On Wednesday 09 April 2008 05:38:16 ken barber wrote:
> states rights started to end with the "civil war."
> that is really what the war was about. the concept
> that the feds were a servant to the states and if the
> servant did not serve the states the states could fire
> the feds by come out of the union.
> slavery? not the real issue. only 4 % of people
> (including U.S. GRANT) were wealthy enough to own
> slaves. it is inconcievable that 96 % would fight for
> something that would not benefit them. just goes
> against human nature. does not compute. but the winner
> gets to write history.
>   the states have very little rights now.

The 4% figure you quote is based on the whole of "The South" if you "... 
consider the seven states of the lower South in the precise order of their 
secession from the Union: South Carolina with 48.7 percent of the white 
families owning slaves; Mississippi with 48 percent; Florida with 36 percent; 
Alabama with 35.1 percent; Georgia with 38 percent; Louisiana with 32.2 
percent; and Texas with 28.5 percent."

Very interesting article titled " Historians and the extent of slave ownership 
in the Southern United States. By Otto H. Olsen" describing how this over 
emphasis on the "narrowness" of slave ownership came about. (I know you like 
proper history articles Ken).

<http://www.southernhistory.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=9406&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0>

Cheers

Deri

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy