mnottertail
Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
|
Sorry top drawer bullshit. Cotton was king. They needed more slaves and were pissed off that the west was voting to keep slavery out, meaning they couldnt move there and participate. So, they were trying to foment a takeover of Cuba and South America (since they couldnt talk the US into taking Mexico which forbade slaves).
Missouri Compromise, Wilmot Proviso and Henry Clay 'the great compromiser' and several other things at that period before and after the secession and leading up to it. They wanted federal OK for slavery, and that is where the states rights argument was put to in the west, most being against slavery in their constituions and for 'free-labor'.
Jefferson Davis as secretary of war had moved a great deal of federal arsenals to the south, and the occupation of one, fort sumpter......well....
Famous speech about that at the time:
BY SENATOR BENJAMIN FRANKLIN WADE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Wade
Wade was a typical self-made man, a true representative of the vigorous fanners of Connecticut stuck in northern Ohio. His fearlessness in opposing slavery made him prominent in the Senate, where his rugged style of oratory and his disinclination to mince his words often led to an exchange of pertinent remarks with prominent defenders of slavery. This speech is in reply to an equally sharp harangue by Toombs, the question at issue being one of precedence between the homestead bill and a bill to appropriate money with which to purchase Cuba. The burden of Toombs's remarks had been a sneer at the " land to the landless" bill..
AM very glad that this question has at length come up: I am glad, too, that it has antagonized with this nigger question. We are " shivering in the wind," are we, sir, over your Cuba question? You may have occasion to shiver on that question before you are through with it. Now, sir, I have been trying here for nearly a month to get a straight forward vote upon this great measure of land to the landless. I glory in that measure. It is the greatest that has ever come before the American Senate, and it has now come so that there is no dodging it. The question will be, shall we give niggers to the niggerless, or land to the landless? . . .
... I will meet that measure. I do not tremble before them or their owners, or anybody else; and it does not become gentlemen of the Senate to tremble over a measure. Sir, it is not very senatorial language. God knows, I never tremble before anybody. I do not expect to tremble before anybody. I do not expect to use language that ought to be offensive to anybody here, and I will not submit to it from anybody.
I moved some days ago to take up this subject. It was said then that there was an appropriation bill that stood in the way of this great question being settled. The Senator from Virginia had his appropriation bills. It was important, then, that they should be settled at once; there was danger that they would be lost, and the Government would stop in consequence, and an appeal was made to gentlemen to give this bill the go-by for the time being, at all events, and the appeal was successful. Gentlemen said the appropriation bills must be passed; and, although they were anxious for the passage of this bill, nevertheless it must be postponed for the appropriation bills. The appropriation bills lie very easy now behind this nigger operation. When you come to niggers for the niggerless, all other questions sink into perfect insignificance. But, sir, we will antagonize these measures. I appeal to the country upon them. I ask the people do you choose that we should go through the earth hunting for niggers, for really that is the whole purpose of the Democratic party? They can no more run their party without niggers than you could run a steam engine without fuel. That is all there is of Democracy; and when you cannot raise niggers enough for the market, then you must go abroad fishing for niggers through the whole world. Are you going to buy Cuba for land for the landless? What is there? You will find three quarters of a million of niggers, but you will not find any land; not one foot, not an inch. I am exceedingly glad that the question has come up. Let us now see who are the friends of this land measure; let us vote it through; and then, without fear or trembling, take up the nigger bill.
I say there is no excuse for gentlemen who are really in favor of this measure. Tell, me, sir, that you skulked behind this Cuba bill? It would be a very poor story to tell those landless men of whom the gentleman speaks. These lacklanders will say to you: "When we lacked land, and you had it in your power to give it to us, you went off fishing for niggers." Will that satisfy them? It may, and it may not. I fear that there will be trembling in some quarters over this question. I hope the vote will be taken, and I warn every man who is a friend of this bill that now is the time; now or never. Give this homestead bill the goby now, and it dies, and every man knows it. Therefore it is idle to tell me that any man is a friend of the homestead bill who will not give it his support now.
Mr. President, I do not like these taunts and threats about fearing one question or another. I do not very much fear anybody or anything. It would be a very uncomfortable state of mind, I should think. But, sir, I am in favor of this measure. The merits of it, I suppose, are open to discussion. I think it would be easy to show that there has not been, at any time, a measure so fraught with benefit to the people all over the country, as this great measure — the homestead bill. If gentlemen see fit, they can pass it in ten minutes; and then we can go back to the nigger bill, and take that up, and make the best headway we can with that. You need not be ten minutes in passing the bill, if you are true to yourselves, true to your constituents, and faithful to those who have asked at the hands of every honest man that this measure should pass. I say, again, there is no reason to skulk it now. It is fairly up. It is in contrast with the other measure; and no man can fail to see that he who votes and prefers one to the other, has done it because his soul was steeped in the nigger bill.
< Message edited by mnottertail -- 8/11/2011 3:27:26 PM >
_____________________________
Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30
|
RE: Michele Bachmann: What do her favorite books tell us? - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread