DIXIE DIVA'S ARCHIVE
-WEfd31273dc9.jpg)
CSA: IN THE BEGINNING
The citizens of the Confederate States of America were NOT Rebels because they had NO allegiance to the United States of America and had NO desire to overthrow the USA government.
The people of the Confederate States of America were NOT Traitors because they were citizens of ANOTHER sovereign nation and could not be legally tried in Union court as traitors.
In 1861, ALL states were sovereign states and had no allegiance to one nation, and thus were called "these" United States NOT "the" United States.
In February 1861, the South legally seceded and legally created a sovereign nation called the Confederate States of America - our nation's ORIGINAL name in 1776. Therefore, the war that ensued from 1861 to 1865 was NOT:
- A Civil War
- A War between the States
BUT, in reality:
- A war between 2 sovereign nations - the CSA and USA
- An unlawful invasion of the CSA by the USA
- A War of Northern Aggression
- The War for Southern Independence (as our American Independence in 1776)
So, we were NOT rebels or traitors BUT Americans living in the Confederacy.
(NOTE: At the 1787 Continental Convention, the committee adopted James Madison's proposal that the federal government CANNOT prevent a sovereign state from seceding.)
Believe it or not, that IS reality!
So, I proudly exercise my RIGHT to fly the Army of Tennessee Battle Flag, the Confederate Southern Cross, or the Confederate Battle Flag AS A REMINDER when AMERICANS were brave enough to stand up to and fight an invading, over-reaching, unconstitutional, tyrannical government.
---From the son of a Confederate Veteran
Dixie Diva
Southern elders speak plain hard truth; they have a knowledge of how our world works and who is a threat to our people. The old Southerns know the Federal lies.The red pill is tough. Our Southern elders are 100% RIGHT about all the attacks on Southern Culture and Heritage.
"I said long ago that it wouldn't stop with Confederate statues & monuments, or even with statues & monuments representing White men. I said it would eventually come down to getting rid of all Christian iconography, as well as crosses, steeples, & churches themselves. It's happening.--MH"
Dixie Diva 6/24/2020
The citizens of the Confederate States of America were NOT Rebels because they had NO allegiance to the United States of America and had NO desire to overthrow the USA government.
The people of the Confederate States of America were NOT Traitors because they were citizens of ANOTHER sovereign nation and could not be legally tried in Union court as traitors.
In 1861, ALL states were sovereign states and had no allegiance to one nation, and thus were called "these" United States NOT "the" United States.
In February 1861, the South legally seceded and legally created a sovereign nation called the Confederate States of America - our nation's ORIGINAL name in 1776. Therefore, the war that ensued from 1861 to 1865 was NOT:
- A Civil War
- A War between the States
BUT, in reality:
- A war between 2 sovereign nations - the CSA and USA
- An unlawful invasion of the CSA by the USA
- A War of Northern Aggression
- The War for Southern Independence (as our American Independence in 1776)
So, we were NOT rebels or traitors BUT Americans living in the Confederacy.
(NOTE: At the 1787 Continental Convention, the committee adopted James Madison's proposal that the federal government CANNOT prevent a sovereign state from seceding.)
Believe it or not, that IS reality!
So, I proudly exercise my RIGHT to fly the Army of Tennessee Battle Flag, the Confederate Southern Cross, or the Confederate Battle Flag AS A REMINDER when AMERICANS were brave enough to stand up to and fight an invading, over-reaching, unconstitutional, tyrannical government.
---From the son of a Confederate Veteran
Dixie Diva
Southern elders speak plain hard truth; they have a knowledge of how our world works and who is a threat to our people. The old Southerns know the Federal lies.The red pill is tough. Our Southern elders are 100% RIGHT about all the attacks on Southern Culture and Heritage.
"I said long ago that it wouldn't stop with Confederate statues & monuments, or even with statues & monuments representing White men. I said it would eventually come down to getting rid of all Christian iconography, as well as crosses, steeples, & churches themselves. It's happening.--MH"
Dixie Diva 6/24/2020
-WE1a2c4af12b.jpg)
I AM THEIR FLAG
In 1861, when they perceived their rights to be threatened, when those who would alter the nature of the government of their fathers were placed in charge, when threatened with change they could not accept, the mighty men of valor began to gather. A band of brothers, native to the Southern soil, they pledged themselves to a cause: the cause of defending family, fireside, and faith. Between the desolation of war and their homes they interposed their bodies and they chose me for their symbol.
I Am Their Flag.
Their mothers, wives, and sweethearts took scissors and thimbles, needles and thread, and from silk or cotton or calico - whatever was the best they had - even from the fabric of their wedding dresses, they cut my pieces and stitched my seams.
I Am Their Flag.
On courthouse lawns, in picnic groves, at train stations across the South the men mustered and the women placed me in their hands. "Fight hard, win if possible, come back if you can; but, above all, maintain your honor. Here is your symbol," they said.
I Am Their Flag.
They flocked to the training grounds and the drill fields. They felt the wrenching sadness of leaving home. They endured sickness, loneliness, boredom, bad food, and poor quarters. They looked to me for inspiration.
I Am Their Flag.
I was at Sumter when they began in jubilation. I was at Big Bethel when the infantry fired its first volley. I smelled the gun smoke along Bull Run in Virginia and at Belmont along the Mississippi. I was in the debacle at Fort Donelson; I led Jackson up the Valley. For Seven Days I flapped in the turgid air of the James River bottoms as McClellan ran from before Richmond. Sidney Johnston died for me at Shiloh as would thousands of others whose graves are marked "Sine Nomine," - without a name - unknown.
I Am Their Flag.
With ammunition gone they defended me along the railroad bed at Manassas by throwing rocks. I saw the fields run red with blood at Sharpsburg. Brave men carried me across Doctor's Creek at Perryville. I saw the blue bodies cover Marye's Heights at Fredericksburg and the Gray ones fall like leaves in the Round Forest at Stones River.
I Am Their Flag.
I was a shroud for the body of Stonewall after Chancellorsville. Men ate rats and mule meat to keep me flying over Vicksburg. I tramped across the wheat field with Kemper and Armistead and Garnett at Gettysburg. I know the thrill of victory, the misery of defeat, the bloody cost of both.
I Am Their Flag.
When Longstreet broke the line at Chickamauga, I was in the lead. I was the last off Lookout Mountain. Men died to rescue me at Missionary Ridge. I was singed by the wildfire that burned to death the wounded in the Wilderness. I was shot to tatters in the Bloody Angle at Spotsylvania. I was in it all from Dalton to Peachtree Creek, and no worse place did I ever see than Kennesaw and New Hope Church. They planted me over the trenches at Petersburg and there I stayed for many long months.
I Am Their Flag.
I was rolled in blood at Franklin; I was stiff with ice at Nashville. Many good men bade me farewell at Sayler's Creek. When the end came at Appomattox, when the last Johnny Reb left Durham Station, many of them carried fragments of my fabric hidden on their bodies.
I Am Their Flag.
In the hard years of so-called "Reconstruction," in the difficulty and despair of years that slowly passed, the veterans, their wives and sons and daughters, they loved me. They kept alive the tales of valor and the legends of bravery. They passed them on to the grandchildren and they to their children, and so they were passed to you.
I Am Their Flag.
I have shrouded the bodies of heroes, I have been laved with the blood of martyrs, I am enshrined in the hearts of millions, living and dead. Salute me with affection and reverence. Keep undying devotion in your hearts. I am history. I am heritage, not hate. I am the inspiration of valor from the past. I Am Their Flag. ~Dr. Michael Bradley~
TRUTH ABOUT THE WAR BETWEEN THE USA AND THE CSA: SLAVERY, TAXES AND THE SOUTH
The slave trade begin in Africa. Warring African tribes would capture rival tribal people and sell them to slave traders in the harbors of Africa. None of the slave traders were American ships, it was people of color selling other people of color who eventually ended up in the American colonies.
Today we see Southern history and the symbols of the Southern States being destroyed and banned by those ignorant of true history. The South is blamed as the origin of the slave trade and negative treatment of other human beings of color but in truth, slavery began in Africa by African people of color.
The Confederate Flag is slandered as a symbol of hate but it never flew on any slave vessel. The memorial statues of Confederate War Veteran's are being destroyed and the graves of Confederate dead are being desecrated. Ignorance is dangerous.
The first African slaves arrived in the American Colonies in 1619.
White folks from Ireland and Oriental people were also sold as slaves and brought to the American colonies.
In 246 years of slavery in America the Confederate flag only flew for 4 of those years. Slavery was established and maintained for 242 years under the United States flag and the British flag; consider that when discussing banning flags.
In 1776 there were twice as many slaves in New York as in Georgia.
The Civil War was never about slavery. President Lincoln stated on several occasions that the war was the result of taxes, the tax on cotton. Lincoln wanted to raise the tax on export cotton by forty percent; the cotton producing states felt the government was overreaching and decided to leave the union. Lincoln did not intend to allow the secession of the South. The Emancipation Proclamation was a presidential proclamation and executive order issued by United States President Abraham Lincoln on September 22, 1862;
it changed the federal legal status of Africans enslaved in the designated areas of the South from slave to free, this was done as a political tactic to try and hurt the South. Lincoln did not free over 51,000 slaves counted in the 1860 census in the states and territories that would make up the Union during the Civil War. Northern slaves as historical facts show were not set free in the north until after the end of the war under the United States flag.
Know true, fact based history before disrespecting the Heritage and Heroes of the South. The South fought against taxation without representation. The South fought for freedom against a tyrannical government.
Southern men did not fight and die so someone else could own slaves.
- Dixie Diva
The slave trade begin in Africa. Warring African tribes would capture rival tribal people and sell them to slave traders in the harbors of Africa. None of the slave traders were American ships, it was people of color selling other people of color who eventually ended up in the American colonies.
Today we see Southern history and the symbols of the Southern States being destroyed and banned by those ignorant of true history. The South is blamed as the origin of the slave trade and negative treatment of other human beings of color but in truth, slavery began in Africa by African people of color.
The Confederate Flag is slandered as a symbol of hate but it never flew on any slave vessel. The memorial statues of Confederate War Veteran's are being destroyed and the graves of Confederate dead are being desecrated. Ignorance is dangerous.
The first African slaves arrived in the American Colonies in 1619.
White folks from Ireland and Oriental people were also sold as slaves and brought to the American colonies.
In 246 years of slavery in America the Confederate flag only flew for 4 of those years. Slavery was established and maintained for 242 years under the United States flag and the British flag; consider that when discussing banning flags.
In 1776 there were twice as many slaves in New York as in Georgia.
The Civil War was never about slavery. President Lincoln stated on several occasions that the war was the result of taxes, the tax on cotton. Lincoln wanted to raise the tax on export cotton by forty percent; the cotton producing states felt the government was overreaching and decided to leave the union. Lincoln did not intend to allow the secession of the South. The Emancipation Proclamation was a presidential proclamation and executive order issued by United States President Abraham Lincoln on September 22, 1862;
it changed the federal legal status of Africans enslaved in the designated areas of the South from slave to free, this was done as a political tactic to try and hurt the South. Lincoln did not free over 51,000 slaves counted in the 1860 census in the states and territories that would make up the Union during the Civil War. Northern slaves as historical facts show were not set free in the north until after the end of the war under the United States flag.
Know true, fact based history before disrespecting the Heritage and Heroes of the South. The South fought against taxation without representation. The South fought for freedom against a tyrannical government.
Southern men did not fight and die so someone else could own slaves.
- Dixie Diva
ABE LINCOLN AND THE EMANCIPATION
PRCOLAMATION: THE TRUTH
Ever read the full text of Abe Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation?
If so, you know that he only freed slaves in Southern Confederate states; and he did not free all of those slaves. The slave states that were part of the Union were not affected; Delaware, Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland, got to keep their slaves.
The Haiti slave rebellion of 1804 was in Lincoln's mind because of the brutality of it; freed slaves rose up and ruthlessly murdered French women and children.
Lincoln had hoped that freed slaves in the Confederacy would rise up as well, making for a speedy end to the war. But alas, that did not happen, some freed slaves joined the Confederate Army.
He never cared about slavery as his letter to Horace Greeley proved. Lincoln stated his only goal was restoring the Union by any means necessary as he missed the Southern taxation income. Lincoln told Greeley that if he could restore the Union without freeing a single slave, he would; It is a lie that the war was fought to free slaves.
Abe Lincoln is one of the grandest examples of racism and proof of the power of a propaganda campaign in America. He was a racist and those celebrating his life with adoration are ignorant of his support of black subjugation. Lincoln was no friend of the black community and he was no abolitionist.
Sources: A. Lynn & Saving the Heritage
PRCOLAMATION: THE TRUTH
Ever read the full text of Abe Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation?
If so, you know that he only freed slaves in Southern Confederate states; and he did not free all of those slaves. The slave states that were part of the Union were not affected; Delaware, Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland, got to keep their slaves.
The Haiti slave rebellion of 1804 was in Lincoln's mind because of the brutality of it; freed slaves rose up and ruthlessly murdered French women and children.
Lincoln had hoped that freed slaves in the Confederacy would rise up as well, making for a speedy end to the war. But alas, that did not happen, some freed slaves joined the Confederate Army.
He never cared about slavery as his letter to Horace Greeley proved. Lincoln stated his only goal was restoring the Union by any means necessary as he missed the Southern taxation income. Lincoln told Greeley that if he could restore the Union without freeing a single slave, he would; It is a lie that the war was fought to free slaves.
Abe Lincoln is one of the grandest examples of racism and proof of the power of a propaganda campaign in America. He was a racist and those celebrating his life with adoration are ignorant of his support of black subjugation. Lincoln was no friend of the black community and he was no abolitionist.
Sources: A. Lynn & Saving the Heritage
THE REBEL YELL
“As all veterans of the great war know, in a charge the Confederates did not preserve their alignment, as the Federals did. They usually went at a run, every man more or less for himself. There was also an inexplicable difference between the battle cries of the Federal and Confederate soldiers. In the assaults of the Federals the cries were regular, like "Hurrah! Hurrah! Hurrah!" simply cheers, lacking stirring life. But the Confederate cries were yells of an intensely nervous description; every man for himself yelling "Yai, Yai, Yi, Yai, Yi!" They were simply fierce shrieks made from each man's throat individually, and which cannot be described, and cannot be reproduced except under the excitement of an assault in actual battle. I do not know any reason for this marked difference unless it was in the more pronounced individuality of the average Confederate soldier.”
Source: “LIFE IN THE CONFEDERATE ARMY BEING PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF A PRIVATE SOLDIER IN THE CONFEDERATE ARMY,” BY ARTHUR P. FORD, 1905.
“As all veterans of the great war know, in a charge the Confederates did not preserve their alignment, as the Federals did. They usually went at a run, every man more or less for himself. There was also an inexplicable difference between the battle cries of the Federal and Confederate soldiers. In the assaults of the Federals the cries were regular, like "Hurrah! Hurrah! Hurrah!" simply cheers, lacking stirring life. But the Confederate cries were yells of an intensely nervous description; every man for himself yelling "Yai, Yai, Yi, Yai, Yi!" They were simply fierce shrieks made from each man's throat individually, and which cannot be described, and cannot be reproduced except under the excitement of an assault in actual battle. I do not know any reason for this marked difference unless it was in the more pronounced individuality of the average Confederate soldier.”
Source: “LIFE IN THE CONFEDERATE ARMY BEING PERSONAL EXPERIENCES OF A PRIVATE SOLDIER IN THE CONFEDERATE ARMY,” BY ARTHUR P. FORD, 1905.
A FORMER SLAVE DEFENDS THE CONFEDERATE FLAG
When you see a Confederate flag, remember a former slave by the name of John F. Harris. In 1890, twenty-five years after the war, Mr. Harris was serving as a Mississippi representative in the House of Representatives. During his term, a bill came before the house to erect a monument to the Confederate soldiers of Mississippi. Mr. Harris could have remained silent and coasted along the easy road of “political correctness,” but his burning bravery wouldn’t allow such cowardice. Here’s what he said when he took the floor:
"Mr. Speaker! I have risen here in my place to offer a few words on the bill. I have come from a sick bed . . . perhaps it was not prudent for me to come. But, sir, I could not rest quietly in my room without . . . contributing . . . a few remarks of my own. I was sorry to hear the speech of the young gentleman from Marshall County. I am sorry that any son of a soldier should go on record as opposed to the erection of a monument in honor of the brave dead. And, sir, I am convinced that had he seen what I saw at Seven Pines and in the Seven Days’ fighting around Richmond, the battlefield covered with the mangled forms of those who fought for their country and for their country’s honor, he would not have made that speech. . . . When the news came that the South had been invaded, those men went forth to fight for what they believed, and they made no requests for monuments . . . But they died, and their virtues should be remembered. Sir, I went with them. I too wore the gray, the same color my master wore. We stayed four long years, and if that war had gone on till now I would have been there yet . . . I want to honor those brave men who died for their convictions. When my mother died I was a boy. Who, Sir, then acted the part of a mother to an orphaned slave boy, but my old missus? Were she living now, or could speak to me from those high realms where are gathered the sainted dead, she would tell me to vote for this bill. And, Sir, I shall vote for it. I want it known to all the world that my voice is given in favor of the bill to erect a monument in honor of the Confederate dead."
A former slave and Confederate soldier, now an elected official of Mississippi, defending the South’s honor. Not only did he vote in favor of the passage of this bill, but his address led all six black Republican representatives in voting favorably of the same. Indeed Southerners of Color, are Southerners nonetheless. We honor John F. Harris for his example and integrity, as well as his love of the South land, despite the hardships he no doubt endured.
Deo Vindice!
Defending the Heritage
Source: Reprint from the Daily Clarion Ledger, Jackson, Mississippi, Feb 23, 1890.
"Mr. Speaker! I have risen here in my place to offer a few words on the bill. I have come from a sick bed . . . perhaps it was not prudent for me to come. But, sir, I could not rest quietly in my room without . . . contributing . . . a few remarks of my own. I was sorry to hear the speech of the young gentleman from Marshall County. I am sorry that any son of a soldier should go on record as opposed to the erection of a monument in honor of the brave dead. And, sir, I am convinced that had he seen what I saw at Seven Pines and in the Seven Days’ fighting around Richmond, the battlefield covered with the mangled forms of those who fought for their country and for their country’s honor, he would not have made that speech. . . . When the news came that the South had been invaded, those men went forth to fight for what they believed, and they made no requests for monuments . . . But they died, and their virtues should be remembered. Sir, I went with them. I too wore the gray, the same color my master wore. We stayed four long years, and if that war had gone on till now I would have been there yet . . . I want to honor those brave men who died for their convictions. When my mother died I was a boy. Who, Sir, then acted the part of a mother to an orphaned slave boy, but my old missus? Were she living now, or could speak to me from those high realms where are gathered the sainted dead, she would tell me to vote for this bill. And, Sir, I shall vote for it. I want it known to all the world that my voice is given in favor of the bill to erect a monument in honor of the Confederate dead."
A former slave and Confederate soldier, now an elected official of Mississippi, defending the South’s honor. Not only did he vote in favor of the passage of this bill, but his address led all six black Republican representatives in voting favorably of the same. Indeed Southerners of Color, are Southerners nonetheless. We honor John F. Harris for his example and integrity, as well as his love of the South land, despite the hardships he no doubt endured.
Deo Vindice!
Defending the Heritage
Source: Reprint from the Daily Clarion Ledger, Jackson, Mississippi, Feb 23, 1890.
A UNION GENERAL ADMITS THE TRUTH
The true story of the late war has not yet been told. It probably never will be told. It is not flattering to our people; unpalatable truths seldom find their way into history.
How the Rebels fought the world will never know; for two years they kept an army in the field that girt their borders with a fire that shriveled our forces as they marched in, like tissue paper in a flame. Southern people were animated by a felling that the word fanaticism feebly expresses; A Love of Liberty expresses it.
For two years this feeling held those Rebels to a conflict in which they were invincible. The North poured out its noble soldiery by the thousands and they fought well, but their broken columns and thinned lines drifted back upon our capitol, with nothing but shameful disasters to tell of the dead, the dying, the lost colors and the captured artillery.
Grant’s road from the Rapidan to Richmond was marked by a highway of human bones. The Northern army had more killed than the Confederate Generals had in command. The men of the South, half starved, unsheltered, in rags, shoeless, yet fighting gallantly against tyranny as Grant marched from the Rapidan to Richmond leaving dead behind him; more men dead than the Confederates had in the Field.
Source: Union General Piatt “Men Who Saved the Union”
Gen. Piatt (U. S. Army) 1887.
Source: Acts of the Republican Party as seen by History, By C. GARDNER, 1906.
A C0NFEDERATE SEARGENT'S POEM
I’ve roamed the hills of might've been
and the swamps of just suppose
I’ve read of our southern Confederacy,
its poetry and its prose
I have crossed the deserts of what if,
Through the bleak and burning sand
A thirst with longing still unquenched
and a love for this dear land
how close we came to victory!
how close and yet, so far.
with nothing left but glory's ashes.
And a bitter unhealing scar
Who can tell the moment
When our star crossed cause was lost?
who can tell with certainty what the death of Stuart cost?
Had Bragg stood fast at Munfordville
Buell's way to bar
Had Neer Pickett's men been ordered
to cross that field so far
Had Albert Sidney Johnson's blood
not soaked the ground where he lay
might the Victory grasped in Shiloh's woods
Made complete the second Day?
Had Jackson lived... and westward gone
To command the army of Tennessee
with that wizard of the saddle
Forrest as his chief of cavalry
What of those lost orders
in the grass at Fredrick town
Was this the straw, blown in the wind
That blew our banners down?
Was the fate of our proud nation
There written in the stars....
And did anyone, I wonder
ever smoke those dammed cigars?
Though I’m looking back in anger
Down the roads of long ago
Tis better than what the future holds
if our heritages laid low
Lift your heads, ye Southerns
and do your fathers proud.
Teach your children of their birthright...
For though yet conquered we're unbowed!
By Sgt Benjamin R. Gormley - April 1992
I’ve roamed the hills of might've been
and the swamps of just suppose
I’ve read of our southern Confederacy,
its poetry and its prose
I have crossed the deserts of what if,
Through the bleak and burning sand
A thirst with longing still unquenched
and a love for this dear land
how close we came to victory!
how close and yet, so far.
with nothing left but glory's ashes.
And a bitter unhealing scar
Who can tell the moment
When our star crossed cause was lost?
who can tell with certainty what the death of Stuart cost?
Had Bragg stood fast at Munfordville
Buell's way to bar
Had Neer Pickett's men been ordered
to cross that field so far
Had Albert Sidney Johnson's blood
not soaked the ground where he lay
might the Victory grasped in Shiloh's woods
Made complete the second Day?
Had Jackson lived... and westward gone
To command the army of Tennessee
with that wizard of the saddle
Forrest as his chief of cavalry
What of those lost orders
in the grass at Fredrick town
Was this the straw, blown in the wind
That blew our banners down?
Was the fate of our proud nation
There written in the stars....
And did anyone, I wonder
ever smoke those dammed cigars?
Though I’m looking back in anger
Down the roads of long ago
Tis better than what the future holds
if our heritages laid low
Lift your heads, ye Southerns
and do your fathers proud.
Teach your children of their birthright...
For though yet conquered we're unbowed!
By Sgt Benjamin R. Gormley - April 1992
THE DAY LINCOLN PAID A VISIT TO
THE SHARPSBURG BATTLEFIELD
In 1862, a story appeared in the periodicals that created a great deal of damaging talk until Lincoln's death in 1865. Newspapers continued to relate the story and challenge denial; denials were never made until long after Mr. Lincoln's demise.
A New Jersey Statesman from Sussex related the story in 1862 as follows:
We see that many papers are referring to the fact that Lincoln ordered a comic song to be sung upon the battlefield. We have known the facts of the transaction for some time, but have refrained from speaking about them. As the newspapers are stating some of the facts, we will give the whole.
Soon after one of the most desperate and sanguinary battles, Mr. Lincoln visited the Commanding General [McClellan], who, with his staff, took him over the field, and explained to him the plan of the battle, and the particular places where the battle was most fierce.
At one point the Commanding General said: “Here on this side of the road five hundred of our brave fellows were killed, and just on the other side of the road, four hundred and fifty more were killed, and right on the other side of that wall five hundred rebels were destroyed. We have buried them where they fell.”
“I declare,” said the President, “this is getting gloomy; let us drive away.” After driving a few yards, the President said, “Jack,” speaking to his companion, “can't you give us something to cheer us up? Give us a song, a lively one.”
Whereupon, Jack struck up, as loud as he could bawl, a comic negro song, which he continued to sing while they were riding off from the battle ground, and until they approached a regiment drawn up, when the Commanding General said : “Would it not be well for your friend to cease his song till we pass this regiment? The poor fellows have lost more than half their number. They are feeling very badly, and I should be afraid of the effect it would have on them.”
The President asked his friend to stop singing until they passed the regiment.
