Apostles Of Disunion : Southern Secession Commissioners And The Causes Of The Civil War

In “Apostles of Disunion: Southern Secession Commissioners and the Causes of the Civil War,” Charles B. Dew analyzes the public letters and speeches of white, southern commissioners in order to prove that the Civil War was fought over slavery. By analyzing the public letters and speeches of the commissioners, Dew offers a compelling argument proving that slavery along with the ideology of white supremacy were primary causes of the Civil War. Dew is not only the Ephraim Williams Professor of American History at Williams College, but he is also a successful author who has received various awards including the Elloit Rudwick Prize and the Fletcher Pratt Award. In fact, two of Dew’s books, Tredegar Iron Works and Apostles of Disunion and Ironmaker to the Confederacy: Joseph R. Anderson, received the Fletcher Pratt Award for the best nonfiction book regarding the American Civil War. In his analysis, Dew argues that the fear of eliminating slavery along with the fear of racial equality were both crucial factors regarding the outbreak of the Civil War. By tracing the speeches and public letters of state-appointed commissioners, Dew effectively argues that the white, southern commissioners led the southern states into a Civil War in order to preserve the institution of slavery as well as the ideology of white supremacy.

The American Civil War has become a point of controversy and argument when discussing key events in shaping America. The arguments that arise when discussing the war tend to focus on whether the Confederate was constitutionally justified in seceding, or whether the North had the right to prevent the secession. However, when discussing the America Civil War and the idea of separation, it is important to be mindful that separation did not simply end at the state level. Letters written by Jesse Rolston, Jr. and Jedediah Hotchkiss portray two significantly different attitudes toward the war, despite the fact that the writers both fought for the Confederate States and give accounts of the same battle, one of which ended in the Confederate’s favor. When examining the documents, both writers express different viewpoints on life on and off the battlefield. This significant difference represents a division amongst the Confederate army.

Charles B Dew, PHD, a winner of Fletcher Pratt Prize from the Civil War Round table of New York for two of his books: Apostles of Disunion and Iron maker to the confederacy, is a native of St. Petersburg, Florida. A son of the south. His book Apostles of Disunion is a book in an attempt to analyze the question: why did the southern states went to secession? In his book, Dew explains why he is writing it and tries to answer (which I believe he does successfully) the question of was the secession due to state right or was the end motive the institution of slavery? The author clearly mentions that he is writing the book in

The secession of South Carolina on December 20, 1860, by a vote of 169-0 was a response to the election of Abraham Lincoln of 1860. Lincoln perceived as an abolitionist wanted to contain slavery rather than ending it. The majority party above the Mason-Dixon line were Republicans and below were primarily Democrats and Republicans were viewed as abolitionists. The election of a Republican threatened the South’s status quo. The primary catalyst for secession was based on slavery. Different social cultures and political beliefs developed due to the South’s intimate and reliant relationship on slavery. Southern whites feared the end of slavery and this paranoia was shared among plantation slave owners and white Yeoman farmers. Southern whites felt that the North were threatening the supposed tranquility of the South. The South’s agrarian economy, honor, and independence were believed to be in danger. Slavery was intertwined with the South’s social, cultural, and economic makeup. As a result of slavery, the South developed a paternalistic culture and racial ideology of white supremacy. The perceived notion that the North was influencing it’s political and social beliefs on the South lead them to believe that secession was the only act of self-preservation. The growing differences between the South and North made it difficult to negotiate. This fear was exaggerated and accelerated the South’s eventual implosion. The South believed that without slavery it would self-destruct and

The South was still extremely unhappy regarding the freedom of the slaves. The Thirteenth Amendment states, “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their

The central thesis of this book is that the secession commissioners that were sent Deep South to other slave states in the winter of 1860-1861 played a major role in defending as well as urging people to subscribe to their ideology and follow them out of the Union. This thesis helps in giving insights in the South’s real intention, which can be argued out that it was to defend its slave trade culture that the North was totally against hence the use of secession as a means of convincing people. Even though the historians mostly ignore these men that were involved in the secession, these men played a vital role in the creation of the beautiful country

Dew takes great care in weaving the evidence to support the thoughts he is presenting with the actual explanation of the evidence. Apostles of Disunion was a very easily read book that was entertaining and educational. I was pleased to find that Dew placed all of the speeches in an Appendix for the reader to read and make his or her own judgements based on the information provided. Dew presented a conclusion to his thesis concisely and adequately. I found it interesting that while South Carolina was the first to actually secede from the Union, it was Mississippi and Alabama that first sent our Commissioners to spread the thoughts of secession. That was a fact that was good for stimulating my own internal musings about the time period and the desire for secession the Southern states had. I found it

