An Argument Against Slavery Being Good
Oscar Himpflewitz
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
~The full quote, taken out of context, is:
" I hold that in the present state of civilization, where two races of different origin, and distinguished by color, and other physical differences, as well as intellectual, are brought together, the relation now existing in the slaveholding States between the two, is, instead of an evil, a good a positive good." ... "I hold then, that there never has yet existed a wealthy and civilized society in which one portion of the community did not, in point of fact, live on the labor of the other." ...
Calhoun said it on February 6, 1837, is voicing his opposition to sending the issue of abolition to a Senate committee for study, noting that "The subject is beyond the jurisdiction of Congress - they have no right to touch it in any shape or form, or to make it the subject of deliberation or discussion." The jurisdiction issue was so obvious that he did not deign to explain it. Had he felt the need of explanation, he would have simply referred to Article I, Sections 2 and 9, Article IV, Section 2, and Amendments IV, V, IX and X of the Constitution of the USA, all of which in one way or another guarantee the right to own slaves as a basic, fundamental right under the constitution. As Calhoun (and Abe Lincoln) well knew and as each repeated constantly throughout the antebellum period, abolition of slavery could be achieved only by state law or constitutional amendment and neither congress nor the president had any right or authority to address, let alone act upon, the matter as a matter of federal constitutional law.
As to why Calhoun determined slavery as a positive good, he touches upon the idea only superficially. His reasoning coincides with similar ideas expressed at various times by folks like Lincoln. He does not deal, in that speech, with the practical economical and social reasons why slavery had become a necessity not only in the south but also for the federal
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
~The full quote, taken out of context, is:
" I hold that in the present state of civilization, where two races of different origin, and distinguished by color, and other physical differences, as well as intellectual, are brought together, the relation now existing in the slaveholding States between the two, is, instead of an evil, a good a positive good." ... "I hold then, that there never has yet existed a wealthy and civilized society in which one portion of the community did not, in point of fact, live on the labor of the other." ...
Calhoun said it on February 6, 1837, is voicing his opposition to sending the issue of abolition to a Senate committee for study, noting that "The subject is beyond the jurisdiction of Congress - they have no right to touch it in any shape or form, or to make it the subject of deliberation or discussion." The jurisdiction issue was so obvious that he did not deign to explain it. Had he felt the need of explanation, he would have simply referred to Article I, Sections 2 and 9, Article IV, Section 2, and Amendments IV, V, IX and X of the Constitution of the USA, all of which in one way or another guarantee the right to own slaves as a basic, fundamental right under the constitution. As Calhoun (and Abe Lincoln) well knew and as each repeated constantly throughout the antebellum period, abolition of slavery could be achieved only by state law or constitutional amendment and neither congress nor the president had any right or authority to address, let alone act upon, the matter as a matter of federal constitutional law.
As to why Calhoun determined slavery as a positive good, he touches upon the idea only superficially. His reasoning coincides with similar ideas expressed at various times by folks like Lincoln. He does not deal, in that speech, with the practical economical and social reasons why slavery had become a necessity not only in the south but also for the federal