When this story was told to us we said: “It is incredible, it is impossible, that any man could act so over the fresh-made graves of the heroic dead. “But the story is told on such authority we know it to be true. We tell the story now that the people may have some idea of the man elected to be President of the United States.
Source: Facts Falsehoods Concerning the War on the South 1861-1865, By George Edmonds, 1904.
THE SHARPSBURG BATTLEFIELD
In 1862, a story appeared in the periodicals that created a great deal of damaging talk until Lincoln's death in 1865. Newspapers continued to relate the story and challenge denial; denials were never made until long after Mr. Lincoln's demise.
A New Jersey Statesman from Sussex related the story in 1862 as follows:
We see that many papers are referring to the fact that Lincoln ordered a comic song to be sung upon the battlefield. We have known the facts of the transaction for some time, but have refrained from speaking about them. As the newspapers are stating some of the facts, we will give the whole.
Soon after one of the most desperate and sanguinary battles, Mr. Lincoln visited the Commanding General [McClellan], who, with his staff, took him over the field, and explained to him the plan of the battle, and the particular places where the battle was most fierce.
At one point the Commanding General said: “Here on this side of the road five hundred of our brave fellows were killed, and just on the other side of the road, four hundred and fifty more were killed, and right on the other side of that wall five hundred rebels were destroyed. We have buried them where they fell.”
“I declare,” said the President, “this is getting gloomy; let us drive away.” After driving a few yards, the President said, “Jack,” speaking to his companion, “can't you give us something to cheer us up? Give us a song, a lively one.”
Whereupon, Jack struck up, as loud as he could bawl, a comic negro song, which he continued to sing while they were riding off from the battle ground, and until they approached a regiment drawn up, when the Commanding General said : “Would it not be well for your friend to cease his song till we pass this regiment? The poor fellows have lost more than half their number. They are feeling very badly, and I should be afraid of the effect it would have on them.”
The President asked his friend to stop singing until they passed the regiment.
When this story was told to us we said: “It is incredible, it is impossible, that any man could act so over the fresh-made graves of the heroic dead. “But the story is told on such authority we know it to be true. We tell the story now that the people may have some idea of the man elected to be President of the United States.
Source: Facts Falsehoods Concerning the War on the South 1861-1865, By George Edmonds, 1904.
A PRAYER FOR THE SOUTH
Our Father, Thank you for protecting us during this time of destruction and unrest. Thank you for being the source of all truth and the knowledge that when we stand for truth that we are standing with you! Thank you for coming to this earth and freely giving your earthly life in order to redeem all those that trust you as their personal Lord and Savior! May we always remember that you showed us the greatest love ever known when you died on a cruel cross to pay for our sins. Thank you for loving us so much that you have given each of us an opportunity to respond to your salvation. Lord, Bless each one that is standing for truth by standing up for our heritage this week and in the weeks to come.
Jesus, we ask that you would touch the lives of those who are suffering today using us as your children, as instruments of your divine love, to point them to your cross and your empty tomb, that they might find peace in the midst of their storms! Where there is pain and hurt, bind up their wounds as the Balm of Gilead! Where there is loss and grief, fill their hearts with your love as the Prince of Peace! Thank you for healing that you have brought to many but we continue to lift up those that are in the hospital and suffering at home. Help us as your children to convey your love at every opportunity.
Lord, we are forever indebted to you for the wonderful Southern heritage you have given us that is now our responsibility to preserve for our children and those that come after us. May our actions be always for the purpose of pointing others toward the truth and always be glory to you and not dishonour to those that have gone before us. We may face, at times, discouragements and heartache as our faith and the things upon which our culture is built are attacked and maligned but help us to remember that truth will always reign supreme in the end. It is in the Holy and Precious name of Jesus Christ that we pray - Amen!
Source: Defending the Heritage
itunes.apple.com
Our Father, Thank you for protecting us during this time of destruction and unrest. Thank you for being the source of all truth and the knowledge that when we stand for truth that we are standing with you! Thank you for coming to this earth and freely giving your earthly life in order to redeem all those that trust you as their personal Lord and Savior! May we always remember that you showed us the greatest love ever known when you died on a cruel cross to pay for our sins. Thank you for loving us so much that you have given each of us an opportunity to respond to your salvation. Lord, Bless each one that is standing for truth by standing up for our heritage this week and in the weeks to come.
Jesus, we ask that you would touch the lives of those who are suffering today using us as your children, as instruments of your divine love, to point them to your cross and your empty tomb, that they might find peace in the midst of their storms! Where there is pain and hurt, bind up their wounds as the Balm of Gilead! Where there is loss and grief, fill their hearts with your love as the Prince of Peace! Thank you for healing that you have brought to many but we continue to lift up those that are in the hospital and suffering at home. Help us as your children to convey your love at every opportunity.
Lord, we are forever indebted to you for the wonderful Southern heritage you have given us that is now our responsibility to preserve for our children and those that come after us. May our actions be always for the purpose of pointing others toward the truth and always be glory to you and not dishonour to those that have gone before us. We may face, at times, discouragements and heartache as our faith and the things upon which our culture is built are attacked and maligned but help us to remember that truth will always reign supreme in the end. It is in the Holy and Precious name of Jesus Christ that we pray - Amen!
Source: Defending the Heritage
itunes.apple.com
YA JUST GOTTA REMIND YOURSELF OF WHO YOU ARE...
Author: Unknown
"I am a Southerner . . .
I won’t apologize
I won’t be reconstructed.
I will not surrender
My identity, my heritage.
I believe in the Constitution,
In States’ Rights,
That the government should be the
Servant, not the Master of the people.
I believe in the right to bear arms,
The right to be left alone.
I am a Southerner . . .
The spirit of my Confederate ancestor
Boils in my blood.
He fought
Not for what he thought was right,
But for what was right.
Not for slavery,
But to resist tyranny, Machiavellian laws,
Oppressive taxation, invasion of his land,
For the right to be left alone.
I am a Southerner
A rebel,
Seldom politically correct,
At times belligerent.
I don’t like DOW, AS, SELC,
Or modern neocon politicians like them.
I like hunting and fishing, Lynyrd Skynyrd,
The Bonnie Blue and Dixie
I still believe in chivalry and civility.
I am a face in the Southern collage of
Gentlemen and scholars, belles and writers,
Soldiers and sharecroppers, Cajuns and Creoles,
Tejanos and IsleÒos, Celts and Germans,
Gullah and Geechi, freedmen and slaves.
We are all the South.
The South . . . My home, my beautiful home,
My culture, my destiny, my heart.
I am a Southerner."
Author: Unknown
"I am a Southerner . . .
I won’t apologize
I won’t be reconstructed.
I will not surrender
My identity, my heritage.
I believe in the Constitution,
In States’ Rights,
That the government should be the
Servant, not the Master of the people.
I believe in the right to bear arms,
The right to be left alone.
I am a Southerner . . .
The spirit of my Confederate ancestor
Boils in my blood.
He fought
Not for what he thought was right,
But for what was right.
Not for slavery,
But to resist tyranny, Machiavellian laws,
Oppressive taxation, invasion of his land,
For the right to be left alone.
I am a Southerner
A rebel,
Seldom politically correct,
At times belligerent.
I don’t like DOW, AS, SELC,
Or modern neocon politicians like them.
I like hunting and fishing, Lynyrd Skynyrd,
The Bonnie Blue and Dixie
I still believe in chivalry and civility.
I am a face in the Southern collage of
Gentlemen and scholars, belles and writers,
Soldiers and sharecroppers, Cajuns and Creoles,
Tejanos and IsleÒos, Celts and Germans,
Gullah and Geechi, freedmen and slaves.
We are all the South.
The South . . . My home, my beautiful home,
My culture, my destiny, my heart.
I am a Southerner."
NATHAN BEDFORD FORREST, AN HONORABLE SOUTHERN HERO
“In 1871 a Congressional investigation was convened to look into Forrest’s alleged involvement with the Klan and to revisit the Ft. Pillow “massacre.” The investigation was chaired by Forrest’s old enemy, William Tecumseh Sherman, who told the press that, “We are here to investigate Forrest, charge Forrest, try Forrest, convict Forrest, and hang Forrest.”
The outcome of the 1871 investigation was twofold. The committee found no evidence that Forrest had participated in the formation of the Klan and that even the use of his name may well have been without his permission. They also found that there was no credible evidence that Forrest had ever participated in or directed any actions of the Klan.
“The reports of Committees, House of Representatives, second session, forty-second congress,” P. 7-449.
“The primary accusation before this board is that Gen. Forrest was a founder of The Klan, and its first Grand Wizard, So I shall address those accusations first. In 1871, Gen. Forrest was called before a congressional Committee along with 21 other ex-Confederate officers including Admiral Raphael Semmes, Gen. Wade Hampton, Gen. John B.
Gordon, and Gen. Braxton Bragg. Forrest testified before Congress personally over four hours. Forrest took the witness stand June 27th, 1871. Building a railroad in Tennessee at the time, Gen Forrest stated he ‘had done more , probably than any other man, to suppress these violence and difficulties and keep them down, had been vilified and abused in the (news) papers, and accused of things I never did while in the army and since. He had nothing to hide, wanted to see this matter settled, our country quite once more, and our people united and working together harmoniously.’
Asked if he knew of any men or combination of men violating the law or preventing the execution of the law: Gen Forest answered emphatically, ‘No.’ (A Committee member brought up a document suggesting otherwise, the 1868 newspaper article from the “Cincinnati Commercial”. That was their “evidence”, a news article.) Forrest stated ‘…any information he had on the Klan was information given to him by others.’
Sen. Scott asked, ‘Did you take any steps in organizing an association or society under that prescript (Klan constitution)?’
Forrest: ‘I DID NOT’ Forrest further stated that ‘…he thought the Organization (Klan) started in middle Tennessee, although he did not know where.
It is said I started it.’
Asked by Sen. Scott, ‘Did you start it, Is that true?’
Forrest: ‘No Sir, it is not.’
Asked if he had heard of the Knights of the white Camellia, a Klan-like organization in Louisiana,
Forrest: ‘Yes, they were reported to be there.’
Senator: ‘Were you a member of the order of the white Camellia?’
Forrest: ‘No Sir, I never was a member of the Knights of the white Camellia.’
Asked about the Klan:
Forrest: ‘It was a matter I knew very little about. All my efforts were addressed to stop it, disband it, and prevent it….I was trying to keep it down as much as possible.’
Forrest: ‘I talked with different people that I believed were connected to it, and urged the disbandment of it, that it should be broken up.'”
The following article appeared in the New York times June 27th, “Washington, 1871. Gen Forrest was before the Klu Klux Committee today, and his examination lasted four hours. After the examination, he remarked than the committee treated him with much courtesy and respect.”
Congressional records show that Gen. Forrest was absolved of all complicity in the founding or operation of the Ku Klux Klan, and he was certainly never a “Grand Wizard”. These committees had the utmost evidence and living witnesses at their disposal. The evidence precluded any Guilt or indictment of Gen. Forrest and the matter was closed before that body of final judgment in 1872.
The following findings in the Final report of this committee of Congress concluded,
“The statement of these gentlemen (Forrest and Gordon) are full and explicit…the evidence fully sustains them.” (Personal Note: At this time Honor was a big part of their society and daily lives with many duels being fought over just that “HONOR” as much General Sherman would have welcomed an excuse to have hanged Forrest, he too concluded he was innocent).
Later the surviving participates from the battle were individually interviewed “Both white and negro soldiers were interviewed fully supporting General Forrest’s testimony”.
After the war committees determined the rumor was started to ensure the USCT would fight, many white officers felt they (USTC) could not be counted on and they had to either be threaten, coerced or frighten. Apparently they got more than they bargained for as in several engagements the USCT were killing both Confederate prisoners and civilians in retaliation for Pillow and could only be controlled under threat of harm.
Reference Specialist
Main Reading Room
Humanities and Social Sciences Division
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave. SE
Washington, DC 20540-4660
“In 1871 a Congressional investigation was convened to look into Forrest’s alleged involvement with the Klan and to revisit the Ft. Pillow “massacre.” The investigation was chaired by Forrest’s old enemy, William Tecumseh Sherman, who told the press that, “We are here to investigate Forrest, charge Forrest, try Forrest, convict Forrest, and hang Forrest.”
The outcome of the 1871 investigation was twofold. The committee found no evidence that Forrest had participated in the formation of the Klan and that even the use of his name may well have been without his permission. They also found that there was no credible evidence that Forrest had ever participated in or directed any actions of the Klan.
“The reports of Committees, House of Representatives, second session, forty-second congress,” P. 7-449.
“The primary accusation before this board is that Gen. Forrest was a founder of The Klan, and its first Grand Wizard, So I shall address those accusations first. In 1871, Gen. Forrest was called before a congressional Committee along with 21 other ex-Confederate officers including Admiral Raphael Semmes, Gen. Wade Hampton, Gen. John B.
Gordon, and Gen. Braxton Bragg. Forrest testified before Congress personally over four hours. Forrest took the witness stand June 27th, 1871. Building a railroad in Tennessee at the time, Gen Forrest stated he ‘had done more , probably than any other man, to suppress these violence and difficulties and keep them down, had been vilified and abused in the (news) papers, and accused of things I never did while in the army and since. He had nothing to hide, wanted to see this matter settled, our country quite once more, and our people united and working together harmoniously.’
Asked if he knew of any men or combination of men violating the law or preventing the execution of the law: Gen Forest answered emphatically, ‘No.’ (A Committee member brought up a document suggesting otherwise, the 1868 newspaper article from the “Cincinnati Commercial”. That was their “evidence”, a news article.) Forrest stated ‘…any information he had on the Klan was information given to him by others.’
Sen. Scott asked, ‘Did you take any steps in organizing an association or society under that prescript (Klan constitution)?’
Forrest: ‘I DID NOT’ Forrest further stated that ‘…he thought the Organization (Klan) started in middle Tennessee, although he did not know where.
It is said I started it.’
Asked by Sen. Scott, ‘Did you start it, Is that true?’
Forrest: ‘No Sir, it is not.’
Asked if he had heard of the Knights of the white Camellia, a Klan-like organization in Louisiana,
Forrest: ‘Yes, they were reported to be there.’
Senator: ‘Were you a member of the order of the white Camellia?’
Forrest: ‘No Sir, I never was a member of the Knights of the white Camellia.’
Asked about the Klan:
Forrest: ‘It was a matter I knew very little about. All my efforts were addressed to stop it, disband it, and prevent it….I was trying to keep it down as much as possible.’
Forrest: ‘I talked with different people that I believed were connected to it, and urged the disbandment of it, that it should be broken up.'”
The following article appeared in the New York times June 27th, “Washington, 1871. Gen Forrest was before the Klu Klux Committee today, and his examination lasted four hours. After the examination, he remarked than the committee treated him with much courtesy and respect.”
Congressional records show that Gen. Forrest was absolved of all complicity in the founding or operation of the Ku Klux Klan, and he was certainly never a “Grand Wizard”. These committees had the utmost evidence and living witnesses at their disposal. The evidence precluded any Guilt or indictment of Gen. Forrest and the matter was closed before that body of final judgment in 1872.
The following findings in the Final report of this committee of Congress concluded,
“The statement of these gentlemen (Forrest and Gordon) are full and explicit…the evidence fully sustains them.” (Personal Note: At this time Honor was a big part of their society and daily lives with many duels being fought over just that “HONOR” as much General Sherman would have welcomed an excuse to have hanged Forrest, he too concluded he was innocent).
Later the surviving participates from the battle were individually interviewed “Both white and negro soldiers were interviewed fully supporting General Forrest’s testimony”.
After the war committees determined the rumor was started to ensure the USCT would fight, many white officers felt they (USTC) could not be counted on and they had to either be threaten, coerced or frighten. Apparently they got more than they bargained for as in several engagements the USCT were killing both Confederate prisoners and civilians in retaliation for Pillow and could only be controlled under threat of harm.
Reference Specialist
Main Reading Room
Humanities and Social Sciences Division
Library of Congress
101 Independence Ave. SE
Washington, DC 20540-4660
A SOLDIER DESCRIBES JEB STUART
“General J. E. B. Stuart was a handsome, dashing, spectacular officer. He wore a broad brimmed, heavily plumed hat with a cockade and dressed in a fine suit of Confederate gray. His sword and belt, his boots and other equipments were bright and clean. He had long reddish brown beard and mounted a splendid charger. Altogether he was a picturesque commander but his showy appearance made him the target of the enemy. He was a brave and gallant officer and his reputation as a capable commander increased until his untimely death.” Houghton Brothers, 1912.
Source: “Two Boys in the Civil War and After,” by W. R. HOUGHTON and M. B. HOUGHTON, 1912
Link to e-book: http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/houghton/houghton.html
“General J. E. B. Stuart was a handsome, dashing, spectacular officer. He wore a broad brimmed, heavily plumed hat with a cockade and dressed in a fine suit of Confederate gray. His sword and belt, his boots and other equipments were bright and clean. He had long reddish brown beard and mounted a splendid charger. Altogether he was a picturesque commander but his showy appearance made him the target of the enemy. He was a brave and gallant officer and his reputation as a capable commander increased until his untimely death.” Houghton Brothers, 1912.
Source: “Two Boys in the Civil War and After,” by W. R. HOUGHTON and M. B. HOUGHTON, 1912
Link to e-book: http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/houghton/houghton.html
THAT DEVIL SHERMAN
Sherman unleashed hell on innocent children, defenseless women, unarmed old men and helpless pets.......
"One bizarre undercurrent of Sherman's devastation came to be known as the "war on dogs". Convincing themselves that Southerners used bloodhouds to track escaped Union prisoners of war, the invaders became obsessed with the notion that all dogs be destroyed. A Federal colonel said that "we were determined that no dogs should escape, be it cur, rat dog or blood hound; we exterminate all." And he saw no need to waste ammunition on the creatures. "The dogs were easily killed. All we had to do was to bayonet them." Some animals, such as cats, "seemed to feel it in the air that something was approaching," observed one woman...
Another lady living in Barnwell wrote that the first act of the invaders upon breaking into her home was to kill her pet dogs. They barked and growled at the intruders, "but in an instant both were hushed, two sharp pistol reports followed the last growl as the faithful dogs bounded forward only to fall in their tracks, dead. Her terrified children stood by, "shedding silent tears." Sometimes the soldiers used the butts of their rifles to kill beloved pets in the presence of children. "
WAR CRIMES AGAINST SOUTHERN CIVILIANS
Walter Brian Cisco
Sherman unleashed hell on innocent children, defenseless women, unarmed old men and helpless pets.......
"One bizarre undercurrent of Sherman's devastation came to be known as the "war on dogs". Convincing themselves that Southerners used bloodhouds to track escaped Union prisoners of war, the invaders became obsessed with the notion that all dogs be destroyed. A Federal colonel said that "we were determined that no dogs should escape, be it cur, rat dog or blood hound; we exterminate all." And he saw no need to waste ammunition on the creatures. "The dogs were easily killed. All we had to do was to bayonet them." Some animals, such as cats, "seemed to feel it in the air that something was approaching," observed one woman...
Another lady living in Barnwell wrote that the first act of the invaders upon breaking into her home was to kill her pet dogs. They barked and growled at the intruders, "but in an instant both were hushed, two sharp pistol reports followed the last growl as the faithful dogs bounded forward only to fall in their tracks, dead. Her terrified children stood by, "shedding silent tears." Sometimes the soldiers used the butts of their rifles to kill beloved pets in the presence of children. "
WAR CRIMES AGAINST SOUTHERN CIVILIANS
Walter Brian Cisco
GENERAL LEE & HIS TRUSTY STEED TRAVELLER
In the following passage, Lee’s son relates a story that illustrates the bond between his father and the high spirited Traveller:
"One afternoon in July of this year, the General rode down to the canal-boat landing to put on board a young lady who had been visiting his daughters and was returning home. He dismounted, tied Traveller to a post, and was standing on the boat making his adieux, when someone called out that Traveller was loose. Sure enough, the gallant gray was making his way up the road, increasing his speed as a number of boys and men tried to stop him.
My father immediately stepped ashore, called to the crowd to stand still, and advancing a few steps gave a peculiar low whistle. At the first sound, Traveller stopped and pricked up his ears. The General whistled a second time, and the horse with a glad whinny turned and trotted quietly back to his master, who patted and coaxed him before tying him up again. To a bystander expressing surprise at the creature's docility the General observed that he did not see how any man could ride a horse for any length of time without a perfect understanding being established between them.
Source: “Recollections and Letters of General Robert E. Lee,” by Captain Robert E. Lee, His Son
Link to free e-book: https://archive.org/details/recollectionsand02323gut
In the following passage, Lee’s son relates a story that illustrates the bond between his father and the high spirited Traveller:
"One afternoon in July of this year, the General rode down to the canal-boat landing to put on board a young lady who had been visiting his daughters and was returning home. He dismounted, tied Traveller to a post, and was standing on the boat making his adieux, when someone called out that Traveller was loose. Sure enough, the gallant gray was making his way up the road, increasing his speed as a number of boys and men tried to stop him.
My father immediately stepped ashore, called to the crowd to stand still, and advancing a few steps gave a peculiar low whistle. At the first sound, Traveller stopped and pricked up his ears. The General whistled a second time, and the horse with a glad whinny turned and trotted quietly back to his master, who patted and coaxed him before tying him up again. To a bystander expressing surprise at the creature's docility the General observed that he did not see how any man could ride a horse for any length of time without a perfect understanding being established between them.
Source: “Recollections and Letters of General Robert E. Lee,” by Captain Robert E. Lee, His Son
Link to free e-book: https://archive.org/details/recollectionsand02323gut
THEODORE ROOSEVELT'S TRIBUTE TO LEE
“No man who is not willing to bear arms and to fight for his rights can give a good reason why he should be entitled to the privilege of living in a free community. The decline of the militant spirit in the Northeast during the first half of this century was much to be regretted.
To it is due more than to any other cause the undoubted average individual inferiority of the Northern compared with the Southern troops – at any rate, at the beginning of the [War].
The Southerners, by their whole mode of living, their habits, and their love of outdoor sports, kept up their warlike spirit, while in the North the so-called upper classes developed along the lines of a wealthy and timid bourgeoisie type, measuring everything by a mercantile standard (a peculiarly debasing one, if taken purely by itself), and submitting to be ruled in local affairs by low, foreign mobs, and in national affairs by their arrogant Southern kinsmen. The militant spirit of these last certainly stood them in good stead in the civil war.
The world has never seen better soldiers than those who followed Lee, and their leader will undoubtedly rank, without any exception, as the very greatest of all the great captains that the English-speaking peoples have brought forth . . .”
(Roosevelt’s Tribute to Lee, Rev. J.H. McNeilly; Confederate Veteran, June 1900, page 257)
http://circa1865.com/?p=1117
“No man who is not willing to bear arms and to fight for his rights can give a good reason why he should be entitled to the privilege of living in a free community. The decline of the militant spirit in the Northeast during the first half of this century was much to be regretted.
To it is due more than to any other cause the undoubted average individual inferiority of the Northern compared with the Southern troops – at any rate, at the beginning of the [War].
The Southerners, by their whole mode of living, their habits, and their love of outdoor sports, kept up their warlike spirit, while in the North the so-called upper classes developed along the lines of a wealthy and timid bourgeoisie type, measuring everything by a mercantile standard (a peculiarly debasing one, if taken purely by itself), and submitting to be ruled in local affairs by low, foreign mobs, and in national affairs by their arrogant Southern kinsmen. The militant spirit of these last certainly stood them in good stead in the civil war.
The world has never seen better soldiers than those who followed Lee, and their leader will undoubtedly rank, without any exception, as the very greatest of all the great captains that the English-speaking peoples have brought forth . . .”
(Roosevelt’s Tribute to Lee, Rev. J.H. McNeilly; Confederate Veteran, June 1900, page 257)
http://circa1865.com/?p=1117
SLAVERY IN NEW YORK – IT’S TIME TO SHARE IN THE BLAME
Systematic use of black slaves in New Netherland [New York] began in 1626, when the first cargo of 11 Africans was unloaded by the Dutch West India Company… From the 1630s to the 1650s, the WIC "was unquestionably the dominant European slave trader in Africa."[1] The British took over in 1664, and control of the colony passed to the Duke of York, who, with his cronies, held controlling interest in the Royal African Company. The change of name from New Netherland to New York brought a crucial shift in policy. Whereas the Dutch had used slavery as part of their colonial policy, the British used the colony as a market for slaves. "The Duke's representatives in New York -- governors, councilors, and customs officials -- were instructed to promote the importation of slaves by every possible means."[2]
But after 1682, as the number of slaves rose (in many places more rapidly than the white population) fears of insurrection mounted, restrictions were applied, and public controls began to be enacted. By that year, it had become illegal for more than four slaves to meet together on their own time; in 1702 the number was reduced to three, and to ensure enforcement each town was required to appoint a "Negro Whipper" to flog violators. In a place where slaves were dispersed in ones and twos among city households, this law, if enforced, would have effectively prohibited slaves from social or family life.
Local ordinances restricted times or distance of travel. Slave runaways were tracked down rigorously, and ones bound for French Canada were especially feared, as they might carry information about the condition and defenses of the colony. The penalty for this was death. Slaves did run off, especially young men, but they tended to gravitate to New York City, rather than Canada. There many of them sought to escape the colony by taking passage on ships, whose captains often were not overly scrupulous about the backgrounds of their sailors.
"Others skulked along the waterfront, where they were drawn into gangs of criminal slaves infesting the docks. The most notorious gang was the Geneva Club, named after the Geneva gin its members were fond of imbibing. There were also groups known as the Free Masons, the Smith Fly Boys, the Long Bridge Boys, and many others whose names have not been recorded. Slaves belonging to such gangs were extremely clannish and often engaged in murderous feuds. Only rarely, however, did they attack white persons. The very existence of such groups nevertheless caused the whites much anxiety. The authorities regarded them as a much greater threat to the public safety than the deadlier gangs of white hoodlums on the waterfront."[3]
In 1712, some slaves in New York City rose up in a crude rebellion that could have been much more deadly, had it been better planned. As it was, it was among the most serious slave resistances in American history, and sparked a vicious backlash by the authorities. The revolt was led by African-born slaves, who decided death was preferable to life in bondage. They managed to collect a cache of muskets and other weapons and hide it in an orchard on the edge of town. On the night of April 6, twenty-four of the conspirators gathered, armed themselves, and set fire to a nearby building. They then hid among trees, and when white citizens rushed up to put out the blaze, the slaves opened fire on them, killing five and wounding six.
The surviving citizens sounded the alarm. Every able-bodied man was pressed into service, and appeals were made to governors of surrounding colonies. The militia pinned down the rebels in the woods of northern Manhattan. The leaders of the uprising committed suicide, and the rest, starving, surrendered. The death toll in the 1712 uprising doesn't seem high, but in a New York county that, at that time probably numbered some 4,800 whites, it was shocking. In considering the psychological impact on the survivors, imagine some sort of attack on modern New York, with its 8 million people, that would leave casualties of 10,000 dead.
A special court convened by the governor made short work of the rebels. Of the twenty-seven slaves brought to trial for complicity in the plot, twenty-one were convicted and put to death. Since the law authorized any degree of punishment in such cases, some unlucky slaves were executed with all the refinements of calculated barbarity. New Yorkers were treated to a round of grisly spectacles as Negroes were burned alive, racked and broken on the wheel, and gibbeted alive in chains. In his report of the affair to England, Governor Hunter praised the judges for inventing 'the most exemplary punishments that could be possibly thought of.' "[4]
As in other Northern colonies, blacks in New York faced special, severe penalties for certain crimes. An example from Poughkeepsie illustrates one of them: A young slave, about twenty years of age, fired his master's barn and outbuildings, and thus destroyed much grain, together with live-stock. He was detected by the smoke issuing from his pocket, (into which he had thrust some combustibles,) imprisoned, tried, and on his confession, condemned to be burned to death. He was fastened to a stake, and when the pile was fired, the dense crowd excluded the air, so that the flames kindled but slowly, and the dreadful screams of the victim were heard at a distance of three miles. His master, who had been fond of him, wept aloud, and called to the Sheriff to put him out of his misery. This officer then drew his sword; but the master, still crying like a child, exclaimed, "Oh, don't run him through!" The Sheriff then caused the crowd to separate, so as to cause a current of air; and when the flame burst out fiercely he called to the sufferer to "swallow the blaze;" which he did, and immediately he sunk dead. [5]
Free blacks lived in New York at risk of enslavement. The colonial courts ruled that if a white person claimed his black employee was a slave, the burden was on the black person to prove he was not. Blacks on the street who could give no plausible account of their movements or proof of their freedom often were picked up by the authorities and jailed on suspicion of being runaway slaves. Local authorities had all but unlimited power in such cases. A black man was arrested in New York City in 1773 simply "because he had curious marks on his back." In such cases the suspected fugitives were held in local jails while advertisements ran in the newspapers seeking their owners. If a claimant arrived, and reimbursed the sheriff for the cost of the detention and the ads, he took the black person away after a few legal formalities. There was little incentive for the sheriff to challenge the claim of ownership in such cases. Even if no claimant came forth, the authorities sometimes then sold the black person into slavery, to cover the cost of detaining and advertising him.
Footnotes to article:
1. Herbert S. Klein, ‘The Atlantic Slave Trade,’ Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.76-7.
2. Edgar J. McManus, ‘A History of Negro Slavery in New York, Syracuse University Press,’ 1966, p.23.
3. ibid., p.105-6.
4. ibid., p.124.
5. William J. Allinson, ‘Memoir of Quamino Buccau, A Pious Methodist,’ Philadelphia: Henry Longstreth, 1851, p.4.
Source: Source: Condensed from - http://www.slavenorth.com. By Douglas Harper/historian, author, journalist and lecturer based in Lancaster, Pa.
Photo: Slave being burned at the stake in 1741. The New York Public Library, Picture Collection.
Systematic use of black slaves in New Netherland [New York] began in 1626, when the first cargo of 11 Africans was unloaded by the Dutch West India Company… From the 1630s to the 1650s, the WIC "was unquestionably the dominant European slave trader in Africa."[1] The British took over in 1664, and control of the colony passed to the Duke of York, who, with his cronies, held controlling interest in the Royal African Company. The change of name from New Netherland to New York brought a crucial shift in policy. Whereas the Dutch had used slavery as part of their colonial policy, the British used the colony as a market for slaves. "The Duke's representatives in New York -- governors, councilors, and customs officials -- were instructed to promote the importation of slaves by every possible means."[2]
But after 1682, as the number of slaves rose (in many places more rapidly than the white population) fears of insurrection mounted, restrictions were applied, and public controls began to be enacted. By that year, it had become illegal for more than four slaves to meet together on their own time; in 1702 the number was reduced to three, and to ensure enforcement each town was required to appoint a "Negro Whipper" to flog violators. In a place where slaves were dispersed in ones and twos among city households, this law, if enforced, would have effectively prohibited slaves from social or family life.
Local ordinances restricted times or distance of travel. Slave runaways were tracked down rigorously, and ones bound for French Canada were especially feared, as they might carry information about the condition and defenses of the colony. The penalty for this was death. Slaves did run off, especially young men, but they tended to gravitate to New York City, rather than Canada. There many of them sought to escape the colony by taking passage on ships, whose captains often were not overly scrupulous about the backgrounds of their sailors.
"Others skulked along the waterfront, where they were drawn into gangs of criminal slaves infesting the docks. The most notorious gang was the Geneva Club, named after the Geneva gin its members were fond of imbibing. There were also groups known as the Free Masons, the Smith Fly Boys, the Long Bridge Boys, and many others whose names have not been recorded. Slaves belonging to such gangs were extremely clannish and often engaged in murderous feuds. Only rarely, however, did they attack white persons. The very existence of such groups nevertheless caused the whites much anxiety. The authorities regarded them as a much greater threat to the public safety than the deadlier gangs of white hoodlums on the waterfront."[3]
In 1712, some slaves in New York City rose up in a crude rebellion that could have been much more deadly, had it been better planned. As it was, it was among the most serious slave resistances in American history, and sparked a vicious backlash by the authorities. The revolt was led by African-born slaves, who decided death was preferable to life in bondage. They managed to collect a cache of muskets and other weapons and hide it in an orchard on the edge of town. On the night of April 6, twenty-four of the conspirators gathered, armed themselves, and set fire to a nearby building. They then hid among trees, and when white citizens rushed up to put out the blaze, the slaves opened fire on them, killing five and wounding six.
The surviving citizens sounded the alarm. Every able-bodied man was pressed into service, and appeals were made to governors of surrounding colonies. The militia pinned down the rebels in the woods of northern Manhattan. The leaders of the uprising committed suicide, and the rest, starving, surrendered. The death toll in the 1712 uprising doesn't seem high, but in a New York county that, at that time probably numbered some 4,800 whites, it was shocking. In considering the psychological impact on the survivors, imagine some sort of attack on modern New York, with its 8 million people, that would leave casualties of 10,000 dead.
A special court convened by the governor made short work of the rebels. Of the twenty-seven slaves brought to trial for complicity in the plot, twenty-one were convicted and put to death. Since the law authorized any degree of punishment in such cases, some unlucky slaves were executed with all the refinements of calculated barbarity. New Yorkers were treated to a round of grisly spectacles as Negroes were burned alive, racked and broken on the wheel, and gibbeted alive in chains. In his report of the affair to England, Governor Hunter praised the judges for inventing 'the most exemplary punishments that could be possibly thought of.' "[4]
As in other Northern colonies, blacks in New York faced special, severe penalties for certain crimes. An example from Poughkeepsie illustrates one of them: A young slave, about twenty years of age, fired his master's barn and outbuildings, and thus destroyed much grain, together with live-stock. He was detected by the smoke issuing from his pocket, (into which he had thrust some combustibles,) imprisoned, tried, and on his confession, condemned to be burned to death. He was fastened to a stake, and when the pile was fired, the dense crowd excluded the air, so that the flames kindled but slowly, and the dreadful screams of the victim were heard at a distance of three miles. His master, who had been fond of him, wept aloud, and called to the Sheriff to put him out of his misery. This officer then drew his sword; but the master, still crying like a child, exclaimed, "Oh, don't run him through!" The Sheriff then caused the crowd to separate, so as to cause a current of air; and when the flame burst out fiercely he called to the sufferer to "swallow the blaze;" which he did, and immediately he sunk dead. [5]
Free blacks lived in New York at risk of enslavement. The colonial courts ruled that if a white person claimed his black employee was a slave, the burden was on the black person to prove he was not. Blacks on the street who could give no plausible account of their movements or proof of their freedom often were picked up by the authorities and jailed on suspicion of being runaway slaves. Local authorities had all but unlimited power in such cases. A black man was arrested in New York City in 1773 simply "because he had curious marks on his back." In such cases the suspected fugitives were held in local jails while advertisements ran in the newspapers seeking their owners. If a claimant arrived, and reimbursed the sheriff for the cost of the detention and the ads, he took the black person away after a few legal formalities. There was little incentive for the sheriff to challenge the claim of ownership in such cases. Even if no claimant came forth, the authorities sometimes then sold the black person into slavery, to cover the cost of detaining and advertising him.
Footnotes to article:
1. Herbert S. Klein, ‘The Atlantic Slave Trade,’ Cambridge University Press, 1999, p.76-7.
2. Edgar J. McManus, ‘A History of Negro Slavery in New York, Syracuse University Press,’ 1966, p.23.
3. ibid., p.105-6.
4. ibid., p.124.
5. William J. Allinson, ‘Memoir of Quamino Buccau, A Pious Methodist,’ Philadelphia: Henry Longstreth, 1851, p.4.
Source: Source: Condensed from - http://www.slavenorth.com. By Douglas Harper/historian, author, journalist and lecturer based in Lancaster, Pa.
Photo: Slave being burned at the stake in 1741. The New York Public Library, Picture Collection.
THE DEATH OF ROBERT E LEE
"On a quiet autumn morning, in the land which he loved so well and served so faithfully, the spirit of Robert Edward Lee left the clay which it had so much ennobled and traveled out of this world into the great and mysterious land. Here in the North, forgetting that the time was when the sword of Robert Edward Lee was drawn against us—forgetting and forgiving all the years of bloodshed and agony—we have long since ceased to look upon him as the Confederate leader, but have claimed him as one of ourselves; have cherished and felt proud of his military genius; have recounted and recorded his triumphs as our own; have extolled his virtue as reflecting upon us—for Robert Edward Lee was an American, and the great nation which gave him birth would be today unworthy of such a son if she regarded him lightly.
“Never had mother a nobler son. In him the military genius of America was developed to a greater extent than ever before. In him all that was pure and lofty in mind and purpose found lodgment. Dignified without presumption, affable without familiarity, he united all those charms of manners which made him the idol of his friends and of his soldiers and won for him the respect and admiration of the world. Even as in the days of triumph, glory did not intoxicate, so, when the dark clouds swept over him, adversity did not depress."
