The war myth in United States history — John Shaqi
The war myth in United States historyHamlin, C. H. (Charles Hunter)
History
The war myth in United States history
Hamlin, C. H. (Charles Hunter)
Propaganda, American; United States -- History; War
By 1860 slavery in the greater part of the civilized world was a dead
or a dying institution. Great Britain in 1833 abolished slavery in
all her possessions. Mexico provided for the gradual abolition of
slavery as early as 1827. Brazil followed in 1888 and Spain
abolished slavery in Cuba in 1878. In all these cases it was done
without conflict. All the northern states of the union had become
free and the western states and territories were repudiating slavery
as well. When California drew up her constitution and asked for
admission in 1850, the clause prohibiting slavery was adopted by a
unanimous vote of her constitutional convention. In the referendum
held in Kansas in 1858, 11,300 out of a total vote of 13,088 were
opposed to slavery. Only a few slaves had been carried there and
they could never have been permanently held as slaves. New Mexico
was organized as a territory in 1850 without regard to slavery and at
one time as many as twenty-two slaves had been carried there.
Nevada, Colorado, and Dakota were organized as territories before
1860 but had no slaves. In Missouri slavery was on the decrease, if
judged by its percentage of the entire population--in 1830, 17.8% of
the Missouri population were slaves; in 1840, 15.5%; in 1850, 12.8%;
and in 1860, only 9.8%. Slavery would have existed in Missouri only
for a few more years, for the anti-slavery population was increasing
rapidly by settlers from the free states and great numbers of people
from Germany who settled in the neighborhood of St. Louis, and were
especially opposed to slavery.
Before 1860, slavery was non-existent in all sections of the union
except the tobacco, cotton and sugar cane belts. In upholding the
institution of slavery, the south was opposed to the spirit of the
age. Slavery was doomed by moral and economic pressure. It was a
useless procedure for the south to demand the right to carry slavery
into the western territory because it was unprofitable economically
and was not wanted. For the same reason it was futile for the
opponents of slavery to try to prohibit by law its extension
westward--the westerners had no desire or use for it. It was this
contention over slavery in western territory which was the
abstraction over which the Civil War was fought.
Many people before 1860, saw the folly of this controversy. Governor
Robert J. Walker of Mississippi recognized that the west would never
be open to slavery, as did Stanton of Tennessee and Senator Toombs of
Georgia. The status of slavery in the west had been automatically
settled by the laws of nature. The two sections, however, cherished
perverted ideas of each other. It was reported, and actually
believed, in the north, that Senator Robert Toombs, of Georgia, had
boastfully declared that he would call the roll of his slaves in
Massachusetts.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account