Neither the issue of States' Rights alone nor the issue of slavery alone
led to the Civil War. Slavery was both a moral and an economic issue.
And the South's concern with States Rights was not a purely legal one:
it was a way of supporting the slave states' claim to a right to keep
slaves. There's no evidence that a pure belief in States' Rights
would have led them to secede.
"Historians have long debated the causes of the Civil War. Many of them
maintain that slavery was the root cause. In his second inaugural
address in 1865, Lincoln said of slavery: "All knew that this interest
was, somehow, the cause of the war." But most historians agree that the
war had a number of causes. They note especially the sectional division
between North and South-that is, the differences in economies, ideals,
and ways of life. They also point to the disputes between the federal
government and the states over what rights and powers the states
possessed. Historians further mention the blunderings of politicians and
the disorder in the American political party system during the 1850's.
Yet all explanations for the causes of the war have always involved or
revolved around the issue of slavery."
[World Book Encyclopedia]
Lawrence:
…I think you'll find out from any reputable historian that
States Rights were the reason the Civil War began. Think about it. South
Carolina wanted to secede. The North said no cessation. Seceding is a
Right of a State, SC said, and went ahead with it. The North said no, lots
of fighting, blood, dying, etc.
[snip]
Robert Paul ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
