American Civil war- The Upper South Left the Union Over State Sovereignty

Thank you con for a great post and arguments. I must say I am very happy to have found this forum. Fugitive Slave LawCon argues that the south's objection to northern states nullifying [showing state sovereignty] federal and constitutional law regarding the fugitive slave law proves that slavery was the issue and not state sovereignty. However from reading the upper south's secession documents and reaction to Lincoln. It is clear the nullification of the fugitive slave laws was not a issue to cause the upper south to leave the union. They chose to stay in the union even after northern states had done so. I believe con is correct in that it was an issue for the cotton states. By northern states rejecting southerns state and constitutional rights to property by nullifying federal law, this in no way says the deep south rejects state sovereignty. It simply is a result of a republic and self government states, where states can disagree. That is why secession is vital to self government and states rights. That is also why every single secession document talks of the states retaining and acting on their sovereignty. They did not reject state sovereignty, they enabled it because of the fugitive slave law among other issues. Saying they would self govern, not northern states govern them. They did not object to northern states using sovereignty, but northern states defying federal constitutional law and their rights to property. Northern federalist Daniel Webster said in 1851 that if the north would not comply with the fugitive slave law, “The south would no longer be bound to observe the compact. A bargain can not be broken on one side, and still bind the other side.” This is why abolitionist said the constitution was a “Covenant with death and an agreement with hell” -William Lloyd Garrison It also brings up an interesting point. A new confederacy would have no protection for runaways slaves north. Had those upper south states stayed in the union, they would have had federal law behind them protecting their property, unlike when they joined the new confederacy. The Confederate Constitution “The CSA framers placed the government firmly under the heads of the states”-Marshall L. Derosa Redeeming American Democracy Lessons from the Confederate ConstitutionCon argues the confederate constitution is generally the same as the USA constitution but that it protects slavery over state sovereignty. I would come to this misunderstanding if I only had his source to go by as well. I cant help but notice your source does not give the actual document.Some of the changes in the CSA include in the CSA constitution from the United states version of “we the people of the US in order to form a more perfect union.... CSA version reads “we the people of the confederate states, each state acting in its sovereign and independent character ...” The confederacy formed a decentralized government. The states had the right to recall powers delegated [not granted] to congress. In the CSA 10th amendment In uncertainties in ruling between states and CSA government, the states would override the federal government. All power to amend the Constitution was taken out of congress and given to the states. The states of the CSA had the right to coin money. Confederate officials working only in a state are subject to impeachment by that state. The Confederate states also gain the power to make river-related treaties with each other. “The CSA congress can have no such power over states officers. The state governments are an essential part of the political system, upon the separate and independent sovereignty of the states the foundation of the confederacy”-1864 Virginia supreme Court Case But to your objection freeing slaves was a state issue in the CSA constitution [as it was in the US constitution but Lincoln threatened to deny that state right] article 1 section 9 clause 4 applies to congress not to the sovereign states. This was in fact anticipating non slave states to join the confederacy. Article 4 section 2 clause 1 and article 4 section 3 clause 1 predicted future free states within the confederacy. As many in the confederacy including VP Stevens thought, that the non slave holding upper Midwest would join the confederacy because of the free trade laws that would compel states connected to the Mississippi river to join the confederacy as non slave states. The CSA constitution did protect slave owners property within the entire CSA regardless if the state was free or slave. During the constitutional convention Cobb of Georgia proposed that all states be required to be slave owning, yet this was rejected. The south wanted boarder states and the free Midwest states to join. Senator Albert Brown of Mississippi stated in the CSA constitution “Each state is sovereign within its own limits, and that each for itself can abolish or establish slavery for itself.” So while slavery was a state option, states rights was applied in the CSA slave or free. Cons Rebuttal1] I believe my opponent has set up a clever straw man. The violation of states sovereignty was not in Lincoln calling volunteers as a president, but the use of the volunteers to suppress the cotton states was the major violation of state sovereignty. 2] “To coerce the states is one of the maddest projects that was ever devised... a complying state at war with a non complying state. Congress marching the troops of one state into the bosom of another? Here is a nation at war with itself. Can any reasonable man be well disposed toward a government which makes war and carnage the only means of supporting itself- a government that can exists only by the sword”. -Alexander Hamilton Northern federalist Con claims the founding fathers were clear the states were not sovereign. To support this he quotes the one of two founders that held this view. Hamilton also wanted to rid America of elections and have a king. Since this is not the topic of the thread I shall be brief. “Resolved, That the several States composing, the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes — delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and that whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force: that to this compact each State acceded as a State, and is an integral part, its co-States forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself...each party has equal right to judge for itself” -Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1798 written by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison [The Father of the Constitution] "The Union was formed by the voluntary agreement of the states; and these, in uniting together, have not forfeited their nationality, nor have they been reduced to the condition of one and the same people. If one of the states chooses to withdraw from the compact, it would be difficult to disapprove its right of doing so, andthe Federal Government would have no means of maintaining its claims directly either by force or right. -Alexis de Tocqueville Democracy in America 3] I disagree strongly. I would ask you to support your claims. Slavery was in both the northern and southerner states for the entire civil war. It was constitutionally protected, Lincoln and the north supported the Corwin amendment that would have protected slavery forever in the the U.S constitution. The 1860 republican platform plank 4 said slavery was a state issue and they would not interfere with slavery. Lincoln also said the states had the right to chose on slavery and he would not interfere with slavery. “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere Untitled with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so” -Abraham Lincoln Inaugural address After the deep south left the union the federal government decided it would not end slavery in the house on Feb 1861 and senate march 2 1861. On July 22 1861 congress declared “This war is not waged , nor purpose of overthrowing or interfering with the rights or established institutions [slavery] of those states.” October 8th 1861 the newspaper Washington D.C National Intelligence said “The existing war had no direct relation to slavery.” “Secessionists were well aware that slavery was under no immediate threat within the Union. Indeed, some anti-secessionists, especially those with the largest investment in slave property, argued that slavery was safer under the Union than in a new experiment in government.” -Clyde Wilson Distinguished Professor Emeritus of History at the University of South Carolina Refrences-The Confederate Constitution of 1861: An Inquiry Into American Constitutionalism By Marshall L. DeRosa University of Missouri Press -Redeeming American Democracy Lessons from the confederate constitution Marshall L. Derosa Pelican press 2007 -The Constitution Of The Confederate States Of America Explained A Clause By Clause Study Of The Souths Magna Carta Lochlainn Seabrook Sea Raven Press 2012-The Real Lincoln Thomas J Dilorenzo Three Rivers press NY NY 2002- Lincoln Unmasked what your not suppose to know about Dishonest Abe Thomas J Dilorenzo Three rivers Press Crown Forum 2006