Re: [tlug] [OT] US Civil War

[Shawn <javajunkie@example.com>]

>    This isn't my understanding of things. I don't think slavery
> was a burning issue one way or the other for the average
> Northerner (or Sourtherner, for that matter). 
 
On what is that based?

A slave came to Mn.  She applied for and was granted freedom.

Here is what our paper said at the time about why they couldn't possibly
publish all the articles submitted:

THE SLAVE CASE.—The all absorbing topic for the week has been the slave
case at Lake Harriet.

..our conviction is that by far the larger porportion of our thinking
people will soon settle into the conviction that the thing done was
right. (ie it is the common view that she was justly freed)

Meantime let us hold firmly to our principles, neither cringing with a
servile or a mercenary spirit to Southerners who are among us, nor on
the other hand imitating that violence we so constantly and with so much
reason condemn in the citizens of the South, towards those among them
who are "suspected" of being hostile to their institution. Not
retaliation, but dignity and firmness, are essential to manliness.

That is from the newspaper at the time.

Other editorials challenged people as Christians to _not_ overlook
slavery (meaning if slaves set foot in our State then they should be
freed) _even if_ it meant that we would lose business from the South.

I don't think you understand what it would mean in a small community of
that time if the pastor said "look slavery needs to end".  

Historical records show people did care passionately.  Historical
records show a conviction to fight slavery even at economic cost.  For
people to argue on this list that the motivations of people from
Minnesota in the civil war was non-recognition of the (supposed) fact
the war was (again supposedly) economic _is_ well let's say not
supported by the newspapers of the time.

Now I don't know about those New Yorkers.  You might be right on their
motivations.  

Shawn