# Resolved; America would be less divisive today if we had executed Confederate leaders for treason **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 8, 2023, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789 "2023-07-08T21:44:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Common\_Tater](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/common_tater/32/13846_2.png) [@Common\_Tater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Common_Tater)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/221 "2023-07-12T18:01:27Z")
If someone was claiming otherwise, maybe you’d have a point. Lincoln instructed New York senator William Seward to push through Congress a 13th Constitutional Amendment named after Congressman Thomas Corwin of Ohio that would prohibit the federal government from ever interfering with Southern Slavery. It read: _“No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service_ [slavery] _by the laws of said State.”_ And the fugitive slave law would remain, so northern states receiving escaped slaves must continue to return them to their owners in the South. In his first inaugural address regarding this amendment, Lincoln said\*\*: “\*\*I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable.” Armed with this amendment, Lincoln and his fellow Republicans were willing to permanently enshrine slavery in the U.S. Constitution in order to keep the Southern States paying those tariffs. The Amendment passed easily in both the House and Senate, meeting the required 2/3 majorities. And five states, Kentucky, Ohio, Rhode Island, Maryland, and Illinois had ratified the amendment before the war rendered it mute. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/222 "2023-07-12T18:01:58Z")
> [@Common\_Tater](#): > > …rendered it mute “Moot.” ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/223 "2023-07-12T18:05:41Z")
Is the stuff following “It read:” from you or somewhere else? ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/224 "2023-07-12T18:09:08Z")
> [@Common\_Tater](#): > > How would that be any different than the United States government not allowing secession? Isn’t that “telling” too? It was created through secession, right? It’s telling because the cause you seem to think the Confederacy was fighting for - states’ rights to secede from the Union - was an action that the Confederacy would not allow from its own member states. I’ll note that you didn’t directly answer my question of whether you believed that the CSA allowed member states to secede as you claimed it did. It didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/225 "2023-07-12T18:20:02Z")
> [@Dissonance](#): > > Am I reading this correctly as you claiming that the Confederacy allowed states to secede from it? Because that was most certainly not the case, see [post 143](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/143); the fact that the Confederacy which created itself via secession didn’t allow member states the right to secede was rather telling of what it was all about, the right to slavery. That doesn’t seem very convincing. If the seceding states were “correct” (whatever that means) that there was an inherent extra-textual right to secede from the union, then **not** addressing the issue (either way) in their constitution doesn’t tell us very much. I don’t understand you to be saying that the Confederate constitution _prohibited_ secession, which would be telling. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/226 "2023-07-12T18:23:50Z")
Everyone was sick of this destructive war. Guerilla tactics by the South were considered and could definitely have been employed for years and quite a few wanted to keep going but didn’t have support. If they were facing the noose you can bet they would do just that. So, probably would be better in the long run, but that is hard to sell to so many mothers of rotting sons at the time. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/227 "2023-07-12T18:29:39Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > > [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > > > You’ve been saying that soldiers who fight in a civil war on the losing side should be treated like ordinary criminals and charged with murder. > > When have I cited a crime of “murder”? It’s treason, based on the definition provided within the constitution. When have I wavered on that? You posted this: > [@Moriarty](#): > > Now _that_, I believe, was not criminal. No matter how wrongheaded the decision, or horrible their motivation, there is nothing in the constitution that expressly prohibits secession. > > But when they attacked, and killed, Americans, that’s when I believe, they committed the constitutional offense of treason. (Or, if we want to be pedantic, the treason was when they authorized the attacking and killing of Americans). So you feel secession wasn’t a criminal act. But attacking and killing people is. If you’re prosecuting people for killing other people, you’re prosecuting them for murder. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/228 "2023-07-12T18:30:28Z")
