In a message dated 2/22/03 9:09:24 AM Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:


>  was on the http://www.civilwarhome.com
> site, checking out the State's Rights explanation under Civil War Potpourri
> on http://www.civilwarhome.com/statesrights.htm which pretty much confirms
> that the term State's Rights was merely a smoke screen for the intent to
> spread slavery when the ethics of slavery were under scrutiny.


Maybe you should go back a re read that.....the Southern states DID exercise
states rights and control....to the extent that it had an impact on the war
fighting capability of Lee's Army. While the Central Government needed more
control several of the states with held that control and the central
government could do NOTHING ABOUT IT. Sounds to me that if the state did like
something,  the state had more control to do something about it.  Also the
Southern States were not the first to think about secession...several New
England states wanted to in the early 1800's as they were being adversely
effected by trade regulations because of the War of 1812. IT was about power
and money....just as the causes of the ACW were. Slavery was a factor, but
the South's lost of power and the threat of economic stagnation combine with
the growth of Western and Northern states political power caused the South to
feel they losing control...I think this is real cause of the war.

WC BUSER

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html