tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6733508189924773862.post3769184728809697857..comments2024-03-28T02:02:22.629-04:00Comments on Random Thoughts on History: Slavery's Expansion vs. Slavery's ExtinctionTim Talbotthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02184297245966915181noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6733508189924773862.post-63266604193029919942017-05-12T15:22:36.014-04:002017-05-12T15:22:36.014-04:00It's nice to see a serious CW student acknowle...It's nice to see a serious CW student acknowledge the fact that before the war it was commonly believed that slavery would die if it were kept out of the territories. Lincoln said he had "no doubt" that slavery would end if barred from the territories.<br /><br />I have come to the conclusion that the Civil War could and should have been avoided.<br /><br />Contrary to the unfortunate Republican and Southern Democrat posturing on the issue, by 1860, after six years of the Kansas-Nebraska Act (the last three coming under Dred Scott as well), there were only 70 slaves in the territories, according to the 1860 census, and it was clear that there was no chance that any territory was going to vote to enter the Union as a slave state. As Senator Crittenden correctly said, the issue of slavery extension was a phantom issue exploited by both sides for political gain at the expense of the Union.Mike Griffithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13979459949144167505noreply@blogger.com