The Confederate Constitution of 1861: An Inquiry Into American Constitutionalism

by Marshall L. DeRosa

Book Overview

In "The Confederate Constitution of 1861," Marshall DeRosa argues that the Confederate Constitution was not, as is widely believed, a document designed to perpetuate a Southern "slaveocracy," but... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0826208126
• ISBN13: 9780826208125
• Release Date: November 1991
• Publisher: University of Missouri Press
• Length: 192 Pages
• Weight: 0.65 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.6" x 6.0" x 9.0"
• Age Range: 14 to 10 years
• Grade Range: Grades 9 to 5

Customer Reviews

A “myth buster”

It you believe slavery was the root cause of the civil war, don't buy this book. It'll hurt your feelings. If you believe the Confederates and their leaders were anti-Constitution and unpatriotic, didn't buy this book. It'll hurt your feelings. If you believe the Southern Confederacy was started to create a slaveocracy, don't buy this book. It'll hurt your feelings. But...if you want a good, thorough, truthful explanation of the Southern Confederacy and its constitution, buy this book. You'll love it.

Facts speak for themselves.

"If I thought this war was to abolish slavery, I would resign my commission and offer my sword to the other side." --Ulysses S. Grant I suspect that Grant -Commander of the Union Army and President of the United States- had a better idea of what the War was about than those who would deny the truth today.

A reply from Cali

Simply based on the laughable liberal's response I would like to ask him why he chooses to perpetuate his fallacy, but I fear there will be no reply apart from insults. To clarify to "conlawyer" I would like him to tell me why then if the South had enough slave labor was an unskilled slave worth hundreds if not thousands of dollars? Or for example why did many blacks fight alongside Confederate forces during the Union campaigns if they were the liberators? And if the war was truly about slavery, why then would the other 80% of the Southern population, who had no slaves or any vested interest in its survival, fight the war? Certainly if it was to "keep the black man down" they needn't have fought at all since that was the outcome due to this radical solution concocted by the GOP of which I am a part. Their solution, namely social engineering on the part of earnest Northern lunatics, caused more suffering and tragedy then a Southern victory ever would. As a person born and raised in California my bias is merely towards that of logic. A retort to my inquiry is much craved.

Very Informative, irritating to Yankees

I thoroughly enjoyed this book and highly recommend it. In reply to some of the points in conlawyer's condemnatory review...1) Davis and Stephens, in their 1861 speeches mentioned by conlawyer, spoke of "agitation over slavery," rather than the desire to perpetuate slavery itself, as being the motivation behind secession. The slavery provisions of the Confederate Constitution of were designed to eliminate this "agitation over slavery"...that is, conflict between States which have emancipated and those which have not...not to protect slavery itself. It removed slavery from the realm of national government and placed it where it properly belonged, in the sphere of State legislative action. The Northern States had eliminated slavery when it became economically unviable in the North...not due to any moral outrage over slavery itself...and did so by the action of their individual State Legislatures. The Southern States, through the Confederate Constitution, simply preserved their right to handle the issue by the same means, and for the same reasons, which the Northern States had used. 2)The State Secession documents...actually, conlawyer is referring to the Declarations of the Causes of Secession issued by four of the States seceding from the Union (the rest did not explain their reasons)...do cite slavery as the prime reason for secession. Southerners often cite conflicts over high tariffs and other economic issues as the cause of secession, and a superficial reading of these Declarations of the Causes of Secession does seem to contradict this, as conlawyer points out. However, what these Declarations were doing was providing a legal basis for secession, just as the original Declaration of Independence set out the legal basis for America's secession from the British Empire. The Southern States needed a clear, unambiguous violation of the Constitution by the Northern States to justify their "breaking of the contract" represented by the Union. It was not unconstitutional for Congress to levy tariffs on imported goods bought by Southerners, or to spend the money thus raised on internal improvements and business subsidies for capitalists in the Northern States. So although the South might have liked to secede over these issues (the Republican Party platform called for high tariffs, internal improvements, and business subsidies, and indeed, soon after taking control, they passed the highest tariff in American history, which would have devastated the South economically), legally, they could not have justified "breaking the contract" between the Southern States and the rest of the Union on that basis. However, the Northern States were in clear violation of the Constitution by acts of their legislatures and decisions by their State Courts which nullified and prevented enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Clause of the Constitution (and the various Fugitive Slave Acts which were passed for the enforcement of said Clause). And it is this which is promine

Destroying the myth.

This book helps destroy the myth that the so-called Civil War was about slavery, and the Southern states were fighting to preserve it! Facts are shown in this book that the South was fighting for smaller government, and the "right" of a state to govern itself. One of the myths about the Confederacy is that they imported slavery. Article 1, Section 9, Paragraph 1 shows that the Confederate Government "outlawed' the international slave trade from its conception, the United States constitution did not! Many who wish to believe the myth of slavery, and the Confederacy will scoff at this book for it's FACTS, but than these people doubtless believe that World War 2 was about the Jewish people and the holocaust.

Concise, Informative, Ground Breaking

This book is perhaps the best I have read on the Confederate Constitution. The book explains the basis for the state's rights and tariff issues and how they effected the writing of the CS Constitution. A large portion of the book talks about John C. Calhoun and his stance on the issues. Also read to learn the improvements in the CS Constitution over the US counterpart. I would recomend this too all Americans, not just Southerners. If you were ever unsure as to what "state's rights" was, this is the book for you. Read! and learn the real reason the South seceeded.