I live in Missouri, which has a complicated history as it was a slave state whose legitimate government remained in the Union while a renegade government declared secession. I do not, therefore, have a quote from the articles of secession from my state, but I gladly provide quotes from many more seceding states that evidence the cause of their separation. Those who claim slavery was not the core cause of the Civil War ignore the very words of whose who waged it.
The first two sentences of Georgia's causes: "The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery."
South Carolina's declaration: "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 '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...
On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.
The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy."
The entire Texas declaration is about slavery, but a key quote: "We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."
American Battlefield Trust is also a good source because they are an apolitical organization. They do also have articles discussing the implications of these documents, but they provide these primary sources as they are. No person can (rationally) deny the contents of these transcripts or claim some kind of bias, as these were the words of the very men who were declaring their causes for secession.
I have read these over, and over, and over again, usually to provide as primary sources in discussions about the cause of the Civil War, but also to remind myself of our nation's history and its realities. Every time they leave me mourning the evil words and the vile spirit contained within them.
Off topic, but I want to thank you for your efforts and ministry. I only just read The Color of Compromise this year, and it helped reveal to me the fear that I still clung to that kept me from doing or saying things about racial justice I knew to be right. I realized I was fearful of how my conservative communities, those who I'd worked with in political (Republican) circles, and some neighbors would react. I hadn't even realized I had this fear, and God revealed my cowardice to me. Your book played an essential role in helping those bonds of trepidation to be broken. God bless you, and thank you again.
While on the one hand, I agree with what you are saying (the cause of the Civil War (American) was slavery.....on the other hand if you had polled the union soldiers at the beginning of the war you would NOT have had them saying we are going to fight to end slavery. WE are going to Preserve the Union.....BUT the cause of the separation WAS Slavery.....and I think the main issue for Lincoln and the Republicans at the time was NOT permitting the extension of slavery into the territories. (AZ, NM, etc.) Check out A. Lincoln by Ron White. (another issue: U S Grant believed that the only states that "might" be able to legally secede were those that were part of the original 13, because the states that came after (Alabama, TX, FL, MS, etc. were PURCHASED BY the original 13) and had no legal right to secede since they were not of the original 13. Just saying that the logic and dialog that occurred before the war was not clear cut as to the rationale. (IF South Carolina had NOT fired on Ft Sumter and began the war (which some argue was Lincoln's plan anyway) would there have been the need for Federal Troops to fight? How could the Lincoln administration have solved the problem of the Federal Forts in seceding states (check out Florida, MS, AL, Louisiana) being taken over by southern states...? (think of Cambodia seizing the Mayaguez....no war with Cambodia resulted.) Stay healthy.
Only the hopelessly ignorant attempt to advance that argument but there are many of them. They argue it was about "states' rights" or a "clash of economies, one industrial and one agricultural", not about slavery. Perhaps they think we're as ignorant of history as they and are unaware that the northern agricultural economy was larger than the South's and was driven by paid, not enslaved labor. And perhaps they chose to remain ignorant that the clash over "states' rights" they like to assert as the cause was the right of the states to opt for slavery, the same as in the 20th century when the "Dixiecrat" Democrats asserted states' rights to maintain policies of racial segregation. That's when they walked over to the Republican camp wearing their KKK sheets under Nixon's "Southern Strategy" and became Republicans where they and their ignorance remain today. The "Southern Heritage" they like to talk about as they waive their Confederate flags, with its plantation mentality, genteel cake walks and idealized image of the "happy slaves" is borne directly from a culture based upon enslaved human beings, human chattel who bore the scars of whippings on their backs if they sought to flee and who were later lynched with impunity under the system of segregation following slavery in southern states where they sought to keep people of color in social and economic bondage as second class citizens. It continues to this day as Republicans make every effort make it difficult for people of color to exercise the franchise. And it’s sad because it represents a reversal of the parties’ very roots. The Republican Party had its origins in abolition and the Democratic Party was, in the dark recesses of history, the one that supported slavery and segregation.
I live in Missouri, which has a complicated history as it was a slave state whose legitimate government remained in the Union while a renegade government declared secession. I do not, therefore, have a quote from the articles of secession from my state, but I gladly provide quotes from many more seceding states that evidence the cause of their separation. Those who claim slavery was not the core cause of the Civil War ignore the very words of whose who waged it.
