Should Lincoln Have Accepted the Crittenden Compromise

[Bush92]

Crittenden Compromise
When President-elect Lincoln got word of this proposal when he was in Philidelphia, he sent a telegram back informing Republicans to reject this proposal. Should Lincoln have accepted the deal and averted civil war?

 

[Old Rocks]

Crittenden Compromise - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Amendments to the Constitution[edit]

1. Slavery would be prohibited in any territory of the United States "now held, or hereafter acquired," north of latitude 36 degrees, 30 minutes line. In territories south of this line, slavery of the African race was "hereby recognized" and could not be interfered with by Congress. Furthermore, property in African slaves was to be "protected by all the departments of the territorial government during its continuance." States would be admitted to the Union from any territory with or without slavery as their constitutions provided.
2. Congress was forbidden to abolish slavery in places under its jurisdiction within a slave state such as a military post.
3. Congress could not abolish slavery in the District of Columbia so long as it existed in the adjoining states of Virginia and Maryland and without the consent of the District's inhabitants. Compensation would be given to owners who refused consent to abolition.
4. Congress could not prohibit or interfere with the interstate slave trade.
5. Congress would provide full compensation to owners of rescued fugitive slaves. Congress was empowered to sue the county in which obstruction to the fugitive slave laws took place to recover payment; the county, in turn, could sue "the wrong doers or rescuers" who prevented the return of the fugitive.
6. No future amendment of the Constitution could change these amendments or authorize or empower Congress to interfere with slavery within any slave state.[5]

Lincoln was absolutely correct in rejecting the compromise. It would have only put off the war, not averted it. The Civil War was inevitable when the Constitution stated that there was such a thing as 3/5's of a man. The Declaration of Independence stated "All Men".

 

[Bush92]

But Lincoln also said he would accept slavery if it would preserve the Union. Wonder why he rejected this? Was he just wanting to be seated as Chief Executive before any major policies were enacted? December, January, and February all the southern states had left the Union except Texas. So by time Lincoln took oath in March, it was game over. Had he gave his blessing to compromise plan I think war could have been avoided. I also feel slavery would have ended itself in the South for two reasons. 1.) Slavery is not economically viable as owner must pay for food, shelter, clothes, and medical care for the slave. If they were made share choppers they would pay their own bills. 2.) England was major consumer of southern cotton. Empire had already outlawed slavery and English abolitionist were turning up the screws to boycott American cotton. These two factors would have ended slavery by 1870.

 

[konradv]

Crittenden Compromise
When President-elect Lincoln got word of this proposal when he was in Philidelphia, he sent a telegram back informing Republicans to reject this proposal. Should Lincoln have accepted the deal and averted civil war?

Still trying to get compensation for slavery?

 

[Toronado3800]

Crittenden Compromise
When President-elect Lincoln got word of this proposal when he was in Philidelphia, he sent a telegram back informing Republicans to reject this proposal. Should Lincoln have accepted the deal and averted civil war?

Oh wow. Next thread saying the Civil War was about anything besides slavery I will quote this little tidbit. Thank you very very much.

Oh, and I dunno. It is easy to say with 20th century morals that slavery was an evil institution and even the backwards USA had to end it in the 1860's.

Also, while plantation slavery may have ceased to exist I am sure the horrors of the Industrial Revolution would have been doubled if out right slaves could have been put to work. It was bad enough on free men.

Also, imagine the sex trafficing and other moral problems which arose. Oh, think about this statement, I'm 1/8 black, am I 8/9ths a man? Strom Thurmond (sp?) would have no clue how to do his taxes for dependants!

So yeah, with hindsight I am very happy Lincoln did not accept. I do give a nod to avoiding the Civil War and its own horrors though.

 

[martybegan]

But Lincoln also said he would accept slavery if it would preserve the Union. Wonder why he rejected this? Was he just wanting to be seated as Chief Executive before any major policies were enacted? December, January, and February all the southern states had left the Union except Texas. So by time Lincoln took oath in March, it was game over. Had he gave his blessing to compromise plan I think war could have been avoided. I also feel slavery would have ended itself in the South for two reasons. 1.) Slavery is not economically viable as owner must pay for food, shelter, clothes, and medical care for the slave. If they were made share choppers they would pay their own bills. 2.) England was major consumer of southern cotton. Empire had already outlawed slavery and English abolitionist were turning up the screws to boycott American cotton. These two factors would have ended slavery by 1870.

