Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: May 2, 2025
Toombs's instant reply, "it all turns on that. What you tax you must protect." This is the very strongest argument of the Southern side. But the alleged slave-property is protected, though only under municipal law, by the Constitution. To protect it elsewhere is against its whole spirit, and, in the present state of public sentiment, against its very letter.
I do not mean that, like the widow, I gave all the living I had. My estate was then greater than that slave-property. I merely wish to show I have no selfish motive in giving, as I shall, the true Southern defence of slavery.
I care not whether Slavery is retained or abolished by the people of the States in which it exists the only rightful authority. The question to me is, has Congress a right to take from the people of the South their Property; or, in other words, having no pecuniary interest therein, are we justified in freeing the Slave-property of others?
Was visited by M. Guerin. and a number of gentlemen members of the Colonial Legislature and others to whom I explained the true issue of the war to wit, an abolition crusade against our slave-property; our population, resources, victories, &c. to all of which they listened with much appearance of gratification, and which they also expressed from time to time, lamenting the blind policy of their Home Government.
Toombs's somewhat rapid rhetoric, a question which, at that moment, seemed of central importance to the candid philosophical inquirer into the moving forces of the times: "Are we, then, Sir, to consider Mr. Calhoun's old complaint the non-recognition of slave-property under the Federal Constitution as constituting now the chief grievance of the South?" "Undoubtedly," was Mr.
I care not whether Slavery is retained or abolished by the people of the States in which it exists the only rightful authority. The question to me is, has Congress a right to take from the people of the South their Property; or, in other words, having no pecuniary interest therein, are we justified in freeing the Slave-property of others?
Douglas replied: "Now, under the laws as they stand, in every Territory of the United States, without any exception, a Southern man can go with his Slave-property on equal terms with all other property. * Every man, either from the North or South, may go into the Territories with his property on terms of exact equality, subject to the local law; and Slave-property stands on an equal footing with all other kinds of property in the Territories of the United States.
The only answer that can possibly be returned is this, that all these vexatious burdens are necessary because a comparatively few persons out of an immense population have chosen to get up a civil war in order to protect and foster their slave-property, and the political power it confers.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking