Keep in mind that I’m no historical scholar; just an avid reader of history with opinions that have been shaped by a combination of what I’ve gleaned from my years of reading, travels, and experience. My opinion is that slavery was just one of the many causes that lead to the war and I think it was used more as an “excuse” to make the North appear more justified in their efforts to keep the Southern states under their control.

Uncle Tom’s Cabin, John Brown’s hanging, and other emotional events spoke much louder to the masses and had a high propaganda value that could be used to support Washington’s need to keep the states under one central government. The average citizen didn’t have time to understand the complexities of politics, industry, agriculture, trade, and government; but they DID understand how inhumane it was for one man to “own” another. Slavery, and all the horrors that were written and preached about it, reached the “simple folk”.

These people were burying most of their children before the age of 10, working hard behind a plow from sun up to sun down, or spending 16 hours a day in a factory or mine. Many felt that they were barely free themselves and could probably empathize with a race that had absolutely no freedom. It was an emotional issue and the masses were easily aroused to strong emotions that touched them on a personal level.

That slavery was a deplorable institution and needed to be abolished there is no doubt or argument. That the Northern politicians and newly formed Republican Party were losing control over the Southern states that preferred to govern themselves, there is also no doubt.

Lincoln himself used slaves to his political advantage, stating that if he could win the war without freeing them, he would do so. Slaves were exploited by the Northern politicians to build emotional support behind their effort to exert control over the South. They used the Radical Abolitionist zealots to throw fire onto the tinder they scattered across the North. Passages from Uncle Tom’s Cabin were read while escaped slaves were displayed on grandstands, showing their scarred backs. Preachers bellowed to the crowds about the abominations committed against God’s children (even though very few white northerners felt that a black was anywhere near equal to them), bands played martial music, poems were written, and a hatred that carried the endorsement of God and Lincoln himself was directed at the horrible institution of slavery and all Southern people in general.

It was a war to free the slaves! The REAL reasons behind the Politician’s agenda didn’t matter...the slavery issue was a means, a tool, a weapon that rallied the people to a common cause. And it worked.

Anyway, that’s just my opinion. Doesn’t make it right and I’m sure that there will be a lot of disagreement, but that’s what’s great about this country: We can say what we believe.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I am a border-ruffian from the State of Missouri. I am a Maine Yankee by adoption. In me you have Missouri morals and Maine culture; this, my friends, is the combination which makes the perfect man." (A shameless misquote from the great Sam Clemens...

CAUSES OF THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

Constitution: 17 September 1787, effective 4 March 1789
Who was a citizen? The question of both slavery and women's rights left unanswered.

IT IS MY OPINION THAT WOMEN BROUGHT ABOUT THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR INODER TO GAIN THEIR FREEDOM.

1791 First Bank of the United States, to handle the colossal war debt and to create a standard form of currency.

Issues of Regional Rebellion
* 1794 Whiskey Rebellion Western Pennsylvania, protested against a federal tax

*1798 Fries’ Rebellion Southeastern part of Pennsylvania.protested against the Direct House Tax of 1798

* 1807 Embargo Act Devastated American agricultural exports effecting the Midwest & South and weakened American ports and shipping industry thus effecting New England.

Issues of Secession Crisis
Confederate political thought
The Confederate view of 'States Rights' is based on four aspects: 1) Property and the institution of slavery; 2) Soft money Agrarian vs National commercial Bank system; 3) Political Power; and 4) Land, availability of the western land to agricultural expansion

1787 Constitution on Slavery "Clearly Sanctioned" Southern states refusing to join the Union if slavery were disallowed

1798 Nullification Southern states' defense of their interests vis-a-vis the North on the question of the tariff, and, more ominously, slavery.

1816 Second Bank of the United States the bank question caused a fundamental division between the merchant, manufacturing and financial interests (generally creditors who favored tight money and high interest rates), and the laboring and agrarian sectors, who were often in debt to banks and therefore favored an increased money supply and lower interest rates.

1820 Missouri Compromise Balance poltical power between Slave States and Free States

1854 Kansas-Nebraska Act Replaced the 1820 Compromise. The popular sovereignty provision caused both proslavery and antislavery forces to marshal strength. The result was the tragedy of “bleeding” Kansas. Northerners and Southerners were aroused to such passions that sectional division reached a point that precluded reconciliation. A new political organization, the Republican party, was founded by opponents of the bill, and the United States was propelled toward the Civil War.

Tariff. Southerners felt these tariffs were unfair and aimed toward them because they imported a wider variety of goods than most Northern people. Taxes were also placed on many Southern goods that were shipped to foreign countries. Southern banks found themselves paying higher interest rates on loans made with banks in the North. The situation grew worse after several "panics", including one in 1857 that affected more Northern banks than Southern. Southern financiers found themselves burdened with high payments just to save Northern banks.