The last provision was the most unworkable one. It would have set the bar for differing levels of amending the constitution, which would be unworkable.

By that time the Southerners were getting comfortable with the concept of independence, and would have rejected the compromise even if Lincoln would have pushed for it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If the South had preserved its right to slavery it would have eventually 'evolved' into the equivalent of South Africa in the days of apartheid.

 

[martybegan]

If the South had preserved its right to slavery it would have eventually 'evolved' into the equivalent of South Africa in the days of apartheid.

Two different systems and paths completely unrelated to each other. Even with a large black population white southerners were never in the minority controlling a majority.

 

[Moonglow]

Lincoln had his own plan, to compensate slave owners and end slavery by buying the slaves and setting them free...

 

[bodecea]

But Lincoln also said he would accept slavery if it would preserve the Union. Wonder why he rejected this? Was he just wanting to be seated as Chief Executive before any major policies were enacted? December, January, and February all the southern states had left the Union except Texas. So by time Lincoln took oath in March, it was game over. Had he gave his blessing to compromise plan I think war could have been avoided. I also feel slavery would have ended itself in the South for two reasons. 1.) Slavery is not economically viable as owner must pay for food, shelter, clothes, and medical care for the slave. If they were made share choppers they would pay their own bills. 2.) England was major consumer of southern cotton. Empire had already outlawed slavery and English abolitionist were turning up the screws to boycott American cotton. These two factors would have ended slavery by 1870.

He didn't reject it...the South stupidly decided to start a shooting war.

 

[Moonglow]

But Lincoln also said he would accept slavery if it would preserve the Union. Wonder why he rejected this? Was he just wanting to be seated as Chief Executive before any major policies were enacted? December, January, and February all the southern states had left the Union except Texas. So by time Lincoln took oath in March, it was game over. Had he gave his blessing to compromise plan I think war could have been avoided. I also feel slavery would have ended itself in the South for two reasons. 1.) Slavery is not economically viable as owner must pay for food, shelter, clothes, and medical care for the slave. If they were made share choppers they would pay their own bills. 2.) England was major consumer of southern cotton. Empire had already outlawed slavery and English abolitionist were turning up the screws to boycott American cotton. These two factors would have ended slavery by 1870.

He didn't reject it...the South stupidly decided to start a shooting war.

Early Tea Partiers....

 

[NYcarbineer]

If the South had preserved its right to slavery it would have eventually 'evolved' into the equivalent of South Africa in the days of apartheid.

Two different systems and paths completely unrelated to each other. Even with a large black population white southerners were never in the minority controlling a majority.

So apartheid is okay if there's a majority of white people? lolol good one.

 

[martybegan]

If the South had preserved its right to slavery it would have eventually 'evolved' into the equivalent of South Africa in the days of apartheid.

Two different systems and paths completely unrelated to each other. Even with a large black population white southerners were never in the minority controlling a majority.

So apartheid is okay if there's a majority of white people? lolol good one.

No, what I'm saying is you can't think that the same thing would have occurred in the US if slavery was allowed to be phased out peacefully, instead of via armed conflict.

Where i my statement do you get the concept you are applying to it?

I know, its because you are an unmitigated asshole hack.

FOAD.

 

[Bush92]

If the South had preserved its right to slavery it would have eventually 'evolved' into the equivalent of South Africa in the days of apartheid.

But Aparthied ended on its own over time and lots of international pressure that did this. The same preassure that Great Britain and Queen Victoria would have put on a single product agrarian economy like the American South.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Crittenden Compromise
When President-elect Lincoln got word of this proposal when he was in Philidelphia, he sent a telegram back informing Republicans to reject this proposal. Should Lincoln have accepted the deal and averted civil war?

How would it have averted the war? He supported the Corwin Amendment that also supported slavery in the south, and yet that didn't avert the war.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Crittenden Compromise - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Amendments to the Constitution[edit]

1. Slavery would be prohibited in any territory of the United States "now held, or hereafter acquired," north of latitude 36 degrees, 30 minutes line. In territories south of this line, slavery of the African race was "hereby recognized" and could not be interfered with by Congress. Furthermore, property in African slaves was to be "protected by all the departments of the territorial government during its continuance." States would be admitted to the Union from any territory with or without slavery as their constitutions provided.
2. Congress was forbidden to abolish slavery in places under its jurisdiction within a slave state such as a military post.
3. Congress could not abolish slavery in the District of Columbia so long as it existed in the adjoining states of Virginia and Maryland and without the consent of the District's inhabitants. Compensation would be given to owners who refused consent to abolition.
4. Congress could not prohibit or interfere with the interstate slave trade.
5. Congress would provide full compensation to owners of rescued fugitive slaves. Congress was empowered to sue the county in which obstruction to the fugitive slave laws took place to recover payment; the county, in turn, could sue "the wrong doers or rescuers" who prevented the return of the fugitive.
6. No future amendment of the Constitution could change these amendments or authorize or empower Congress to interfere with slavery within any slave state.[5]