> [@Falchion](#): > > That doesn’t seem very convincing. If the seceding states were “correct” (whatever that means) that there was an inherent extra-textual right to secede from the union, then **not** addressing the issue (either way) in their constitution doesn’t tell us very much. I don’t understand you to be saying that the Confederate constitution _prohibited_ secession, which would be telling. Read the cites. The issue of writing a state’s right to secede into the Confederate constitution was proposed twice but tabled both times, then never addressed again. One would imagine if a state’s right to secede was actually the cornerstone of the reason for creating the CSA, it would be something that they would actually address in writing their constitution and include in it. They did not, instead they tabled any talk on writing it in and instead did a copy and paste from the United States constitution on the issue. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/229 "2023-07-12T18:37:20Z")
> [@Moriarty](#): > > Treason depends on how well your revolution goes. If you win, and write the narrative, it’s not treason. It’s not only that. If you win and, as the US did, conclude the conflict _with a peace treaty_, then your independence is in fact ratified by the parent nation. It’s not just “we won, therefore it’s not treason because we say so” it’s “we won, and you agree we won, and you further agree that we are an independent nation, therefore you and we all agree it’s not treason—couldn’t possibly be—because we acted as a peer state in international affairs.” Not that there is no power in victory without a formal peace treaty—there’s a strong argument that victory eliminated the sovereignty of the parent nation over the seceding territory, and so by international standards creates a new nation—but the strongest case against treason is made where, in addition to throwing off the bounds of the parent nation’s sovereignty (to include overcoming, eliminating, and replacing its monopoly on violence in the territory concerned), there is a formal recognition by the parent nation of independence. The US got both from the UK. The southern states got neither. They didn’t even get a sort of quasi-independent status in the form of recognition by other foreign powers. ---
**Author:** ![Falchion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a88e57/32.png) [@Falchion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Falchion)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/230 "2023-07-12T18:41:29Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Weird how you didn’t quote any of the people who actually led secession efforts in the US. [Because they were pretty clear what the cornerstone of the Confederacy was](https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/cornerstone-speech): Not that I really disagree with your underlying claim, but it’s little odd to see Alexander Stephens (who, as I understand it, was known for his opposition to secession prior to and at the Georgia Secession Convention – where he voted against it) described as a person “who actually led the secession efforts”. I understand why he’s being portrayed this way, but it’s odd. > [@Dissonance](#): > > Read the cites. The issue of writing a state’s right to secede into the Confederate constitution was proposed twice but tabled both times, then never addressed again. One would imagine if a state’s right to secede was actually the cornerstone of the reason for creating the CSA, it would be something that they would actually address in writing their constitution and include in it. They did not, instead they tabled any talk on writing it in and instead did a copy and paste from the United States constitution on the issue. I don’t have the underlying cites; just the narrative you linked to. That said, I don’t take any conclusion from the fact that it wasn’t addressed. (And, in fact, I can imagine the argument that adding it to a new constitution would weaken the argument that it was an inherent right under the existing US constitution). ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/231 "2023-07-12T18:46:05Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Also curious why anyone would care what Charles Dickens, of all people, thought about the causes of the American Civil War. Obviously, his credentials as an English novelist qualifies him as an expert on the subject. /s ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/232 "2023-07-12T18:46:23Z")
> [@Common\_Tater](#): > > One can be forgiven at this late date for a sneaking suspicion that these guys didn’t care about slavery, they cared about Import Tariffs. Ain’t that grand? Lincoln was less worried about tariffs than he was about the precedent that a state could at will say “screw you guys, I’m going home!” What authority did the federal government have at all except at the states’ sufferance if a state could quit the Union at any time? No central government could survive a radically libertarian attitude towards membership. That was part of the huge debate in the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers back when the ratification of the constitution was being debated: the pro-Federalists pointed out the previous failure of such entities as the Delian League as an example. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/233 "2023-07-12T18:48:09Z")
> [@Falchion](#): > > Not that I really disagree with your underlying claim, but it’s little odd to see Alexander Stephens (who, as I understand it, was known for his opposition to secession prior to and at the Georgia Secession Convention – where he voted against it) described as a person “who actually led the secession efforts”. I understand why he’s being portrayed this way, but it’s odd. Yeah, good point: I should have said “leaders of the Confederacy” there. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/234 "2023-07-12T18:50:43Z")
