Poor Southern whites did not own slaves, and were not particularly interested in the slavery issue.
They had nothing in common with the plantocracy, and never associated with them socially. Being ranked only one step up from the blacks, they detested them with particular virulence. But they did not leap into uniform to fight for slavery.
Principally they were a warlike breed (largely descended from Ulstermen) who positively welcomed an excuse to carry a rifle, swagger about and seek the spoils of war.
If they needed a specific cause, they could feel that they were defending the homeland against the invader. And in the end, they were led by Robert E. Lee, one of the most inspiring Generals in American history.
There were any number of reasons, but some possibilities include:
There are a number of reasons that most Southerners did not want to see slavery abolished. First however, is a correction. Thar being that Souther citizens without slaves were not "loyal" to slavery. They were loyal to the structure of Southern society which placed in the poorest white person in the South a step above slaves. The other factor lies in the resentment that the typical Southerner saw with the federal government and abolitionists. They saw "interference" in the ways of the South. And, the new Republican Party, to many people in the South was a disruption to what had been the norm for decades. And, if there was any greater state loyalty in the US, it was among Southerners with ultr loyalty to their states that was not that powerful in the North.
because they might have owned slaves in the past or they didn't want to be different
OR they were more concerned with state government having more authority than federal government.
To get both the northern and southern states to agree to it. The southern states wanted slaves counted in the population for determining representation in Congress (even though slaves couldn't vote). The northern states wanted them excluded.
No he did not sopport slavery. In fact he was storngly oposed to salvery.
Penn didn't have slaves. He was a Quaker and this would have been against his belief system. The first one isn't right. After I researched this question, yes it is against his belief but he owned and traded three slaves. No one knows where he got them though.
John Jay owned several slaves, even though he supported the anti-slavery movement. Ok, wtf! answer, if he supported the anti slaves, why the hell would he own slaves? Is he sick in the head?
Whites were used as inderntured servants though blacks were mostly slaves.
To get both the northern and southern states to agree to it. The southern states wanted slaves counted in the population for determining representation in Congress (even though slaves couldn't vote). The northern states wanted them excluded.
No he did not sopport slavery. In fact he was storngly oposed to salvery.
the speech was called the Emancipatiom Proclamation The Emancipation Proclamation did free the slaves, but it was not a speech. It was an Executive Order.
though slavery was around in some form for most of recorded history, the first slaves in America came from Africa's Gold Coast. They were captured there and transported to America to supply cheap labor for the developing southern plantations.
Penn didn't have slaves. He was a Quaker and this would have been against his belief system. The first one isn't right. After I researched this question, yes it is against his belief but he owned and traded three slaves. No one knows where he got them though.
Southern California, with most of it going to Los Angeles.
The British-Americans finished taking slavery into Texas when they crossed the Mississippi River and brought their slaves with them. Spain originally owned Texas and had some slaves, though it wasn't the normal until people crossed the river from the other southern states.
They were free because they obeyed their masters.
They didn't start slavery, which had been going for thousands of years. What they started was the particular trade, where African slaves would be shipped to America and the Caribbean in exchange for raw materials like sugar. When the European countries abolished slavery, the Southern states of America kept it going because it was the mainstay of the cotton industry. (The North had abolished it because it did not fit the factory system.) As cotton represented half of all American exports, Congress was not especially keen to outlaw Southern slavery, and most Northerners got into uniform at the outbreak of the Civil War purely for the purpose of keeping the Southern states within the USA. When Lincoln later 'proclaimed' freedom for Southern slaves (and not Northern ones), it was not a crusade but a war measure - though an unusual one, because it could not be rescinded after the war. That is how the slaves got their freedom.
Even though there aren't much around now,but in the past the Methodist Episcopal south was different from the methodist episcopal because the methodist episcopal south believed in owning slaves.
How many slaves were usually needed on a sugar plantation
Africans originally came to America as slaves. That is why "black" is the 2nd most common "race" (remember that slaves could be a variety of black races, but were primarily African). The southern states really pulled a huge ironic joke, didn't they (even though slavery isn't humorous).