- Feb 2019
-
www.battlefields.org www.battlefields.org
-
For twenty-five years this agitation has been steadily increasing, until it has now secured to its aid the power of the common Government.
Basically, the south hates the abolitionist movement with a passion.
-
"Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,"
This could, contrary to the south's claims, flip flop either way. In fact, Lincoln was more interested in just preserving the union than freeing the slaves or anything like that.
-
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.
Referring to early compromises when it came to the creation of the constitution.
-
The General Government, as the common agent, passed laws to carry into effect these stipulations of the States. For many years these laws were executed. But an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution.
This would seem, regardless of the law, to be a failure on the states part and not the government. Also refers to abolitionists and other similar groups.
-
"No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up, on claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due."
Pretty sure this is what the fugitive slave act was based off of. Why with these two laws does the south think the government has failed?
-
We maintain that in every compact between two or more parties, the obligation is mutual; that the failure of one of the contracting parties to perform a material part of the agreement, entirely releases the obligation of the other;
I think the South considers the Wilmot Proviso, the election of Lincoln, and Bloody Kansas to be failures of the federal government, but what else could fall into this category?
-
Thus were established the two great principles asserted by the Colonies, namely: the right of a State to govern itself; and the right of a people to abolish a Government when it becomes destructive of the ends for which it was instituted.
So if I understand it correctly, South Carolina believes that the federal government has become destructive towards the states, despite no anti slavery laws being passed yet.
-
A struggle for the right of self-government ensued, which resulted, on the 4th of July, 1776, in a Declaration, by the Colonies, "that they are, and of right ought to be, FREE AND INDEPENDENT STATES;
I read, according to These Truths, that much of the language used to compare the relationship between the colonies and England was that the colonies were basically slaves. In addition, the Declaration of Independence had a first draft where Thomas Jefferson criticised slavery. Thus, it's very interesting that a southern state uses this argument.
-
The people of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled
This seems to echo the opening preamble of the constitution. Interesting.
-
separate and equal
I don't know exactly why, but this makes me think ahead to Jim Crow laws and the whole separate but equal idea (that was completely false).
-
Approved, Tuesday, January 29, 1861
Summary: Feels like the state of Georgia is declaring itself free of the United States because the other states have failed to uphold the compact that established the Union, the U.S. Constitution. Many of their gripes are true. Many facts are also omitted. Under it all, is the divisive issue of slavery and the inherent economics that made abolishing slavery so difficult.
-
The Supreme Court unanimously
Dred Scott v. Sandford decision.
-
Claimants are murdered with impunity;
I would need to research this. Could be true...slave owners murdered for going after fugitive slaves.
-
A similar provision of the Constitution requires them to surrender fugitives from labor.
Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 but most Northern states had enacted "personal liberty laws" that worked to prevent the capture of runaways in the North. They weren't always effective, but effective enough that the South was angry about them and listed them here.
-
ordinance of 1787.
Sometimes called the Northwest Ordinance.
-
They have sent emissaries among us for the accomplishment of these purposes.
John Brown
-
because their avowed purpose is to subvert our society and subject us not only to the loss of our property but the destruction of ourselves, our wives, and our children, and the desolation of our homes, our altars, and our firesides.
My understanding of this is a reference to John Brown's Raid on Harpers' Ferry. Otherwise it is a bit hyperbolic.
-
amounting to more than one-third, who united with the unanimous voice of the South against this usurpation;
I assume this is referencing the Northerners who didn't vote for Lincoln in 1860.
-
They raised their standard in 1856 and were barely defeated.
John C. Fremont v. Pierce (Democrat) v. Fillmore (Know Nothing)
-
The North demanded the application of the principle of prohibition of slavery to all of the territory acquired from Mexico and all other parts of the public domain then and in all future time.
Hi, I'm the Wilmot Proviso back again!
-
equal participation in the whole of it.
Which they got. Both Utah and New Mexico Territories, formed under the Compromise of 1850, were open to slavery by the use of popular sovereignty.
-
Northern anti-slavery men of all parties asserted the right to exclude slavery from the territory by Congressional legislation and demanded the prompt and efficient exercise of this power to that end.
I think I've underestimated the Wilmot Proviso and its contribution to the start of the Civil War. Previously, I thought, "Why did it matter, it never went anywhere?" But as I read through this, it really did anger the South in ways they were still fuming about over a decade later.
-
All these classes saw this and felt it and cast about for new allies.
The tariff was stopped, so domination of the South by the North had to find other means. And so anti-slavery ramps up.
-
But when these reasons ceased they were no less clamorous for Government protection, but their clamors were less heeded-- the country had put the principle of protection upon trial and condemned it. After having enjoyed protection to the extent of from 15 to 200 per cent. upon their entire business for above thirty years, the act of 1846 was passed. It avoided sudden change, but the principle was settled, and free trade, low duties, and economy in public expenditures was the verdict of the American people. The South and the Northwestern States sustained this policy. There was but small hope of its reversal; upon the direct issue, none at all.
I feel like this is the Walker Tariff of 1846, which was passed by pro-slavery legislators. In 1857 the tariff was revised again and was favorable towards Southern agricultural interests. Often we hear that tariffs were a cause of the Civil War, but if I read this right, Georgia's writers feel they stopped the tariff exploitation. It's hard to see the full picture without seeing some of the debate as to the meaning behind this paragraph.
-
we offer the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, the highest judicial tribunal of our country,
See Dred Scott v. Sandford court case.
-
Even the owners of fishing smacks sought and obtained bounties for pursuing their own business (which yet continue), and $500,000 is now paid them annually out of the Treasury. The navigating interests begged for protection against foreign shipbuilders and against competition in the coasting trade. Congress granted both requests, and by prohibitory acts gave an absolute monopoly of this business to each of their interests, which they enjoy without diminution to this day. Not content with these great and unjust advantages, they have sought to throw the legitimate burden of their business as much as possible upon the public; they have succeeded in throwing the cost of light-houses, buoys, and the maintenance of their seamen upon the Treasury, and the Government now pays above $2,000,000 annually for the support of these objects
It's been hard to find information as to what this directly references. (Well, on the Internet, because there are probably books written about the Georgia Secession Convention.)
-
While the subordination and the political and social inequality of the African race was fully conceded by all
This is probably a mostly true statement.
-
In several of our confederate States a citizen cannot travel the highway with his servant who may voluntarily accompany him
It's fun to read the hubris here. That a slave, here called a servant, may "voluntarily" accompany his/her master is very blind thinking.
-
The manufacturing interests entered into the same struggle early, and has clamored steadily for Government bounties and special favors.
You can tell Georgia is ticked about some of the special treatment and protections given the Northern interests. It is also interesting how it doesn't see the over-representation of the South via the 3/5ths compromise or the Fugitive Slave Act or Indian Removal as special favors. It was specific to Georgia that the federal government sent troops to remove the Cherokee, in direct violation of Worcester v. Georgia. A stark reminder that we often overlook our own benefits and highlight others' advantages.
-
The question of slavery was the great difficulty in the way of the formation of the Constitution.
True and False. The 3/5ths Compromise proves that but the debate over proportional and equal representation solved via the Great Compromise disproves it.
-
persistently refused to comply with their express constitutional obligations to us in reference to that property
Reference to lack of enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.
-
dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America
Uses specific language to bring the reader back to the Declaration of Independence's "dissolve the political bands".
-