Why Did Arkansas Secede?

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Do we have a last a secession pure of the slavery entanglement?

References used
WHY DID ARKANSAS SECEDE?
Journal of both sessions of the Convention of the state of Arkansas, which were begun and held in the capitol, in the city of Little Rock


“Resolved, That the inaugural of Mr. Lincoln, President of the United States, is, and should be, regarded as a menace involving the inhuman doctrine of coercion, against which Arkansas should pledge herself to resistance, by all she holds sacred on earth, as long as she has a dollar to spend or a son to defend her.”​

inhuman doctrine of coercion? Really What coercion and why is it inhumane?

“Resolved, That the assembling of an army at Washington, under the plea that there would be an attempt on the capital, was but a miserable pretext, poorly disguised–the true object being, first, to intimidate us into submission; and if that failed, then to carry out the policy indicated in his inaugural address, which is both humiliating to southern honor and destructive to southern interest.”​
Southern interest? Slave labor.

"Resolved, That the vast preparations for war, manifested in assembling the navy from foreign stations–the building of new ships of war–the passage of the laws by Congress authorizing the raising of large bodies of troops, and the collection of military stores–the appropriation of large sums of money from the federal treasury–the declared purpose of the President in his inaugural, to recapture the forts, arsenals and public buildings in the seven States that have seceded from the Federal Union, are an unquestionable declaration of war against those States, and afford unmistakable evidence that it is the intention of the administration of the federal government to precipitate the people of those states into all the horrors incident to a civil war, and that the declared intention of the President also contained in his late inaugural, to collect the revenues and duties in those states, is a further manifestation of said purpose.”​

So according to this, the Federal government has no right to recover what was stolen from her and is in the hands of a Slave Republic.

“Resolved, That in so trying an emergency there is but one path left for Arkansas to tread with honor, and that is found in the instant dissolution of those ties that bind her to her oppressor,and the assertion of her rights, by all the means which God has given her–making a common cause with those who are ready to live or die with her.”​
It all gets spoiled by the alliance of a Slave States and a Slave Republic.
 

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

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
WHY DID ARKANSAS SECEDE?

The secession convention seems concerned about the protection of slavery

On March 9, George P. Smoote of Columbia County introduced these resolutions:​
“1st. Resolved, That the platform of the party known as the black republican party, contains unconstitutional dogmas, dangerous in their tendency and highly derogatory to the rights of slave states, and among them the insulting, injurious and untruthful enunciation of the right of the African race in this country to social and political equality with the whites.​
“2nd. Resolved, That it is the sense of this convention, from the past history of the party, known as the black republican party–from the past action of its leaders, and their course in the present crisis, and from the acts, utterances and conduct of its newly elected president, that said party intends to abide by and carry out, if possible, its insulting and unconstitutional platform.​
“3rd. Resolved. That the seceded states have ample justification for having dissolved the ties which bound them to the old Federal Union, in the constant and unconstitutional political warfare made by the party, known as the black republican party, upon the institutions of the slave states, which warfare has culminated in the election of a president by that party, by a purely sectional vote–upon an unconstitutional platform, the principles of which, if carried out, would utterly ruin the South.​
“4th. Resolved, That this convention cannot shut its eyes upon the fact that the government of the United States is now under the control of said black republican party, and that said party has power to use every arm of the same, except, perhaps, the judicial.​
“5th. Resolved. That in the opinion of this convention it is a conclusion clearly resulting from the foregoing that every feeling of honor, interest and sympathy demand that the State of Arkansas should discontinue her present political relations with the United States of America, and unite herself with the Confederate States of America.”​
 

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
WHY DID ARKANSAS SECEDE?

Civil Liberties reserved to whites. The only one in dispute is slavery.