December 18, 1860 The Crittenden Compromise
The Crittenden Compromise was perhaps the last-ditch effort to resolve the secession crisis of 1860-61 by political negotiation. Whereas serious and alarming dissensions have arisen between the northern and southern states, concerning the rights and security of the rights of the slaveholding States, and especially their rights in the common territory of the United States; and whereas it is eminently desirable and proper that these dissensions, which now threaten the very existence of this Union, should be permanently quieted and settled by constitutional provisions, which shall do equal justice to all sections, and thereby restore to all the people that peace and good-will which ought to prevail between all the citizens of the United States: Therefore

1861
February 4. The Confederate States of America was formed
March 4. Abraham Lincoln took office as President of the United States.
April 12. The first Confederate cannon fired on Fort Sumter.
April 15. President Lincoln issued a call for 75,000 militia.
May 3. The President called for 40,034 more militia.
July 21. The Battle of Bull Run

Three Major Reasons
that motivated the North to fight during the Civil War are:

1) The special place of America in world history
the churches emphasized that the Union had to be preserved because of the special place that America occupied in world history. With its republican institutions, democratic ideas, and Christian values, the United States was the leader of civilization’s forward march. Thus in fighting to maintain the federal union, Northerners were struggling on behalf of more than a single nation - they were fighting for the future of humanity itself.

2) A Union victory will prepare the way for the Kingdom of God on earth
Christian ministers portrayed the war for the Union in religious millennial terms. They believed that a Union victory would lead shortly to a time when God’s reign would be more thoroughly established on earth. They claimed that a Union victory would bring a time that the Founding Fathers of the republic pictured and dreamed about, and prayed for. It will come with blessings, and be greeted with Hallelujahs, it will be the Millennium of political glory, the Sabbath of Liberty, and the Jubilee of humanity.

3) The constitutional question of property or the issue of slavery
As the war took more lives, the ministers sought a theological explanation for the many death and Union military failure. They drew on a tradition traceable to Puritan preaching - the jeremiad - to explain the reverses. The jeremiad was a sermon from the Old Testament prophet Jeremiah that threatened people with judgment unless they renounced their sin. Thus, the war was seen as a punishment sent by God, and the conviction grew that God would continue to chastise the North and would not allow it to win until the North took steps to end slavery. By the fall of 1862, the war had become a baptism of blood. The pouring out of blood was cleansing the nation of its sin and preparing it for moral rebirth.

My understanding of Confederate 'State's Rights'

The Confederate view of 'States Rights' is based on four aspects: 1) Property and the institution of slavery; 2) Soft money Agrarian vs National commercial Bank system; 3) Political Power; and 4) Land, availability of the western land to agricultural expansion

1) Peculiar Institution of Slavery
Southerners would not accept threats to their slave properties and Northerners would have no dealings with reforms that might imperil their commercial endeavors.

By 1787 the affects of Enlightenment or the natural rights ideology of the American Revolution, caused increasing numbers of citizens to question the institution of slavery. Antislavery societies had begun to spring up in the North. As early as 1785 Southerners understood that if they took chattel with them into Pennsylvania, they ran the risk that their slaves might be liberated during their residency in that state or any 'free' state. Abolitionism with White Northerners was not a burning issue but Northerners were willing to stop the expansion of slavery. Within the decade, emancipationist legislation would be passed in every Northern state.

But when the choice was between saving the Union or eradicating slavery, the peculiar institution took a backseat. The national government embraced the notion that the Southern states should be left to deal with slavery within their respective jurisdictions as they saw fit. The South was delighted with its victory. Congress could terminate the African slave trade, but not before 1808. The run-a-way slave law required that slaves be returned to their owners even from 'free' states. Also, the national government guaranteed that slaves could be moved from one slave state to another as well as slaves could be brought into 'free' states at lest temporarily without being freed. The 3/5ths clause allowed slave states to include 60% of their chattel in the population count for the apportionment of representation in the lower house of congress and the electoral college. Congress was prohibited from taxing exports, a move that prevented slavery from being taxed indirectly through the imposition of duties on the cash crop produced by chattel. Finally, the national government could protect states from "domestic Violence" by suppressing Insurrections which include slave revolts. The 'slave' states had gotten all they sought.

2) Beware the "Stockjobbers" , Wealthy men in the northern states already owned most of the shares of the government's securities and with a national bank system, would become the principle stockholders in the Bank of the United States. These "stockjobbers" (northern commercial elite), Jefferson declared, would have the leverage to control both states and individuals to secure their every whim at the disadvantage of the Southern Agrarian Proprietors .

3) Political Power
The power of the national government at the expense of the states.

Under the articles of Confederation, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Delaware, whose combined populations did not equal that of the free population of Virginia, and barely exceeded the number of free inhabitants of North Carolina, each enjoyed one vote in Congress. Southerners were apprehensive that neither their personal interest, nor that of their region, any longer was safe. It appeared that their interests were no better served by the American Union than they had been in the empire.