New York Herald, in the death of Gen Robert E Lee, October 12, 1870
"On a quiet autumn morning, in the land which he loved so well and served so faithfully, the spirit of Robert Edward Lee left the clay which it had so much ennobled and traveled out of this world into the great and mysterious land. Here in the North, forgetting that the time was when the sword of Robert Edward Lee was drawn against us—forgetting and forgiving all the years of bloodshed and agony—we have long since ceased to look upon him as the Confederate leader, but have claimed him as one of ourselves; have cherished and felt proud of his military genius; have recounted and recorded his triumphs as our own; have extolled his virtue as reflecting upon us—for Robert Edward Lee was an American, and the great nation which gave him birth would be today unworthy of such a son if she regarded him lightly.
“Never had mother a nobler son. In him the military genius of America was developed to a greater extent than ever before. In him all that was pure and lofty in mind and purpose found lodgment. Dignified without presumption, affable without familiarity, he united all those charms of manners which made him the idol of his friends and of his soldiers and won for him the respect and admiration of the world. Even as in the days of triumph, glory did not intoxicate, so, when the dark clouds swept over him, adversity did not depress."
New York Herald, in the death of Gen Robert E Lee, October 12, 1870
THE MURDER OF CONFEDERATES IN PRISON CAMPS
When someone mentions "Civil War Prison Camp" you immediately think Andersonville....because that's what government schooling and northern historians have trained you to think that.
The Chief Surgeon of Camp Elmira NY was overheard to boast, before resigning to avoid court martial, he had killed more rebels than any Union soldier. Even more cruel conditions existed in the prison at Camp Douglas in Chicago.
There were 3,866 more Confederate soldiers who died in Union prisons than Union soldiers in Confederate prisons.
The South was unable to feed it’s own Army; the North had abundant supplies and simply allowed Southern POWs to starve.
Defending the Heritage by Roberts Apple downloads
When someone mentions "Civil War Prison Camp" you immediately think Andersonville....because that's what government schooling and northern historians have trained you to think that.
The Chief Surgeon of Camp Elmira NY was overheard to boast, before resigning to avoid court martial, he had killed more rebels than any Union soldier. Even more cruel conditions existed in the prison at Camp Douglas in Chicago.
There were 3,866 more Confederate soldiers who died in Union prisons than Union soldiers in Confederate prisons.
The South was unable to feed it’s own Army; the North had abundant supplies and simply allowed Southern POWs to starve.
Defending the Heritage by Roberts Apple downloads
CONFEDERATE SOLDIERS WERE PATRIOTS
Next time someone calls your Confederate Ancestors traitors you may ask them to contemplate…
That many Southerners; most of whom never owned any slaves saw self-righteous New England Puritans as the Taliban, radical religious fanatics of their time. It was the Yankee intention to force its will and ideology on the people of the South, an idea independent Southerners fiercely rejected.
The overwhelming majority of New Englanders had NO problem with slavery; in fact slavery began in the New England states and its citizens made fortunes from the slave trade and it continued to profit from slavery right up to and throughout the war.
Like todays Taliban, New England Yankees were prepared to kill every man, woman and child in order to impose their philosophy and in the process rape, burn, loot and torture its way through the Southland. Northern media and the likes of General Sherman are documented as saying such and this government endorsed, scorched earth policy continued with near perfection after the war with the near extermination of the American Indians.
That said, fast-forward 150 years and imagine a Taliban style regime now dominating the Congress having been elected by less than 40% of the popular vote and presently threatening to invade your homes and impose its will on your people. Considering today’s political climate, that’s not so far-fetched, it’s happened already and history often repeats itself. Would today’s population submit to that form of rule or would it rebel and form a new government, one having the consent of the people as stated by our Declaration of Independence?
In this new scenario, should the Taliban win, all who oppose it would be called traitors…and guess who writes the history after that! Good becomes evil, right becomes wrong just like the War for Southern Independence. Deo Vindice!
Defending the Heritage: Roberts
Next time someone calls your Confederate Ancestors traitors you may ask them to contemplate…
That many Southerners; most of whom never owned any slaves saw self-righteous New England Puritans as the Taliban, radical religious fanatics of their time. It was the Yankee intention to force its will and ideology on the people of the South, an idea independent Southerners fiercely rejected.
The overwhelming majority of New Englanders had NO problem with slavery; in fact slavery began in the New England states and its citizens made fortunes from the slave trade and it continued to profit from slavery right up to and throughout the war.
Like todays Taliban, New England Yankees were prepared to kill every man, woman and child in order to impose their philosophy and in the process rape, burn, loot and torture its way through the Southland. Northern media and the likes of General Sherman are documented as saying such and this government endorsed, scorched earth policy continued with near perfection after the war with the near extermination of the American Indians.
That said, fast-forward 150 years and imagine a Taliban style regime now dominating the Congress having been elected by less than 40% of the popular vote and presently threatening to invade your homes and impose its will on your people. Considering today’s political climate, that’s not so far-fetched, it’s happened already and history often repeats itself. Would today’s population submit to that form of rule or would it rebel and form a new government, one having the consent of the people as stated by our Declaration of Independence?
In this new scenario, should the Taliban win, all who oppose it would be called traitors…and guess who writes the history after that! Good becomes evil, right becomes wrong just like the War for Southern Independence. Deo Vindice!
Defending the Heritage: Roberts
MORE ON DEVIL SHERMAN AND HIS TROOPS
JUST WHY ARE SOME BLACKS SO ENAMORED WITH THEIR ALLEGED LIBERATORS…
Sherman personally saw his men rape and murder unyielding slaves throughout the march and gave no order to stop...
"General Howard, Freedmen's Bureau, estimated that 25% of African-Am lost their lives by the war. [But] Ransom/Sutch estimated that 1.6% of African-Am died as a direct result of the war. [based on the 3.5M blacks in the CSA, this would come to around 56,000 civilian (black) deaths. Howard's est. would be 875,000 d.]"
In testimony given before Congress, Judge Sharkey described the devastating impact which the "armies of freedom" and the "great emancipator" had upon the black race:
"I believe that there are now in my State very little over half the number of freedmen that were formerly slaves, certainly not more than two-thirds. They have died off. There is no telling the mortality that has prevailed among them; they have died off in immense numbers." Before the Joint House and Senate Committee of Fifteen, 39th Congress, in the spring of 1866, reprinted in Hans. I., Trefousse (ed.), Background for Radical Reconstruction, Little, Brown, & Co., Boston, 1970, pp. 27-29.
Miss had 436,000 slaves in 1860, if Sharkey was right, that’s 130,000 Negro civilian deaths in Miss alone.
J R Graham when looking at the issue of Negro civilian deaths came to 400,000 from death and starvation.
JUST WHY ARE SOME BLACKS SO ENAMORED WITH THEIR ALLEGED LIBERATORS…
Sherman personally saw his men rape and murder unyielding slaves throughout the march and gave no order to stop...
"General Howard, Freedmen's Bureau, estimated that 25% of African-Am lost their lives by the war. [But] Ransom/Sutch estimated that 1.6% of African-Am died as a direct result of the war. [based on the 3.5M blacks in the CSA, this would come to around 56,000 civilian (black) deaths. Howard's est. would be 875,000 d.]"
In testimony given before Congress, Judge Sharkey described the devastating impact which the "armies of freedom" and the "great emancipator" had upon the black race:
"I believe that there are now in my State very little over half the number of freedmen that were formerly slaves, certainly not more than two-thirds. They have died off. There is no telling the mortality that has prevailed among them; they have died off in immense numbers." Before the Joint House and Senate Committee of Fifteen, 39th Congress, in the spring of 1866, reprinted in Hans. I., Trefousse (ed.), Background for Radical Reconstruction, Little, Brown, & Co., Boston, 1970, pp. 27-29.
Miss had 436,000 slaves in 1860, if Sharkey was right, that’s 130,000 Negro civilian deaths in Miss alone.
J R Graham when looking at the issue of Negro civilian deaths came to 400,000 from death and starvation.
CONFEDERATE MOTHER GIVES GENERAL MCCLELLAN FAIR WARNING…
General George McClellan writes about his encounter with a Southern lady during the Peninsula Campaign as following:
“I visited one of the dwelling-houses just outside the fortifications (if the insignificant rifle-pits could be called such) for the purpose of obtaining something more palatable than hard-tack, salt beef, or pork, which, with coffee, comprised the marching rations.
“The woman of the house was communicative, and expressed her surprise at the great number of Yanks who had ‘come down to invade our soil.’ She said she had a son in the Confederate army, or, as she expressed it, ‘in our army,’ and then tearfully said she should tremble for her boy every time she heard of a battle. I expressed the opinion that we should go into Richmond without much fighting. ‘No!’ said she, with the emphasis of conviction, ‘you all will drink hot blood before you all get thar!’”
Source: BATTLES AND LEADERS OF THE CIVIL WAR, VOLUME TWO
General George McClellan writes about his encounter with a Southern lady during the Peninsula Campaign as following:
“I visited one of the dwelling-houses just outside the fortifications (if the insignificant rifle-pits could be called such) for the purpose of obtaining something more palatable than hard-tack, salt beef, or pork, which, with coffee, comprised the marching rations.
“The woman of the house was communicative, and expressed her surprise at the great number of Yanks who had ‘come down to invade our soil.’ She said she had a son in the Confederate army, or, as she expressed it, ‘in our army,’ and then tearfully said she should tremble for her boy every time she heard of a battle. I expressed the opinion that we should go into Richmond without much fighting. ‘No!’ said she, with the emphasis of conviction, ‘you all will drink hot blood before you all get thar!’”
Source: BATTLES AND LEADERS OF THE CIVIL WAR, VOLUME TWO
SOME UNDENIABLE TRUTHS….
In the late nineteenth century Bill Arp's weekly column in the “Atlanta Constitution,” syndicated to hundreds of newspapers, made him the South's most popular writer. Others surpassed him in literary quality, but in numbers of regular readers, no one exceeded Bill Arp. Here is yet one more commentary made by a man who lived during this time in history that illustrates the North’s involvement in the slavery issue and lack of accepting responsibility…
The South takes the position that if slavery is sinful, the North is not responsible for that sin; that it is a state institution, and that to interfere with slavery in the states in any way, even by censure, is a violation of the rights of the states. The language of our politicians is, upon us and our children rest the evil! We are willing to take the responsibility, and to risk the penalty! You will find evil and misery enough in the North to excite your philanthropy and employ your beneficence.
You have purchased our cotton; you have used our sugar; you have eaten our rice; you have smoked and chewed our tobacco --all of which are the products of slave labor. You have grown rich by traffic in these articles; you have monopolized the carrying trade and borne our slave-produced products to your shores. Your northern ships, manned by northern men, brought from Africa the greater part of the slaves which came to our continent, and they are still smuggling them in. When, finding slavery unprofitable, the northern states passed laws for gradual emancipation, but few obtained their freedom, the majority of them being shipped South and sold, so that but few, comparatively, were manumitted. If the slave trade and slavery are great sins, the North is particeps criminis, and has been from the beginning. Bill Arp, 1902
Source: THE UNCIVIL WAR by Bill Arp, 1902.
In the late nineteenth century Bill Arp's weekly column in the “Atlanta Constitution,” syndicated to hundreds of newspapers, made him the South's most popular writer. Others surpassed him in literary quality, but in numbers of regular readers, no one exceeded Bill Arp. Here is yet one more commentary made by a man who lived during this time in history that illustrates the North’s involvement in the slavery issue and lack of accepting responsibility…
The South takes the position that if slavery is sinful, the North is not responsible for that sin; that it is a state institution, and that to interfere with slavery in the states in any way, even by censure, is a violation of the rights of the states. The language of our politicians is, upon us and our children rest the evil! We are willing to take the responsibility, and to risk the penalty! You will find evil and misery enough in the North to excite your philanthropy and employ your beneficence.
You have purchased our cotton; you have used our sugar; you have eaten our rice; you have smoked and chewed our tobacco --all of which are the products of slave labor. You have grown rich by traffic in these articles; you have monopolized the carrying trade and borne our slave-produced products to your shores. Your northern ships, manned by northern men, brought from Africa the greater part of the slaves which came to our continent, and they are still smuggling them in. When, finding slavery unprofitable, the northern states passed laws for gradual emancipation, but few obtained their freedom, the majority of them being shipped South and sold, so that but few, comparatively, were manumitted. If the slave trade and slavery are great sins, the North is particeps criminis, and has been from the beginning. Bill Arp, 1902
Source: THE UNCIVIL WAR by Bill Arp, 1902.
TODAY IN SOUTHERN HISTORY
February 22nd marks the 158th anniversary of the establishment of the permanent Government of the Confederate States of America. This day was deliberately chosen as the birthday of the new "republic of republics," for it was also the birthday of the illustrious Virginian, George Washington.
President Jefferson Davis said, "We have changed the constituent parts, but not the system of our Government. The Constitution formed by our fathers is that of these Confederate States, in their exposition of it, and in the judicial construction it has received, we have a light which reveals its true meaning."
