The Confederacy was About Slavery

AS A RUNUP TO ACTUAL WAR , THERE WAS THE WASHINGTON PEACE CONFERENCE THAT ATTEMPTED TO PREVENT ANY FURTHER STATES FROM SECEDING AND TO HOPEFULLY AVOID ANY FURTHER HOSTILITIES
This is from the Richmond Dispatch as reported by the Civil War Sesquicentennial Blog entitled Four Score and TEN

Quote:
Washington, Feb. 27.

–the Peace Conference has passed, by a vote of 9 to 8, the sub-substitute of Mr. Franklin. The following is the document:

1. Sec. 1st. In all the present Territory of the United Sates North of the parallel of 30 degrees, 30 minutes of North latitude, involuntary services, except in punishment for crime. is prohibited. In all the present Territory, South of that line, the status of persons held to service or labor, as it now exists, shall not be changed.– Nor shall any law be passed by Congress or the Territorial Legislature to hinder or prevent the taking of such persons from any of the States of this Union to said Territory, nor to impair the rights arising from said relation; but the same shall be subject to judicial cognizance in the Federal Courts according to the course of the common law. When any Territory north or south of said line, with such boundary as Congress may prescribe. shall contain a population equal to that required for a member of Congress, it shall. if its form of government be republican, be admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the original States. with or without involuntary servitude, as the Constitution of such State may provide.

2. Sec. 2. Territory shall not be acquired by the United States, unless by treaty; nor, except for naval and commercial stations and depots, unless such treaty shall be ratified by four-fifths of all the members of the Senate.

3. Sec. 3. Neither the Constitution, nor any amendment thereof, shall be constructed to give Congress power to regulate, abolish or control with in any State or Territory of the United States. the relation established or recognized by the laws thereof touching persons bound to labor or involuntary service therein, nor to interfere with or abolish involuntary service in the District of Columbia without the consent of Mary land and without the consent of the owners, or making the owners who do not consent just compensation; nor the power to interfere with or prohibit representatives and others from bringing with them to the city of Washington, retaining and taking away, persons so bound to labor; nor the power to interfere with or abolish involuntary service in places under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States within those States and Territories where the same is established or recognized; nor the power to prohibit the removal or transportation, by land, sea, or river, of persons held to labor or involuntary servitude in any State or Territory of the United States to any other State or Territory thereof where it is established or recognized by law or usage; and the right during transportation of touching at ports, shores, and landings, and of landing in case of distress, shall exist. Nor shall Congress have power to authorize any higher rate of taxation on persons bound to labor than on land.

4. Sec. 4. The third paragraph of the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution, shall not be construed to prevent any of the States, by appropriate legislation, and through the action of their judicial and ministerial officers, from enforcing the delivery of fugitives from labor to the person to whom such service or labor is due.

5. Sec. 5. The foreign slave trade and the importation of slaves into the United States and their Territories, from places beyond the present limits thereof, are forever prohibited.

6. Sec. 6. The first, third and fifth sections, together with this section six of these amendments, and the third paragraph of the second section of the first article of the Constitution, and the third paragraph of the second section of the fourth article thereof, shall not be amended or abolished without the consent of all the States.

7. Sec. 7. Congress shall provide by law that the United States shall pay to the owner the full value of his fugitive from labor in all cases where the marshal, or other officer, whose duty it was to arrest such fugitive, was prevented from so doing by violence, or when intimidation from mobs or riotous assemblages, or when, after arrested, such fugitive was rescued by force, and the owner thereby prevented and obstructed in the pursuit of his remedy for the recovery of such fugitive.

It is reported that the Virginia and North Carolina delegations are divided, a majority in each being against the substitute. This report is not, however, authentic.

The Conference has adjourned.

[second Dispatch.]

In actuality, the Outcome of the PEace Conference was a rewording of the Missouri Compromise and The Crittenden Compromise

THE CRITTENDEN "COMPROMISE"(the substance thereof)

Quote:
6 Amendments to the Constitution

1.Slavery would be prohibited in any territory of the United States "now held, or hereafter acquired," north of latitude 36 degrees, 30 minutes line. In territories south of this line, slavery of the African race was "hereby recognized" and could not be interfered with by Congress. Furthermore, property in African slaves was to be "protected by all the departments of the territorial government during its continuance." States would be admitted to the Union from any territory with or without slavery as their constitutions provided.
2.Congress was forbidden to abolish slavery in places under its jurisdiction within a slave state such as a military post.
3.Congress could not abolish slavery in the District of Columbia so long as it existed in the adjoining states of Virginia and Maryland and without the consent of the District's inhabitants. .Compensation would be given to owners who refused consent to abolition.
4.Congress could not prohibit or interfere with the interstate slave trade.
5.Congress would provide full compensation to owners of rescued fugitive slaves. Congress was empowered to sue the county in which obstruction to the fugitive slave laws took place to recover payment; the county, in turn, could sue "the wrong doers or rescuers" who prevented the return of the fugitive.
6.No future amendment of the Constitution could change these amendments or authorize or empower Congress to interfere with slavery within any slave state.
Fugitive slave laws

That fugitive slave laws were constitutional and should be faithfully observed and executed.
That all state laws which impeded the operation of fugitive slave laws, the so-called "Personal liberty laws," were unconstitutional and should be repealed.
That the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850 should be modified (and rendered less objectionable to the North) by equalizing the fee schedule for returning or releasing alleged fugitives and limiting the powers of marshals to summon citizens to aid in their capture.
That laws for the suppression of the African slave trade should be effectively and thoroughly executed

The Crittenden Compromise , aCongressional intervention to prevent a Civil War, clearly shows that the primary issue of an impending war was slavery clear and simple.

