We Need to Understand the Civil War
By Brother Rogers
2011 marks the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War. It is important to understand this turning point in American history, especially as it affects our state. There is little in the history of Mississippi that is not directly or indirectly tied back to the war and the issues that caused it.
We can trace our history back from desegregation to the Civil Rights Movement to Jim Crow to Reconstruction to the Civil War. We cannot understand the circumstances we find ourselves in today unless we understand how we got here.
Interestingly, the Civil War still sparks disagreement today. Some believe southern states seceded over slavery, while others think slavery was not the main reason that Confederate states left the Union.
Well, what did those who took our state out of the Union say at the time? At the January 1861 state convention to consider secession for Mississippi, the delegates declared, “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world.”
That same declaration continues, “… a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.”
That seems pretty straightforward. The original intent of the secession delegates is clear. Without the threat to slavery, there would have been no reason to secede.
It is true that Abraham Lincoln did not go to war to end slavery. On August 22, 1862, he wrote in a letter, “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.”
But the Union needed saving precisely because its leaders, North and South, were implacably divided over the future of slavery. Furthermore, the South understood Lincoln’s anti-slavery position from the beginning, which is why his election prompted their fears about slavery’s demise. He wrote in the same letter, “I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.” Lincoln backed up his words one month later when he issued the Emancipation Proclamation.
What about states’ rights or a high tariff? No Southern state ever said it was seceding over states’ rights. Nevertheless, the main rights Southern states wanted were the right to own slaves, add slave states and travel anywhere with slaves. Tariff rates were lower than at any point since 1816, mainly because Southern politicians had written the tariff laws.
A chain of events from the Mexican War to the Compromise of 1850 to the Kansas-Nebraska Act to the Dred Scott decision to the John Brown raid to the election of Abraham Lincoln all had a pronounced impact on one issue – slavery.
The point is not that Confederate soldiers fought to preserve slavery and Union soldiers to eradicate it. Different men had different motivations. The point is that without slavery there would have been no Civil War. That fact is inescapable.
Let’s hope after the sesquicentennial commemorations conclude that more people will take the Mississippi secessionist convention delegates at their word and realize this simple historical truth. It’s hard to move ahead if you don’t know where you’ve been.
Brother Rogers is a guest columnist for the Starkville Daily News and works for the Stennis Center for Public Service.
2011 marks the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War. It is important to understand this turning point in American history, especially as it affects our state. There is little in the history of Mississippi that is not directly or indirectly tied back to the war and the issues that caused it.
We can trace our history back from desegregation to the Civil Rights Movement to Jim Crow to Reconstruction to the Civil War. We cannot understand the circumstances we find ourselves in today unless we understand how we got here.
Interestingly, the Civil War still sparks disagreement today. Some believe southern states seceded over slavery, while others think slavery was not the main reason that Confederate states left the Union.
Well, what did those who took our state out of the Union say at the time? At the January 1861 state convention to consider secession for Mississippi, the delegates declared, “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery — the greatest material interest of the world.”
That same declaration continues, “… a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.”
That seems pretty straightforward. The original intent of the secession delegates is clear. Without the threat to slavery, there would have been no reason to secede.
It is true that Abraham Lincoln did not go to war to end slavery. On August 22, 1862, he wrote in a letter, “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.”
But the Union needed saving precisely because its leaders, North and South, were implacably divided over the future of slavery. Furthermore, the South understood Lincoln’s anti-slavery position from the beginning, which is why his election prompted their fears about slavery’s demise. He wrote in the same letter, “I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men everywhere could be free.” Lincoln backed up his words one month later when he issued the Emancipation Proclamation.
What about states’ rights or a high tariff? No Southern state ever said it was seceding over states’ rights. Nevertheless, the main rights Southern states wanted were the right to own slaves, add slave states and travel anywhere with slaves. Tariff rates were lower than at any point since 1816, mainly because Southern politicians had written the tariff laws.
A chain of events from the Mexican War to the Compromise of 1850 to the Kansas-Nebraska Act to the Dred Scott decision to the John Brown raid to the election of Abraham Lincoln all had a pronounced impact on one issue – slavery.
The point is not that Confederate soldiers fought to preserve slavery and Union soldiers to eradicate it. Different men had different motivations. The point is that without slavery there would have been no Civil War. That fact is inescapable.
Let’s hope after the sesquicentennial commemorations conclude that more people will take the Mississippi secessionist convention delegates at their word and realize this simple historical truth. It’s hard to move ahead if you don’t know where you’ve been.
Brother Rogers is a guest columnist for the Starkville Daily News and works for the Stennis Center for Public Service.