Carefully avoiding the ambiguities of the U.S. Constitution which had allowed for the growth of a sectional party in the North, the preamble of the C.S. Constitution clearly stated from whence political power in the new Confederacy was drawn and for what purpose it was formed: "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."
February 22nd marks the 158th anniversary of the establishment of the permanent Government of the Confederate States of America. This day was deliberately chosen as the birthday of the new "republic of republics," for it was also the birthday of the illustrious Virginian, George Washington.
President Jefferson Davis said, "We have changed the constituent parts, but not the system of our Government. The Constitution formed by our fathers is that of these Confederate States, in their exposition of it, and in the judicial construction it has received, we have a light which reveals its true meaning."
Carefully avoiding the ambiguities of the U.S. Constitution which had allowed for the growth of a sectional party in the North, the preamble of the C.S. Constitution clearly stated from whence political power in the new Confederacy was drawn and for what purpose it was formed: "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."
CIVILIAN CASUALTIES IN THE NORTH AT THE HANDS OF THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT
The first civilian casualties of 16 killed and several dozen wounded occurred in Maryland when a Baltimore mob attacked a Massachusetts regiment on its way to protect Washington in April 1861.
Another 1000 were killed in the New York draft riots of 1863 when the US Government used infantry and artillery against its own citizens.
Lincoln issued a proclamation extending martial law to those who opposed conscription. The number of arrests under this order during the war was several thousand. One can only speculate as to how many of these as well as political prisoners died while in confinement in Northern prisons during the suspension of Habeas Corpus.
Source: Defending the Heritage
The first civilian casualties of 16 killed and several dozen wounded occurred in Maryland when a Baltimore mob attacked a Massachusetts regiment on its way to protect Washington in April 1861.
Another 1000 were killed in the New York draft riots of 1863 when the US Government used infantry and artillery against its own citizens.
Lincoln issued a proclamation extending martial law to those who opposed conscription. The number of arrests under this order during the war was several thousand. One can only speculate as to how many of these as well as political prisoners died while in confinement in Northern prisons during the suspension of Habeas Corpus.
Source: Defending the Heritage
ROBERT E. LEE WAS "RIGHT"
“The consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it.” Robert E. Lee
The greatest transformation after the War for Southern Independence involved the growing power of the central government.
The federal government which was previously invisible except for the post office, now has its fingers in virtually every aspect of American life due in no small part to the end of States Rights. The leviathan of government is almost daily stripping Americans of previously held sacred rights, proving again…THE SOUTH WAS RIGHT!
Source: Defending the Heritage
“The consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of that ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it.” Robert E. Lee
The greatest transformation after the War for Southern Independence involved the growing power of the central government.
The federal government which was previously invisible except for the post office, now has its fingers in virtually every aspect of American life due in no small part to the end of States Rights. The leviathan of government is almost daily stripping Americans of previously held sacred rights, proving again…THE SOUTH WAS RIGHT!
Source: Defending the Heritage
SARAH MORGAN DAWSON
Sarah Morgan Dawson was born on 2/28/42 in Louisiana. She is known for the diary she kept during the War Between the States. From March 1862 until April 1865, Dawson recorded her thoughts and experiences, providing one of the most detailed accounts of civilian life in wartime Barton Rouge, Louisiana.
Here is a quote from the diary of this determined Southern Belle that shows what Southern ladies are made of…
“This is a dreadful war to make even the hearts of women so bitter! I hardly know myself these few weeks. I, who have such a horror of bloodshed, consider even killing in self-defense murder, who cannot wish [Yankees] the slightest evil, whose only prayer is to have them sent back in peace to their own country - I talk of killing them!”
Source: “A Confederate Girl’s Diary” by Sarah Morgan Dawson, published 1913.
Link to free e-book: http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/dawson/dawson.html
Sarah Morgan Dawson was born on 2/28/42 in Louisiana. She is known for the diary she kept during the War Between the States. From March 1862 until April 1865, Dawson recorded her thoughts and experiences, providing one of the most detailed accounts of civilian life in wartime Barton Rouge, Louisiana.
Here is a quote from the diary of this determined Southern Belle that shows what Southern ladies are made of…
“This is a dreadful war to make even the hearts of women so bitter! I hardly know myself these few weeks. I, who have such a horror of bloodshed, consider even killing in self-defense murder, who cannot wish [Yankees] the slightest evil, whose only prayer is to have them sent back in peace to their own country - I talk of killing them!”
Source: “A Confederate Girl’s Diary” by Sarah Morgan Dawson, published 1913.
Link to free e-book: http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/dawson/dawson.html
SOME SOUTHERN HISTORY
In July 1864, in an effort to cause the Union to pull troops away from the siege of Petersburg, General Robert E. Lee ordered General Jubal Early to initiate an attack against Washington DC. In conjunction with this action, Colonel John Singleton Mosby (the Grey Ghost) was sent to disrupt communications between Washington and Harpers Ferry, WV.
On July 4-5, Mosby attacked the Union base across the river at Point of Rocks, Maryland. They also cut all of the telegraph wires between Washington and Harpers Ferry and captured a number of Union wagons full of supplies.
On the evening of the 5th, Mosby ate dinner at Temple Hall Farm in northern Loudoun County, Virginia, a place of divided loyalties. Elizabeth White was the wife of Confederate Cavalry officer Elijah White of the 35th Battalion of the Virginia Cavalry. She had been living with her neighbors the Balls at Temple Hall, but she was not present at dinner that evening.
Early that morning of July 5, 1864, White, Kate and Betsie Ball of Temple Hall Farm and their friend Annie Hempstone had embarked on a daring mission. to retrieve desperately needed boots and clothing for soldiers of the 35th Battalion who had family in Maryland. The decision by these young women to risk charges of treason by crossing the Potomac River into Union territory to obtain supplies illustrates the increasing desperation in the Confederacy.
While guns blazed a short distance up the Potomac River at Point of Rocks on the morning of July 5, 1864, Elizabeth White and her friends crossed the Potomac River at White's Ford. Once in Montgomery County, Maryland, the four friends hurried to find the family members who were holding the supplies for Confederate soldiers.
The next morning, the women came back to the ford to cross the river and return to Virginia. They had tied the boots and clothing they collected to the frames of their hoop skirts. At the ford, they discovered that Union soldiers were guarding the river crossing. The women quickly retreated to the home of Elizabeth White's mother, where they hid their clandestine goods.
The four women were arrested as spies and transported to the Old Capitol Prison in Washington, DC. Though Union officials knew the women were Confederate sympathizers, they could find no evidence to support a charge of spying. The women repeatedly stated that their trip to Montgomery County, Maryland was for pleasure alone, and Union officials released them three weeks later.
Somehow escaping detection, Elizabeth White and her comrades promptly returned to the house of White's mother in Dickerson, Maryland and retrieved their concealed items. The return river crossing was precarious simply because of the weight of the items concealed in the folds of the women's skirts but went off without a hitch.
Colonel White distributed the boots and clothing to his grateful cavalrymen. Elizabeth White, Annie Hempstone, and Kate and Betsie Ball had taken great risks to retrieve these supplies and had demonstrated their willingness to expose themselves to great danger to support their soldiers.- Virginia Division UDC
In July 1864, in an effort to cause the Union to pull troops away from the siege of Petersburg, General Robert E. Lee ordered General Jubal Early to initiate an attack against Washington DC. In conjunction with this action, Colonel John Singleton Mosby (the Grey Ghost) was sent to disrupt communications between Washington and Harpers Ferry, WV.
On July 4-5, Mosby attacked the Union base across the river at Point of Rocks, Maryland. They also cut all of the telegraph wires between Washington and Harpers Ferry and captured a number of Union wagons full of supplies.
On the evening of the 5th, Mosby ate dinner at Temple Hall Farm in northern Loudoun County, Virginia, a place of divided loyalties. Elizabeth White was the wife of Confederate Cavalry officer Elijah White of the 35th Battalion of the Virginia Cavalry. She had been living with her neighbors the Balls at Temple Hall, but she was not present at dinner that evening.
Early that morning of July 5, 1864, White, Kate and Betsie Ball of Temple Hall Farm and their friend Annie Hempstone had embarked on a daring mission. to retrieve desperately needed boots and clothing for soldiers of the 35th Battalion who had family in Maryland. The decision by these young women to risk charges of treason by crossing the Potomac River into Union territory to obtain supplies illustrates the increasing desperation in the Confederacy.
While guns blazed a short distance up the Potomac River at Point of Rocks on the morning of July 5, 1864, Elizabeth White and her friends crossed the Potomac River at White's Ford. Once in Montgomery County, Maryland, the four friends hurried to find the family members who were holding the supplies for Confederate soldiers.
The next morning, the women came back to the ford to cross the river and return to Virginia. They had tied the boots and clothing they collected to the frames of their hoop skirts. At the ford, they discovered that Union soldiers were guarding the river crossing. The women quickly retreated to the home of Elizabeth White's mother, where they hid their clandestine goods.
The four women were arrested as spies and transported to the Old Capitol Prison in Washington, DC. Though Union officials knew the women were Confederate sympathizers, they could find no evidence to support a charge of spying. The women repeatedly stated that their trip to Montgomery County, Maryland was for pleasure alone, and Union officials released them three weeks later.
Somehow escaping detection, Elizabeth White and her comrades promptly returned to the house of White's mother in Dickerson, Maryland and retrieved their concealed items. The return river crossing was precarious simply because of the weight of the items concealed in the folds of the women's skirts but went off without a hitch.
Colonel White distributed the boots and clothing to his grateful cavalrymen. Elizabeth White, Annie Hempstone, and Kate and Betsie Ball had taken great risks to retrieve these supplies and had demonstrated their willingness to expose themselves to great danger to support their soldiers.- Virginia Division UDC
WOMEN OF THE CONFEDERACY
Nancy Hart lived in Nicholas County, then in Virginia and now part of West Virginia. She joined the Moccasin Rangers and served as a spy, reporting on federal troop activity in her home's vicinity and leading rebel raiders to their position. She was said to have led a raid on Summersville in July 1861, at age 18. Captured by a band of Union soldiers, she tricked one of her captors and used his own gun to kill him, then escaped. After the war she married Joshua Douglas.- United Daughters of the Confederacy Archives
Nancy Hart lived in Nicholas County, then in Virginia and now part of West Virginia. She joined the Moccasin Rangers and served as a spy, reporting on federal troop activity in her home's vicinity and leading rebel raiders to their position. She was said to have led a raid on Summersville in July 1861, at age 18. Captured by a band of Union soldiers, she tricked one of her captors and used his own gun to kill him, then escaped. After the war she married Joshua Douglas.- United Daughters of the Confederacy Archives
DEFENDING THE HERITAGE
April is Confederate History and Heritage Month in the Old Dominion, as well as in many states across the South. As part of the celebration, here are some frequent Q&A's:
1. Was secession the cause of the war?
No. Secession is a mere civil process having no necessary connection with war. Norway seceded from Sweden, and there was no war. The attempted linking of slavery and secession with war is merely an effort to obscure the issue - "a red herring drawn across the trail." Secession was based (1) upon the natural right of self-government, (2) upon the reservation to the States in the Constitution of all powers not expressly granted to the Federal government. Secession was such a power, being expressly excepted in the ratifications of the Constitution by Virginia, Rhode Island, and New York. (3) Upon the right of the principal to recall the powers vested in the agent; and upon (4) the inherent nature of all partnerships, which carries with them the right of withdrawal. The States were partners in the Union, and no partnership is irrevocable. The "more perfect Union" spoken of in the Preamble to the Constitution was the expression merely of a hope and wish. No rights of sovereignty whatever could exist without the right of secession.
2. What then was the cause of the war?
The cause of the war was (1) the rejection of the right of peaceable secession of eleven sovereign States by Lincoln, and (2) the denial of self-government to 8,000,000 of people, occupying a territory half the size of Europe. Fitness is necessary for the assertion of the right, and Lincoln himself said of these people that they possessed as much moral sense and as much devotion to law and order as "any other civilized and patriotic people." Without consulting Congress, Lincoln sent great armies to the South, and it was the war of a president elected by a minority of the people of the North. In the great World War Woodrow Wilson declared that "No people must be forced under sovereignty under which it does not choose to live." When in 1903 Panama seceded from Colombia, the United States sided with Panama against Colombia, thereby encouraging secession.
