Originally Posted by RHOD
Originally Posted by JoeBob
Originally Posted by RHOD
Originally Posted by dassa
Would it be accurate to say secession was about slavery( in some states), the war was about the federal govt imposing its will on the states?

That secession was about slavery would be correct.

The second part is kind of true, but in a hypocritical way of the part of the South. They South was perfectly fine with the Federal Government imposing its will on states when the South saw it to their benefit. They pushed through and supported the Fugitive Slave Act, a Federal law that required states where slavery was illegal to actively participate in the capture and return of fugitive slaves to their masters. The Southern states openly supported the Dred Scott case, that ruled that a Slave owner could take his slaves into a Free State and that Free State had to legally recognize the masters right to his slaves even thought slavery was supposed to be illegal in that state.


Fugitive Slave Act? You mean Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3 of the US Constitution wasn’t enough for northern states?

Quote
No Person held to Service or Labour 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 Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

Article 4, Section 2, Clause 3 of the US Constitution wasn't enough for Southern Sates. The Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 pushed it further. But you are right, the Sothern's States as far back as the Constitution loved Federal Power when it was used in protecting their right to own Slaves.

Well, why wasn’t it enough? Are you saying that Northern States were not following the US Constitution simply because they didn’t like what it said and southern states were wrong for insisting that they follow the Constitution? Is that what you’re saying?