The second document the speech to Georgia from Mississippi Secession Commissioner charges the North with disregard for the constitution based on Article 1 sec 2&9, Article 4 section 2 and therefore being hostile and an enemy to the South. They further charge the Black Republican rule, of breaking and overturning the Constitution of the United States. These charges are based on the North’s

Sectionalism was ultimately the main cause of the civil war. Sectionalism is occurs when an individual identifies with a geographic section of the United States based on their culture, social, economical, and political interests of that section. Sectionalism eventually caused the division of the nation, and created parts of the nation, which were the Union and the Confederation. As the tensions progressed, the government strived to unite the divided nation by establishing different legislation to satisfy each section; however, multiple historical events, such as the Election of Abraham Lincoln, the passing of the Kansas Nebraska Act, etc, interrupted the balancing act within the divided nation. The tensions between these sections eventually built up and caused the Civil War to occur. The Civil War was caused by the various economical differences within the nation, the conflict between the legality of slavery, and the political disputes in Congress over issues during that time.

Throughout history, people have gone to extreme lengths to secure their economic well being. The people in the Southern states were no different in this regard, and for this reason we affirm the resolution that the South was justified to secede from the Union. Before going any farther, we must define key terms in the resolution. The South refers to the 11 states who became the Confederate States of America. The Union was the United States in 1860. Lastly, justified means done for a legitimate reason, in this case in the context of the political and economic circumstances of the time. We support our affirmation with the following contention: that the South’s economic interests were in such danger that they took the only path available to them

When the American Civil War began in the spring of 1861, those flocking to enlistment stations in states both north and south chiefly defined their cause as one of preservation. From Maine to Minnesota, young men joined up to preserve the Union. From Virginia to Texas, their future foes on the battlefield enlisted to preserve a social order, a social order at its core built on the institution of slavery and racial superiority . Secession had not been framed by prominent Southerners like Robert Toombs as a defensive measure to retain the fruits of the revolution against King George, a fight against those who sought to “intrique insurrection with all its nameless horrors.” (Toombs Speech) On January 1, 1863, when Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation went into effect the war became a revolution. The Union, the soldiers in blue fought to preserve could no longer exist. On every mile of soil, they would return to the Stars and Stripes from that moment on, the fabric of society would be irrevocably changed. In May of 1865, with the abolition of slavery engrained into the Constitution with the passage of the 13th Amendment, the Confederate armies of Lee and Johnston disbanded, and Lincoln dead of an assassin’s bullet; this change was the only certainty the torn fabric of the newly reunited states was left to be resown. Andrew Johnson and Southern Democrats believed the revolution of 1863 had gone far enough. Radical Republicans and African-Americans sought instead to bring it to

The romanticized version of the Civil War creates a picture of the North versus the South with the North imposing on the South. However, after reading “The Making of a Confederate” by William L. Barney, one can see that subdivisions existed before the war was declared. The documents analyzed by Barney primarily focus on the experiences of Walter Lenoir, a southern confederate and a member of the planter elite. His experiences tell a vivid story of a passionate and strongly opinioned participant of the Civil War as well as demonstrate a noticeably different view involving his reasoning when choosing a side. Between analyzing this fantastic piece of literature and other resourceful documents from “Voices of Freedom” by Eric Foner, one

Oddly enough the Pittsburgh Press wrote this paper in the Northern state of Pennsylvania. The South felt the North was going to abolish slavery, which increased the conflict between the two sides of the Union leading the South to secede and create a separate, pro-slavery government and country. In the South Carolina ordinance of secession it states Lincoln and his Northern followers show hostile views towards slavery along with the idea that the government cannot hold itself up when the conflicting views of a half free and half slave government. This only confirms that the conflict between the North and South is growing and secession will happen in time. This led to the secession of the South because there is conflict between the two sides and the South wants slavery to continue to thrive and expand. Slavery was another reason why the South seceded. Besides slavery, the South felt they had no power within the government.

Before the Civil War started, the North and the South argued on two main topics: slavery and state rights. In my opinion, it was because of slavery that state rights were argued. When Western territories were annexed from Mexico, they were admitted to the Union with the condition that that slavery be banned through the Wilmot Proviso (History.com). Because of this, slave states felt they were unfairly treated and outnumbered. The religious fervor of the Second Great Awakening also gave way to new ideology. Combined with the growing abolitionist sentiment, Northern states began taking action against Southern states. Because their rights as

Some states are currently threatening to leave the country because of the belief that the government has too much power over the people and the laws our country has to follow. In our society, we live by laws set by the government, and if any of them are broken, there is a punishment. These laws are set to make sure that the people of America are following the way things are ran so the country will not collapse. Although these laws are set for the safety of the people, sometimes when the government has that kind of power to make people follow certain things they should not have to follow, many issues arise. In the late 1800’s, many issues emerged between the South and the Union on whether the Southern states had the right to secede from the