He believes that history should not be taught as straightforward facts and dates to memorize, but rather analysis of the context and root causes of events.
Loewen recommends that teachers use two textbooks, so that students may realize the contradictions and ask questions, such as, "Why do the authors present the material like this?"

Loewen co-authored a United States history textbook, Mississippi: Conflict and Change (1974), which won the Lillian Smith Award for Best Southern Nonfiction in 1975.
The Mississippi Textbook Purchasing Board did not approve the textbook for use in the state school system.
Loewen challenged the state's decision in a lawsuit, Loewen v. Turnipseed (1980).

The American Library Association considers Loewen v. Turnipseed, 488 F. Supp. 1138 (N.D. Miss. 1980), a historic First Amendment case, and one of the foundations of our "right to read freely."
Mississippi: Conflict and Change was rejected for use in Mississippi's public schools by the Mississippi Textbook Purchasing Board on the grounds that it was too controversial and placed too much focus on racial matters.

Judge Orma R. Smith of the U.S. District Court ruled that the rejection of the textbook was not based on "justifiable grounds", and that the authors were denied their right to free speech and press

So thats it then, whites can feel real good about themselves ?

is the focus of Loewen's criticism of the history books that were used and are being used in American schools...So that whites can feel real good about themselves.

5. The two sides were not fighting for/against slavery.


The Northern armies were not fighting to free the slaves and the Southern armies were not fighting to defend slavery. The goal of the North was to defeat the Confederacy in order to restore the Union; the goal of the South was to win its fight for independence. From the beginning to the end, Lincoln made it clear that slavery/emancipation was secondary to reunion. (As it happened, the fate of 4 million slaves hung in the balance once Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation.)

Most Southerners owned no slaves--many such as Lee and Jackson favored gradual emancipation--but they were strongly opposed to abolition for political, economic and social reasons. Moreover, the powerful minority of slaveholders were calling the shots (politically speaking). In short, slavery precipitated secession and doomed the Confederacy. The Confederate government was unwilling to sacrifice slavery for the cause of independence, so there was no chance for a negotiated (political) settlement of the war. In this sense, it unintentionally became a war for/against slavery, but that was not why the two sides were fighting.

6. Secession was about states rights, not slavery.

This is a myth, rarely heard at the time of the Civil War, and largely invented after the fact by Southerners seeking to separate the Confederacy from the abomination of slavery.

It is false to claim that the North was fighting to free the slaves and the South was fighting to keep them in bondage; but that does not mean the war was all about States' Rights and was not about slavery.

The two sides were fighting essentially BECAUSE of slavery. For all the political, social, cultural, and economic differences that divided the North and South, slavery was the root cause of secession and the Civil War.

Can you pair of fools cite one document that lists an English slave being sold in England after the Norman Conquest ?

I suspect that Liberals are still pissed that the South largely abandoned the Dem party and turned conservative.

I suspect that Liberals are still pissed that the South largely abandoned the Dem party and turned conservative.

When Minneapolis mayor Hubert Humphrey addressed the convention, he urged the Democratic Party to "get out of the shadow of states' rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights," prompting a walkout by Southern delegates who later nominated Strom Thurmond as the presidential nominee of the States' Rights Party (Dixiecrats).

I've been told that the America has bombed Cuba - huh? I was like, 'When?' And I was told that we bombed them in the 1960's. HUH?

I was also told by a very intelligent man that Abraham Lincoln wanted the slaves in the south to be emancipated so that he could then transfer them from the cotton and tobacco fields to work the factories in the increasingly industrialized north- as SLAVE labor...huh?

I was also told that Texas, New Mexico and Arizona were instrumental in the cause of the confederacy.

He was fed all this misinformation by a British bloke who is a confederate sympathizer and travels to the US to do Civil War re-enactments.

To be fair, if someone were to ask an American to hold forth on the English Civil War and/or Reformation...how many of them would be able to accurately recount any information at all?

History is all about context and nuances and if you don't have those - you really can't get an accurate picture.

I'm puzzled by your cavalier dismissal of Loewen's excellent article Five Myths.

I would think that a Sociologist-Historian would be the preferred academic

Quote:

Can you pair of fools cite one document that lists an English slave being sold in England after the Norman Conquest ?

Well, the first slaves arrived in London in 1555. In 1595 Queen Elisabeth complained in a letter to the City of London that too many black slaves were there