainly is mentioned in the Ordinances of Secession for Texas and Mississippi.
I will have to review the South Carolina Ordinances of Secession.
Leftyhunter
 

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

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,790
Location
los angeles ca
Really. I have a framed reproduction copy of the South Carolina Ordinance of Secession handing on the wall, there is no mention of slavery.
Yes really it is false to say that Slavery was not a reason for Secession of South Carolina. The sourced Wiki article and the linked Yale Law Review completely dispels the notion that slavery was not the main if not the only reason for South Carolina's Secession.
Leftyhunter
 

CSA Today

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
Dec 3, 2011
Messages
19,711
Location
Laurinburg NC
Yes really it is false to say that Slavery was not a reason for Secession of South Carolina. The sourced Wiki article and the linked Yale Law Review completely dispels the notion that slavery was not the main if not the only reason for South Carolina's Secession.
Leftyhunter
Off topic, if you want to know the South Carolina Ordinance of Secession said read it.
 

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Really. I have a framed reproduction copy of the South Carolina Ordinance of Secession handing on the wall, there is no mention of slavery.
I have a gold-lettered gilt-framed framed reproduction copy of the Alabama Ordinance of Secession with the following set in sequins. "avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions "
 

wausaubob

Major
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
8,094
Location
Denver, CO
I have a gold-lettered gilt-framed framed reproduction copy of the Alabama Ordinance of Secession with the following set in sequins. "avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions "
Which provides evidence that by 1860 even Alabama was moving back to false labels for slavery. That would be consistent with plenty of guys in No. Alabama who were skeptical of secession.
I think there was a majority in favor in the deep south, but in the border states the people were aware of what the north was like.
They had schools, multiple churches, railroads that could pay their bonds and functioning cities that paid good money for hogs and horses.
 

wausaubob

Major
Joined
Apr 4, 2017
Messages
8,094
Location
Denver, CO
The cotton south states had a political coalition that could dominate almost all of the slave labor states. The northern Democrats could not win the Presidential election without the south. That was the means by which the cotton 7 dominated national politics.
There is no reason to argue about whether a majority supported secession in the Confederate states. The money and power definitely supported it. But the major southern cities were all a bit different in their economics and demographics from the rest of the south.
 

Mosby

Private
Joined
Jan 20, 2017
Messages
43
The South Carolina Ordinance of Secession does not mention slavery or give any reasons. The declaration of causes: Confederate States of America - Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union talks mostly about slavery. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp For example the following three paragraphs.

"These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to perloin the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction."
 

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,790
Location
los angeles ca
The South Carolina Ordinance of Secession does not mention slavery or give any reasons. The declaration of causes: Confederate States of America - Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union talks mostly about slavery. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp For example the following three paragraphs.

"These ends it endeavored to accomplish by a Federal Government, in which each State was recognized as an equal, and had separate control over its own institutions. The right of property in slaves was recognized by giving to free persons distinct political rights, by giving them the right to represent, and burthening them with direct taxes for three-fifths of their slaves; by authorizing the importation of slaves for twenty years; and by stipulating for the rendition of fugitives from labor.

We affirm that these ends for which this Government was instituted have been defeated, and the Government itself has been made destructive of them by the action of the non-slaveholding States. Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to perloin the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection.

For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government. Observing the forms of the Constitution, a sectional party has found within that Article establishing the Executive Department, the means of subverting the Constitution itself. A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that "Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free," and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction."
Yet per @CSA Today slavery had nothing to do with the cause of Secession for South Carolina. Other posters claim that Slavery had absolutely nothing to do with Secession.
Leftyhunter
 

WJC

Brigadier General
Moderator
Thread Medic
Answered the Call for Reinforcements
Joined
Aug 16, 2015
Messages
12,160
***Posted as Moderator***
The topic asks, "was there really a majority for secession in the South?"
This is not intended to be yet another discussion of the causes of secession or the various Ordinances of Secession: we have threads discussing those topics.

Please stay on topic.
 


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