The first two sentences of Georgia's causes: "The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery."
South Carolina's declaration: "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 '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...
On the 4th day of March next, this party will take possession of the Government. It has announced that the South shall be excluded from the common territory, that the judicial tribunals shall be made sectional, and that a war must be waged against slavery until it shall cease throughout the United States.
The guaranties of the Constitution will then no longer exist; the equal rights of the States will be lost. The slaveholding States will no longer have the power of self-government, or self-protection, and the Federal Government will have become their enemy."
The entire Texas declaration is about slavery, but a key quote: "We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."
Daniel! This is so helpful. Did you have these quotes on-hand already or did you just look them up? Impressive!
One of the simpler sources to link for these particular transcripts (rather than linking to each individually) is here: https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states
They also have the transcript of the infamous Cornerstone Speech. Who better to confirm the intent of the Confederacy than their own Vice President? https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/cornerstone-speech
American Battlefield Trust is also a good source because they are an apolitical organization. They do also have articles discussing the implications of these documents, but they provide these primary sources as they are. No person can (rationally) deny the contents of these transcripts or claim some kind of bias, as these were the words of the very men who were declaring their causes for secession.
I have read these over, and over, and over again, usually to provide as primary sources in discussions about the cause of the Civil War, but also to remind myself of our nation's history and its realities. Every time they leave me mourning the evil words and the vile spirit contained within them.
Off topic, but I want to thank you for your efforts and ministry. I only just read The Color of Compromise this year, and it helped reveal to me the fear that I still clung to that kept me from doing or saying things about racial justice I knew to be right. I realized I was fearful of how my conservative communities, those who I'd worked with in political (Republican) circles, and some neighbors would react. I hadn't even realized I had this fear, and God revealed my cowardice to me. Your book played an essential role in helping those bonds of trepidation to be broken. God bless you, and thank you again.
While on the one hand, I agree with what you are saying (the cause of the Civil War (American) was slavery.....on the other hand if you had polled the union soldiers at the beginning of the war you would NOT have had them saying we are going to fight to end slavery. WE are going to Preserve the Union.....BUT the cause of the separation WAS Slavery.....and I think the main issue for Lincoln and the Republicans at the time was NOT permitting the extension of slavery into the territories. (AZ, NM, etc.) Check out A. Lincoln by Ron White. (another issue: U S Grant believed that the only states that "might" be able to legally secede were those that were part of the original 13, because the states that came after (Alabama, TX, FL, MS, etc. were PURCHASED BY the original 13) and had no legal right to secede since they were not of the original 13. Just saying that the logic and dialog that occurred before the war was not clear cut as to the rationale. (IF South Carolina had NOT fired on Ft Sumter and began the war (which some argue was Lincoln's plan anyway) would there have been the need for Federal Troops to fight? How could the Lincoln administration have solved the problem of the Federal Forts in seceding states (check out Florida, MS, AL, Louisiana) being taken over by southern states...? (think of Cambodia seizing the Mayaguez....no war with Cambodia resulted.) Stay healthy.
Only the hopelessly ignorant attempt to advance that argument but there are many of them. They argue it was about "states' rights" or a "clash of economies, one industrial and one agricultural", not about slavery. Perhaps they think we're as ignorant of history as they and are unaware that the northern agricultural economy was larger than the South's and was driven by paid, not enslaved labor. And perhaps they chose to remain ignorant that the clash over "states' rights" they like to assert as the cause was the right of the states to opt for slavery, the same as in the 20th century when the "Dixiecrat" Democrats asserted states' rights to maintain policies of racial segregation. That's when they walked over to the Republican camp wearing their KKK sheets under Nixon's "Southern Strategy" and became Republicans where they and their ignorance remain today. The "Southern Heritage" they like to talk about as they waive their Confederate flags, with its plantation mentality, genteel cake walks and idealized image of the "happy slaves" is borne directly from a culture based upon enslaved human beings, human chattel who bore the scars of whippings on their backs if they sought to flee and who were later lynched with impunity under the system of segregation following slavery in southern states where they sought to keep people of color in social and economic bondage as second class citizens. It continues to this day as Republicans make every effort make it difficult for people of color to exercise the franchise. And it’s sad because it represents a reversal of the parties’ very roots. The Republican Party had its origins in abolition and the Democratic Party was, in the dark recesses of history, the one that supported slavery and segregation.