Lincoln was absolutely correct in rejecting the compromise. It would have only put off the war, not averted it. The Civil War was inevitable when the Constitution stated that there was such a thing as 3/5's of a man. The Declaration of Independence stated "All Men".

I'm curious about the logic behind your comment regarding the three-fifths compromise, since it was the north that wanted slaves to not count as people whereas the south wanted them to be counted as a full person. Can you explain?

 

[Bush92]

But Lincoln also said he would accept slavery if it would preserve the Union. Wonder why he rejected this? Was he just wanting to be seated as Chief Executive before any major policies were enacted? December, January, and February all the southern states had left the Union except Texas. So by time Lincoln took oath in March, it was game over. Had he gave his blessing to compromise plan I think war could have been avoided. I also feel slavery would have ended itself in the South for two reasons. 1.) Slavery is not economically viable as owner must pay for food, shelter, clothes, and medical care for the slave. If they were made share choppers they would pay their own bills. 2.) England was major consumer of southern cotton. Empire had already outlawed slavery and English abolitionist were turning up the screws to boycott American cotton. These two factors would have ended slavery by 1870.

He didn't reject it...the South stupidly decided to start a shooting war.

Abraham Lincoln to John A. Gilmer Saturday December 15 1860 Lincoln will not issue statement to reassure South
Yes he did reject it.

 

[Bush92]

The South had no illusion about winning the war outright. Jefferson Davis was once Secretary of War. He knew the odds were against the South.They wanted to do was shift public opinion in the North to let them secede or acquiesce to their demand. Bluff that had been used since Nullification Crisis of 1832. Had Lincoln gave some ground, war could have been avoided.

 

[jwoodie]

There was no need for a civil war (that cost 600,000 American lives) other than to preserve Lincoln's presidential legacy. Slavery would have ended within 20 years anyway. The seceding states could have been held accountable for damage to federal property and made to pay reparations by a blockade, if necessary. Only Virginia's last-minute secession, fueled by Lincoln's call for federal troops to invade the South, gave the Confederacy any pretense of being a sustainable economic entity.

 

[MaryL]

Crittenden Compromise - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Amendments to the Constitution[edit]

1. Slavery would be prohibited in any territory of the United States "now held, or hereafter acquired," north of latitude 36 degrees, 30 minutes line. In territories south of this line, slavery of the African race was "hereby recognized" and could not be interfered with by Congress. Furthermore, property in African slaves was to be "protected by all the departments of the territorial government during its continuance." States would be admitted to the Union from any territory with or without slavery as their constitutions provided.
2. Congress was forbidden to abolish slavery in places under its jurisdiction within a slave state such as a military post.
3. Congress could not abolish slavery in the District of Columbia so long as it existed in the adjoining states of Virginia and Maryland and without the consent of the District's inhabitants. Compensation would be given to owners who refused consent to abolition.
4. Congress could not prohibit or interfere with the interstate slave trade.
5. Congress would provide full compensation to owners of rescued fugitive slaves. Congress was empowered to sue the county in which obstruction to the fugitive slave laws took place to recover payment; the county, in turn, could sue "the wrong doers or rescuers" who prevented the return of the fugitive.
6. No future amendment of the Constitution could change these amendments or authorize or empower Congress to interfere with slavery within any slave state.[5]

Lincoln was absolutely correct in rejecting the compromise. It would have only put off the war, not averted it. The Civil War was inevitable when the Constitution stated that there was such a thing as 3/5's of a man. The Declaration of Independence stated "All Men".

I'm curious about the logic behind your comment regarding the three-fifths compromise, since it was the north that wanted slaves to not count as people whereas the south wanted them to be counted as a full person. Can you explain?

Perhaps I misapprehend this post, the NORTH wanted slavery and the SOUTH was against owning human beings as property? Are you kidding? Besides contradicting history, it violates logic. I am not a lawyer and I will not play games and split hairs or words. The south wanted to maintain slavery and the north strove to end slavery, bluntly and as elementary as that.