Quote:
Originally Posted by HHP
From a legal standpoint, I think that question remains open.
At the time of the war, the South was producing one of the most valuable export products in the country, cotton. Secession would have left the Northern states without that revenue. They skirted the legal issue by considering the Southern states as being in a rebellion against the Union allowing the Union to respond in force to restore order. The Confederates saw the situation as sovereign states choosing to form a new union and a new country. Note that the South did not conduct military operations in Northern territory until well into the war. They saw their role as defending their newly declared borders, not fighting to control areas outside their borders.
Most people, particularly in the South, considered their primary allegiance was to their home state, not the federal government. All that changed after the war.
|
And from a moral standpoint, the issue of owning people as slaves.
It certainly helps your "valuable export" when there are no labor costs.