In a message to the convention dated March 2, 1861, Governor Henry M. Rector wrote, “Unfortunate it may prove in the future for the cause of civil liberty, that the American government, made up of confederated states–peopled from a common ancestry, and deriving the inestimable blessing of republican liberty from a common fountain, have from antagonistic, domestic and social institutions become alienated–distrustful and inimical to each other–until the ligaments of the Union, once like hooks of steel, have been severed so insensibly as almost to defy realization. … The question at issue before the people of Arkansas is, whether their honor, their future safety and happiness now and forever, impels them to separate from the Federal Union, and unite their fortunes with the seven seceding states, or, on the other hand, whether prudential motives shall admonish them to take refuge amidst the fragments of the old Union, hoping for a reconstruction of the government upon terms of honorable equality to the slaveholding states.”​
 

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,806
Location
los angeles ca
WHY DID ARKANSAS SECEDE?

The secession convention seems concerned about the protection of slavery

On March 9, George P. Smoote of Columbia County introduced these resolutions:​
“1st. Resolved, That the platform of the party known as the black republican party, contains unconstitutional dogmas, dangerous in their tendency and highly derogatory to the rights of slave states, and among them the insulting, injurious and untruthful enunciation of the right of the African race in this country to social and political equality with the whites.​
“2nd. Resolved, That it is the sense of this convention, from the past history of the party, known as the black republican party–from the past action of its leaders, and their course in the present crisis, and from the acts, utterances and conduct of its newly elected president, that said party intends to abide by and carry out, if possible, its insulting and unconstitutional platform.​
“3rd. Resolved. That the seceded states have ample justification for having dissolved the ties which bound them to the old Federal Union, in the constant and unconstitutional political warfare made by the party, known as the black republican party, upon the institutions of the slave states, which warfare has culminated in the election of a president by that party, by a purely sectional vote–upon an unconstitutional platform, the principles of which, if carried out, would utterly ruin the South.​
“4th. Resolved, That this convention cannot shut its eyes upon the fact that the government of the United States is now under the control of said black republican party, and that said party has power to use every arm of the same, except, perhaps, the judicial.​
“5th. Resolved. That in the opinion of this convention it is a conclusion clearly resulting from the foregoing that every feeling of honor, interest and sympathy demand that the State of Arkansas should discontinue her present political relations with the United States of America, and unite herself with the Confederate States of America.”​
Sounds a lot like the issue is slavery not tariffs that add to the cost of Ellie Mays dress or dads Scotch. Edited.
Leftyhunter
 

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
WHY DID ARKANSAS SECEDE?
We become very explicit in this paragraph about motives.
In reference to the deep south, Governor Rector wrote, “Have they in the light of heaven been sinned against, or are they sinning against others? Their offence, like our own, in the eyes of the northern people, is slavery. This institution, co-existent with the remotest periods of civilization, and sanctioned by divine authority, is declared by the president elect to ‘be in the course of ultimate extinction.’ He has declared, and that truly, that the United States government ‘cannot exist half slave and half free. An irrepressible conflict, says he, is going on between freedom and slavery. That institution is now upon its trial before you, and if we mean to defend and transmit it to our children, let us terminate this northern crusade, by forming a separate government, in which no conflict can ensue. But if, upon the other hand, we are prepared to admit the argument, that slavery is a sin–that the melioration of the white and the black races requires us to abolish it, we shall keep in the true line of policy marked out by the incoming President, by remaining in the Union.” [Ibid., pp. 43-44]​
 

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
Sounds a lot like the issue is slavery not tariffs that add to the cost of Ellie Mays dress or dads Scotch. Edited.
Leftyhunter
Journal of both sessions of the Convention of the state of Arkansas, which were begun and held in the capitol, in the city of Little Rock

Some tariff remarks from the secession conventions.
P498
To build up their sectional predominance in the Union, the constitution must be first abolished by constructions; but, that being done, the consolidation of the North to rule the South by the tariff and slavery issues, was in the obvious course of things.​
P500
It cannot be believed that our ancestors would have assented to any Union whatever with the people of the North, ^if the feelings and opinions now existing amongst them, had existed when the constitution was framed. There was then no tariff— no fanaticism concerning negroes. It was the delegates from​

Edited.