Southerners were living under the umbra of depotism, the ancestors of these yeoman long ago had sought to escape the heavy hand of monarchical and aristocratically controlled central governments in England and Europe by fleeing to America. They were being confronted with what they believed was the "same tyranny which drove the first emigrants from their home".

4) Available Land for Expansion
The Southern states needed the western lands to be opened to settlement which allowed slavery. The Southern states feared that a national government controlled by an increasingly Abolitionist Northern states.

South Carolina Heritage
South Carolina was the most militant of the Southern states.
In 1663 King Charles of England gave a grant of land "South of Virginia" to a group of his friends.  They wanted to the use the colony for their businesses. They named the colony Carolina in honor of Charles. The first settlement was Charleston. When these men came they found that many settlers from Virginia were already living in the area. This caused arguments between the two groups. In 1680 the argument was solved by dividing Carolina into two separate colonies:  North Carolina and South Carolina.

Once approved by the King, in 1660, several of the Proprietors (who lived on the island of Barbados) drove the settlement of Carolina. In October 1665, Sir John Yeamans and a group of colonists established a colony in the area now know as Cape Fear. It was located slightly upriver from present-day Wilmington, N.C., and on a branch or creek on the western side of the Cape fear River. As many as 800 colonists may have been drawn to Charles Town, as it was known.

The first English settlement was made in 1670, when William Sayle sailed up the Ashley River with three shiploads of English emigrants from the Barbados, and they pitched their tents on its banks and built a town, which has since wholly disappeared. It has been estimated that nearly half of the immigrants to the new colony in its first three decades were from Barbados. In 1671, Sir John Yeamans, whom we have met in North Carolina, joined the colony, bringing with him about two hundred African slaves.

South Carolina differs from most of the colonies:
1) in not having had to battle against impending dissolution during its first years of existence
2) Also, nearly half of the immigrants to the new colony in its first three decades were from Barbados which had a strong slave economy already in existance.
3) And from all the others in depending largely on slave labor from the beginning.

About 1693 by a sea captain, who gave a bag of seed to a South Carolina planter. Not many years passed till the Carolinas rivaled Egypt and Lombardy in furnishing rice for Southern Europe. By the middle of the eighteenth century indigo became a strong rival of rice in South Carolina, but not until a later generation was cotton enthroned as king. Rice grows best in marshy ground and swamps, and its cultivation is peculiarly destructive to human life. The same is in a great measure true of indigo. These facts had much to do in shaping the economic and social condition of South Carolina. They made it the chief slaveholding community in America. No white man could long endure the malarial atmosphere of the rice swamps. Even among the blacks the death rate was very high, and their ranks had to be refilled constantly from Africa. But slaves were cheap. A strong black man could be purchased for forty pounds and, as he could earn near that amount in a year, the planter found it more profitable to work him to death than to take care of him. Almost from the beginning the slaves in South Carolina outnumbered the whites; slavery became the cornerstone in the political system and so it continued to the time of the Civil War.

Many of the South Carolinians were men who had fled from religious persecution at home, such as the Huguenots. At the same time, yeoman farmers, who worked smaller tracts of land, sat in popular assemblies and found their way into political office. Their outspoken independence was a constant warning to the oligarchy of planters not to encroach too far upon the rights of free men.

Another difference arose from the important seaport of Charleston, and therefore direct communication with Europe, the West Indies or New England. Charleston through its commodious harbor, carried on a brisk foreign trade -- bringing the commodities and luxuries of civilized life. Here lived the wealthy planter, visiting but seldom his plantation were herds of black men toiled under the lash of the overseer. Most naturally the conditions in Charleston fostered the growth of aristocracy, while in culture and refinement the city came to rival Philadelphia, New York and Boston. Charleston, South Carolina, became the leading port and trading center of the South. There the settlers quickly learned to combine agriculture and commerce, and the marketplace became a major source of prosperity.

Western Agrarians' Post Revolutionary War Concerns

* Western Agrarians wanted to protect the small producers from the "money men" who did not live by their own labor but preyed upon those who did. They wished to minimize the levies of great men: taxes, rents, legal fees, and land payments.

* Western Agrarians feared prolonged economic dependence as tenants or wageworkers as the path to "slavery".

* Western Agrarians wanted and needed access to and possession of freehold land.

* Western Agrarians believed that republican government could not survive unless property was widely held and equitably distributed among adult (white, at the time) males. They feared that if the great men could not be checked in their greed that American would become an oppressive society of arrogant aristocrats lording over impoverished, landless, and powerless masses.

* The agrarian yeomen believed that wilderness land ought to be free to the needy and that common folks had the right to resist laws they perceived as unjust.

Pvt Craig Young
3rd Maine, 29th Georgia, Dirigo Base Ball Club, & 3rd Maine Tobogganeers