Why would anyone care about what the leaders of the confederacy had to say about the right (or the lack of one) to secede? You can only get to that point by not caring about what the leaders of the early US had to say on the right (or the lack of it) to secede. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/235 "2023-07-12T18:53:51Z")
> [@ASL\_v2.0](#): > > Why would anyone care about what the leaders of the confederacy had to say about the right (or the lack of one) to secede? Not sure if you’re arguing with me or amplifying me. ---
**Author:** ![SunUp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ea5d25/32.png) [@SunUp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SunUp)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/236 "2023-07-12T18:55:56Z")
> [@Common\_Tater](#): > > Lincoln even invited the western counties in Virginia to secede, and they formed a new state! West Virginia ring a bell? West Virginia was not formed by secession. After Virginia ratified its ordinance of secession through a referendum on May 23, 1861, a convention met in Wheeling which declared that those Virginia officeholders who adhered to the ordinance had forfeited their offices. The convention formed a new government of Virginia, seating a governor, state legislature, and two U.S. Senators. The U.S. government recognized this new government set by the convention as the official government of the state of Virginia. The legislature of Virginia asked that the state of West Virginia, consisting of a list of counties of Virginia be formed, according to Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution. Congress passed a resolution to this effect on the provision that the new state outlaw slavery. Once this was done, West Virginia was admitted to the Union on June 30, 1863. > [@Common\_Tater](#): > > Apparently what he was not OK with was losing 90% of the federal revenue coming in from import Tariffs out of New Orleans and Charleston harbor. As you can see from a perusal of: > **[Southern ports paid 75 percent of tariffs in 1859 – Dead Confederates, A...](https://deadconfederates.com/tag/southern-ports-paid-75-percent-of-tariffs-in-1859/)** > > Posts about Southern ports paid 75 percent of tariffs in 1859 written by Andy Hall Southern ports were the source of only a small fraction of tariff revenues. > The Chamber of Commerce from 1860 reports — on the very first page — **[customs revenue for Port of New York for 1859 at $38,834,212](http://books.google.com/books?id=zn4pAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Annual+Report+of+the+Chamber+of+Commerce+of+the+State+of+New+York,+for+the+Year+1860&hl=en&sa=X&ei=nWsqUZ_RCZPu9ATcq4HQAQ&ved=0CDwQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false)**, or about 63.5% of the [**$61.1M in federal revenue**](http://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/piechart_1859_US_fed) that year. The Port of New York, alone, **accounted for nearly two-thirds of U.S. Government revenue in 1859.** Any assertion that southern ports paid a large share of federal revenues is simply untrue. > [@Common\_Tater](#): > > I certainly am not advocating a position here, just pointing out the right to secede was the cornerstone of the Confederacy, they cited the Declaration of Independence. The Declaration of Independence does not outline a right to secession, but to revolution - McPherson discusses the difference in _Battle Cry of Freedom_, chapter 8, “The Counter-revolution of 1861”. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/237 "2023-07-12T18:59:42Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > > [@ASL\_v2.0](#): > > > > Why would anyone care about what the leaders of the confederacy had to say about the right (or the lack of one) to secede? > > Not sure if you’re arguing with me or amplifying me. It’s like this… on the one hand, it seems reasonable enough to conclude that the Confederacy would have prohibited secession because its founders said so. But then you can only get into the Confederacy, from the US, by not caring about what the founders (of the US) said. So while it’s great for pointing out the hypocrisy of Confederates, it doesn’t necessarily settle the question of how the Confederacy would have responded to an actual attempt at secession by a confederate state. They might have said one thing, but done (or allowed for) another. As hypocrites will tend to do. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/238 "2023-07-12T19:35:29Z")
Lincoln was willing to compromise, but the South saw the writing on the wall - slavery was doomed. Maybe not immediately, but it was ending around the world, and it couldn’t last forever with the country together while the wealthier and more industrial half opposed it. They seceded, and wrote and stated publicly that they seceded, for slavery. These are the facts, from the articles of secession of the various states and the words of Confederate leadership. I don’t know why this is so hard for so many to accept - there had been fighting, political and physical, regarding slavery for years, it was intensifying, and Southern slaveowners thought secession was the only way they’d get to keep their slaves, so they seceded. That’s what they said and what they did. It wasn’t complicated. ---
