MO-CW-L ArchivesArchiver > MO-CW > 2005-11 > 1130957182
From: "Bill Morgan" <>
Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 12:46:22 -0600
With such a complete grasp of history, surely you know that slavery existed
in the North well after the Confederacy was forced to capitulate. Mr.
Lincoln's famed "Emancipation Proclamation" specifically limited freeing of
slaves to those states "in rebellion" against the United States. As the
Confederate states had already declared their independence he was merely
making another affront to the sovereignty of a people who had voted for
independence from federal despotism. Mr. Lincoln also suspended the right of
habeas corpus until overruled by the Supreme Court.
His famed proclamation specifically excluded the states of Maryland,
Tennessee and Delaware and slavery was not officially ended in Kentucky,
Missouri and Delaware until ratification of the 13th Amendment in December,
1865. Delaware was, in fact, the last state to end slavery.
Certainly you are also aware that much of the slave traffic came from the
North, with a booming slave market in Baltimore, for example. Many Yankee
brokers bought human chattel in the West Indies and brought them into
northern ports for sale.
The most unique thing about Missouri and Kansas was that the so-called
"civil war" started here about five years before the assault on Fort Sumter.
Federally instigated bandits and fanatics such as Jim Lane, Jim Montgomery
and John Brown organized gangs of armed ruffians to launch raids in
Missouri, ostensibly to combat slavery. The "Jayhawkers" and "border
ruffians," however, were seldom interested in whether or not a targeted
family owned slaves. If they had livestock or other valuables they were fair
game no matter how they stood on the issue of slavery.
The War of Northern Aggression, like most wars throughout history, was over
money and wealth. The Yankees wanted cheap cotton for their textile mills
and they wanted to recover what they paid for that cotton by taxing southern
cotton producers unmercifully. The powerful business interests of the
Northeast controlled the national government in the city of Washington and
used it to hold the South in firm control and near-poverty. Those same
businessmen abused their own workers and held them in what amounted to
economic slavery. They had no interest in eliminating slavery, just a
burning desire to insure that they reaped as much as possible of the profits
of that "unholy institution."
Chattel slavery was deplorable but it continues today in many parts of the
This country was built first upon the backs of indentured servants (economic
slaves) from Europe and then on the labors of chattel slaves, first from the
people indigenous to the West Indies and subsequently the Africans. "Human
bondage" built the great industrial strength of the northeast United States
just as surely as it did the plantation life of the South.
Bill, in KC
> If by resources you mean the ability to traffic in human bondage-then you
> are correct-and actually you are incorrect regarding Missouri's
> uniqueness-the only state not to raise White Union troops was South
> Carolina-where neo-confederates still fight the usage of the term civil
> war-Slavery allowed a lazy white slave owning population to play upon the
> racial fears of the middle to lower classes-who had nothing to gain with
> slavery-slavery of course kept wages down for the middle and poor
> whites-while allowing the wealthy slave owners to live a life of fancy
> laziness. Also let us keep in mind the CSA instituted our first
> draft-however, exempting Slave owners who owned 20 slaves or more (I think
> this # is accurate)-Rich man's war-poor man's fight.
> Of course the issue of State's Rights was not important to Southerners who
> clamored for, and had passed, the Fugitive Slave Law which allowed
> widespread violations of non Slave States Rights-State's Rights folks tend
> to forget this little issue-I will not even go into the violent resistance
> to and repression of free speech and free press for anti-slavery AMERICANS
> in the south-suffice to say that the Slave Owning elite were able to
> trample on the rights of the working class, the anti-slavery, and Black
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:54 AM
> Subject: Re: [MO-CW] Re: MO-CW-D Digest V05 #134
> Remembering that the North benefited the most from it all. They had the
> textile factories. It appears the North was trying to control the South
> and it's
> resources. I believe much of the history to be correct in regards to most
> south, but when it came to MIssouri, it was an entirely different issue.
> State's Rights...is always what is at issue and as typical, it appears to
> be a
> repeating trend. Slavery of any kind is wrong and was wrong so please
> misunderstand me. I am not trying to justify slavery. I am trying to
> the real reasons for the SO CALLED CIVIL WAR, from one Missourian's point
> view. My family lost all it had from Order #11 and the Burn Orders. They
> just simple God Believing and Hard Working Folks as many were.
> Check Scholl/Ross/Boone/Muir/Hinde/Key/Wallace/Parr/James/Younger,
> ==== MO-CW Mailing List ====
> NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters,
> political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal
> messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be
> grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen
> View and search Historical Newspapers. Read about your ancestors, find
> marriage announcements and more. Learn more:
> ==== MO-CW Mailing List ====
> To unsubscribe from this list, send ONLY the word UNSUBSCRIBE to the
> utility address If you are trying to
> unsubscribe from the Digest list, use the same utility address but change
> the -L- to a -D-
> Find your ancestors in the Birth, Marriage and Death Records.
> New content added every business day. Learn more:
|Re: [MO-CW] Slavery and Mr. Lincoln's despotism by "Bill Morgan" <>|