 

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,806
Location
los angeles ca
Journal of both sessions of the Convention of the state of Arkansas, which were begun and held in the capitol, in the city of Little Rock

Some tariff remarks from the secession conventions.
P498
To build up their sectional predominance in the Union, the constitution must be first abolished by constructions; but, that being done, the consolidation of the North to rule the South by the tariff and slavery issues, was in the obvious course of things.​
P500
It cannot be believed that our ancestors would have assented to any Union whatever with the people of the North, ^if the feelings and opinions now existing amongst them, had existed when the constitution was framed. There was then no tariff— no fanaticism concerning negroes. It was the delegates from​

There seems to be no mention of China nor the TRR.




If only the Arkansas State Legislature could of stated what exact imported goods were so vital that it was worth sacrificing their son's over paying a tariff.
Leftyhunter
 

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,806
Location
los angeles ca
You keep talking about southerners fighting because of railroads and tariffs. The reason they were fighting was because they had declared their independence from the Union.
Edited.
Also it's meaningless to day that the South wanted Independence without stating the reason. It's a bit disingenuous to state that the vast majority of the Southerners desired Independence when forty percent of the South's population is either enslaved or racially oppressed and and there was significant Unionist sentiment.
Leftyhunter
 

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,806
Location
los angeles ca
Dying to defend your country against invasion is honorable. Invasion is not honorable.
The Confederacy was only a country in the minds of the Secessionists. No other nation recognized the Confederacy. American soldiers did not invade the South they simply crushed an illegal rebellion per the US Constitution. Fighting to defend slavery is not honorable.
Leftyhunter
 

Potomac Pride

First Sergeant
Joined
Oct 28, 2011
Messages
1,664
Location
Georgia
Edited.
Also it's meaningless to day that the South wanted Independence without stating the reason. It's a bit disingenuous to state that the vast majority of the Southerners desired Independence when forty percent of the South's population is either enslaved or racially oppressed and and there was significant Unionist sentiment.
Leftyhunter
You have some interesting material in your post. However, secession and war are actually separate things.
 

leftyhunter

Colonel
Joined
May 27, 2011
Messages
16,806
Location
los angeles ca
You have some interesting material in your post. However, secession and war are actually separate things.
Thanks but in the case of the ACW they are one and the same. The Secessionists seized US forts,mints,armouries and troops. Therefore Lincoln had no choice put to call out the Militia to suppress the rebellion per the US Constitution. If the Secessionists had sought the protection of the federal courts or utilized non violent resistance then your point about secession not equaling war would be valid. Instead the secessionists thou one Johnny Reb could beat ten Billy Yanks.
Leftyhunter
 

jgoodguy

.
-*- Mime -*-
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
35,538
Location
Birmingham, Alabama
You have to wonder about Northern parents' regard for sons maimed and killed fighting a war to keep a people in their union against their will.
Barely a majority of Southerners and even then as the war progressed many of these Southerners changed their minds. Dying to free people from slavery is honorable. Dying to protect slavery not so much.
Leftyhunter
Despite the tenacity and heroic fighting ability of the Southern people to stay in a war for four years given the North's vast superiority in numbers and war-making materiel, I very much doubt they could have done so without the enthusiastic support of only barely a majority of the Southern people. What would have been a great changing of mind among a large majority of the Northern public would have occurred had the Lincoln regime attempted to sell to them that their sons were dying to free slaves.
As Host.
This thread is not in Arkansas anymore.
Please return it there at the earliest possible moment.

Thanks
 

OpnCoronet

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Messages
10,429
You have to wonder about Northern parents' regard for sons maimed and killed fighting a war to keep a people in their union against their will.



In actual fact though, it was the Union that was fighting for its very existence, i.e., all Unionists were defending themselves from an unproved and premeditated attack, by defending their place in the Union., under its Constitution.

The Military provocations listed by Arkansas as evidence of Northern aggression, were in fact(and, chronologically) only responses, after the fact, of the Union(and, its citizens) being attacked, with premeditation and planning aforethought.

Secession may be possible(legal), but, only by a form and operation provided by the Constitution of the United States itself, Not by Arkansas, et. al.
 


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