**Author:** ![ASL\_v2.0](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asl_v2.0/32/3525_2.png) [@ASL\_v2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ASL_v2.0)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/239 "2023-07-12T19:59:05Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > …slavery was doomed. Maybe not immediately, but it was ending around the world, and it couldn’t last forever with the country together while the wealthier and more industrial half opposed it. They seceded, and wrote and stated publicly that they seceded, for slavery. These are the facts, from the articles of secession of the various states and the words of Confederate leadership. You’re being too generous to the confederacy. I see no reason to believe slavery was “doomed” given the high hurdle to be overcome to amend the Constitution. Slavery was safe under the Constitution, its preservation all but guaranteed for an indefinite future (perhaps even to the present day). What the South was _really_ worried about was the possibility that the Northern states might continue to push back against efforts to expand slavery into the territories, the Dred Scott Decision notwithstanding, and likewise continue to undermine efforts at enforcement of the Fugitive Slave At of 1850. The South had won a string of victories in trampling the rights of northern states, oppressing free blacks living in or even just visiting the south, and expanding slavery into the territories. It even came close to turning Illinois into a slave state and was poised, on the eve of the Civil War, to win the right to take slaves from the south and maintain them as property after moving into a free state, thus effectively making _every state a slave state_. What the secessionists were _really_ afraid of was that the North might succeed in rolling back some of those victories in time, perhaps even (gasp) seeing slavery successfully restricted to the south after all. But the institution of slavery itself, in those states that allowed for it, was under _no danger_ of being outlawed by federal enactment. The great irony of the Civil War, a happy one to be sure, is that by attempting to secede for the right to preserve and expand slavery, the secessionists actually did the one thing that could create conditions for slaveries permanent destruction: it took their arch-white supremacist leaders out of the balance of national power _just long enough_ to allow sanity to prevail and see the passage of a trio of impressive pro-civil rights, pro-human rights amendments to the Constitution, not least of which was the 13th amendment prohibiting slavery except as a punishment for crime. Secessionists were, in a sense, as critical to the salvation of the nation’s soul as Judas was to salvation of mankind according to the Christian religious tradition: had the South not betrayed the Union, we might all still share in the guilt of the nation’s original sin, just as, but for Judas’ betrayal of Christ (according to Christian tradition, at least) mankind would still be doomed by the unremovable stain of Adam and Eve’s original sin. It’s downright biblical. ---
**Author:** ![Moriarty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/moriarty/32/49_2.png) [@Moriarty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moriarty)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2023, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789/240 "2023-07-12T20:17:55Z")
> [@Falchion](#): > > If the seceding states were “correct” (whatever that means) that there was an inherent extra-textual right to secede from the union, then **not** addressing the issue (either way) in their constitution doesn’t tell us very much. I don’t understand you to be saying that the Confederate constitution _prohibited_ secession, which would be telling. Well, its preamble does say this > [@](#): > > We, the people of the Confederate States, each State acting in its sovereign and independent character, in order to form a permanent federal government, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God do ordain and establish this Constitution for the Confederate States of America. (My emphasis) And there’s this clause > [@](#): > > The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the Confederate States and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the Confederate States. It seems pretty inviolable. > [@ASL\_v2.0](#): > > [The South] was poised, on the eve of the Civil War, to win the right to take slaves from the south and maintain them as property after moving into a free state, thus effectively making _every state a slave state_. And they took care of this concern in their new constitution. > [@](#): > > The citizens of each State shall be entitled to all the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States; and shall have the right of transit and sojourn in any State of this Confederacy, with their slaves and other property; and the right of property in said slaves shall not be thereby impaired. They also resolved that pesky fugitive slave law, too. > [@](#): > > (3) No slave or other person held to service or labor in any State or Territory of the Confederate States, under the laws thereof, escaping or lawfully carried into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor; but shall be delivered up on claim of the party to whom such slave belongs,. or to whom such service or labor may be due. [https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th\_century/csa\_csa.asp](https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_csa.asp) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/resolved-america-would-be-less-divisive-today-if-we-had-executed-confederate-leaders-for-treason/986789.md?page=13)