Defending the Heritage
April is Confederate History and Heritage Month in the Old Dominion, as well as in many states across the South. As part of the celebration, here are some frequent Q&A's:
1. Was secession the cause of the war?
No. Secession is a mere civil process having no necessary connection with war. Norway seceded from Sweden, and there was no war. The attempted linking of slavery and secession with war is merely an effort to obscure the issue - "a red herring drawn across the trail." Secession was based (1) upon the natural right of self-government, (2) upon the reservation to the States in the Constitution of all powers not expressly granted to the Federal government. Secession was such a power, being expressly excepted in the ratifications of the Constitution by Virginia, Rhode Island, and New York. (3) Upon the right of the principal to recall the powers vested in the agent; and upon (4) the inherent nature of all partnerships, which carries with them the right of withdrawal. The States were partners in the Union, and no partnership is irrevocable. The "more perfect Union" spoken of in the Preamble to the Constitution was the expression merely of a hope and wish. No rights of sovereignty whatever could exist without the right of secession.
2. What then was the cause of the war?
The cause of the war was (1) the rejection of the right of peaceable secession of eleven sovereign States by Lincoln, and (2) the denial of self-government to 8,000,000 of people, occupying a territory half the size of Europe. Fitness is necessary for the assertion of the right, and Lincoln himself said of these people that they possessed as much moral sense and as much devotion to law and order as "any other civilized and patriotic people." Without consulting Congress, Lincoln sent great armies to the South, and it was the war of a president elected by a minority of the people of the North. In the great World War Woodrow Wilson declared that "No people must be forced under sovereignty under which it does not choose to live." When in 1903 Panama seceded from Colombia, the United States sided with Panama against Colombia, thereby encouraging secession.
Defending the Heritage
A WORD ON ROBERT E. Lee
“He possessed every virtue of other great commanders without their vices. He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring.
He was a public officer without vices; a private citizen without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy and a man without guile. He was a Caesar without his ambition; Frederick without his tyranny; Napoleon without his selfishness, and Washington without his reward.
He was obedient to authority as a servant, and loyal in authority as a true king. He was gentle as a woman in life; modest and pure as a virgin in thought; watchful as a Roman vital in duty; submissive to law as Socrates, and grand in battle as Achilles!” ....Georgia Senator Benjamin Harvey Hill, 1874.
“He possessed every virtue of other great commanders without their vices. He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring.
He was a public officer without vices; a private citizen without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy and a man without guile. He was a Caesar without his ambition; Frederick without his tyranny; Napoleon without his selfishness, and Washington without his reward.
He was obedient to authority as a servant, and loyal in authority as a true king. He was gentle as a woman in life; modest and pure as a virgin in thought; watchful as a Roman vital in duty; submissive to law as Socrates, and grand in battle as Achilles!” ....Georgia Senator Benjamin Harvey Hill, 1874.
THE INFAMOUS SOUTHERN BELL...BELLE BOYD
Only 17 years old when the Civil War began, by early 1862 Belle Boyd of Martinsburg (now West Virginia) and her activities were well known to the Union Army and the press, who dubbed her La Belle Rebelle. While visiting relatives whose home in Front Royal, Virginia was being used as a Union headquarters, Boyd learned that Union General Nathaniel Banks' forces had been ordered to march.
She rode fifteen miles to inform Confederate General Stonewall Jackson who was nearby in the Shenandoah Valley. She returned home under cover of darkness. Several weeks later, on May 23, 1862, when she realized Jackson was about to attack Front Royal, she ran onto the battlefield to provide the General with last minute information about the Union troop dispositions. Jackson captured the town and acknowledged her contribution and her bravery in a personal note.
Boyd was arrested several times, but managed to avoid incarceration until July 29, 1862, when she was imprisoned in Old Capitol Prison in Washington, DC, but was released after a month. She was arrested again in July 1863, after which she devised a unique method of communicating with her supporters outside. They shot rubber balls into her cell with a bow and arrow; she then enclosed messages inside the balls and threw them back.
In December 1863 Boyd was released and banished to the South. She sailed for England on May 8, 1864, but was arrested again as a Confederate courier. She finally escaped to Canada with the help of a Union naval officer, Lieutenant Sam Hardinge, and eventually made her way to England where she and Hardinge were married. Boyd later wrote of her wartime activities, "I allowed but one thought to keep possession of my mind - the thought that I was doing all a woman could do for her country's cause."
Only 17 years old when the Civil War began, by early 1862 Belle Boyd of Martinsburg (now West Virginia) and her activities were well known to the Union Army and the press, who dubbed her La Belle Rebelle. While visiting relatives whose home in Front Royal, Virginia was being used as a Union headquarters, Boyd learned that Union General Nathaniel Banks' forces had been ordered to march.
She rode fifteen miles to inform Confederate General Stonewall Jackson who was nearby in the Shenandoah Valley. She returned home under cover of darkness. Several weeks later, on May 23, 1862, when she realized Jackson was about to attack Front Royal, she ran onto the battlefield to provide the General with last minute information about the Union troop dispositions. Jackson captured the town and acknowledged her contribution and her bravery in a personal note.
Boyd was arrested several times, but managed to avoid incarceration until July 29, 1862, when she was imprisoned in Old Capitol Prison in Washington, DC, but was released after a month. She was arrested again in July 1863, after which she devised a unique method of communicating with her supporters outside. They shot rubber balls into her cell with a bow and arrow; she then enclosed messages inside the balls and threw them back.
In December 1863 Boyd was released and banished to the South. She sailed for England on May 8, 1864, but was arrested again as a Confederate courier. She finally escaped to Canada with the help of a Union naval officer, Lieutenant Sam Hardinge, and eventually made her way to England where she and Hardinge were married. Boyd later wrote of her wartime activities, "I allowed but one thought to keep possession of my mind - the thought that I was doing all a woman could do for her country's cause."
NEW ORLEANS DAILY CRESCENT, JANUARY 21, 1861:
“They (the South) know that it is their import trade that draws from the people's pockets sixty or seventy millions of dollars per annum, in the shape of duties, to be expended mainly in the North, and in the protection and encouragement of Northern interest... These are the reasons why these people do not wish the South to secede from the Union. They (the North) are enraged at the prospect of being despoiled of the rich feast upon which they have so long fed and fattened, and which they were just getting ready to enjoy with still greater gout and gusto. They are as mad as hornets because the prize slips them just as they are ready to grasp it." New Orleans Daily Crescent, January 21, 1861
N.C. Wyeth Civil War Notes
“They (the South) know that it is their import trade that draws from the people's pockets sixty or seventy millions of dollars per annum, in the shape of duties, to be expended mainly in the North, and in the protection and encouragement of Northern interest... These are the reasons why these people do not wish the South to secede from the Union. They (the North) are enraged at the prospect of being despoiled of the rich feast upon which they have so long fed and fattened, and which they were just getting ready to enjoy with still greater gout and gusto. They are as mad as hornets because the prize slips them just as they are ready to grasp it." New Orleans Daily Crescent, January 21, 1861
N.C. Wyeth Civil War Notes
SARAH MORGAN DAWSON
Sarah Morgan Dawson was born on 2/28/42 in Louisiana. She is known for the diary she kept during the War Between the States. From March 1862 until April 1865, Dawson recorded her thoughts and experiences, providing one of the most detailed accounts of civilian life in wartime Barton Rouge, Louisiana.
In April 1861, Sarah’s brother, Henry Waller Morgan, died in a duel. Later the same year, her father—who opposed secession, but supported his state once it seceded—died at home. When Dawson began her diary in January 1862, she was still mourning the loss of her kin in addition to the departure of her three remaining brothers into Confederate service.
In April 1862, Farragut captured New Orleans and by May, the Federal onslaught on Baton Rouge had begun. With her “running bag” packed and her personal papers piled on her bed ready to burn, Dawson used her diary to record a warning to any Federal soldier who attempted to “Butlerize—or brutalize” her in the attack.
Here are several of quotes from the diary of this determined Southern Belle that shows what Southern ladies are made of…
April 26, 1862:
And if you Yankees want to know what an excited girl can do, just call and let me show you the use of the small seven-shooter and a large carving knife which vibrate between my belt and my pocket. Always ready for emergencies.
May 9, 1862:
This is a dreadful war to make even the hearts of women so bitter! I hardly know myself these few weeks. I, who have such a horror of bloodshed, consider even killing in self-defense murder, who cannot wish [Yankees] the slightest evil, whose only prayer is to have them sent back in peace to their own country - I talk of killing them!
May 9, 1862:
“All devices signs and flags of the Confederacy shall be suppressed,” so says Picayune Butler (word used then in LA. that meant trivial). Good! I devoted all my red, white, and blue silk to the manufacture of Confederate flags. As soon as one is confiscated, I make another until my ribbon is exhausted, when I will sport a duster emblazoned in high colors, “Hurrah! For the Bonny Blue Flag!” Henceforth, I wear one pinned to my bosom - not a duster, but a little flag. The man who says, take it off will have to pull it off himself. The man who dares attempt it –well! A pistol in my pocket fills up the gap. I am capable, too.
May 10, 1862:
Does it take thirty thousand men and one million of dollars to murder defenseless women and children? O great nation! Bravo!
May 31, 1862
So ended the momentous shelling of Baton Rouge, during which the valiant Farragut killed one woman, wounded three, struck some twenty houses several times apiece and indirectly caused the death of two little children who were drowned in their flight… Hurrah for the illustrious Farragut, the Woman Killer!!!
Date not indicated:
The North cannot subdue us. We are too determined to be free… If by power of overwhelming numbers they conquer us, it will be a barren victory over a desolate land.
Source: “A Confederate Girl’s Diary” by Sarah Morgan Dawson, published 1913.
Sarah Morgan Dawson was born on 2/28/42 in Louisiana. She is known for the diary she kept during the War Between the States. From March 1862 until April 1865, Dawson recorded her thoughts and experiences, providing one of the most detailed accounts of civilian life in wartime Barton Rouge, Louisiana.
In April 1861, Sarah’s brother, Henry Waller Morgan, died in a duel. Later the same year, her father—who opposed secession, but supported his state once it seceded—died at home. When Dawson began her diary in January 1862, she was still mourning the loss of her kin in addition to the departure of her three remaining brothers into Confederate service.
In April 1862, Farragut captured New Orleans and by May, the Federal onslaught on Baton Rouge had begun. With her “running bag” packed and her personal papers piled on her bed ready to burn, Dawson used her diary to record a warning to any Federal soldier who attempted to “Butlerize—or brutalize” her in the attack.
Here are several of quotes from the diary of this determined Southern Belle that shows what Southern ladies are made of…
April 26, 1862:
And if you Yankees want to know what an excited girl can do, just call and let me show you the use of the small seven-shooter and a large carving knife which vibrate between my belt and my pocket. Always ready for emergencies.
May 9, 1862:
This is a dreadful war to make even the hearts of women so bitter! I hardly know myself these few weeks. I, who have such a horror of bloodshed, consider even killing in self-defense murder, who cannot wish [Yankees] the slightest evil, whose only prayer is to have them sent back in peace to their own country - I talk of killing them!
May 9, 1862:
“All devices signs and flags of the Confederacy shall be suppressed,” so says Picayune Butler (word used then in LA. that meant trivial). Good! I devoted all my red, white, and blue silk to the manufacture of Confederate flags. As soon as one is confiscated, I make another until my ribbon is exhausted, when I will sport a duster emblazoned in high colors, “Hurrah! For the Bonny Blue Flag!” Henceforth, I wear one pinned to my bosom - not a duster, but a little flag. The man who says, take it off will have to pull it off himself. The man who dares attempt it –well! A pistol in my pocket fills up the gap. I am capable, too.
May 10, 1862:
Does it take thirty thousand men and one million of dollars to murder defenseless women and children? O great nation! Bravo!
May 31, 1862
So ended the momentous shelling of Baton Rouge, during which the valiant Farragut killed one woman, wounded three, struck some twenty houses several times apiece and indirectly caused the death of two little children who were drowned in their flight… Hurrah for the illustrious Farragut, the Woman Killer!!!
Date not indicated:
The North cannot subdue us. We are too determined to be free… If by power of overwhelming numbers they conquer us, it will be a barren victory over a desolate land.
Source: “A Confederate Girl’s Diary” by Sarah Morgan Dawson, published 1913.
THE OFFICIAL BIG LIE…
In December of 1860 and January of 1861, many newspapers across the North and Midwest simply wanted to “let the South go in peace.” But the bankers, railroads and shippers soon informed the press of the financial implications of Southern independence.
The editorial tune changed dramatically in February and March of 1861 to “No, we must NOT let the South go,” and “what about our shipping?” and “what about our revenue?” As the New York Times noted on March 30th, “We were divided and confused until our pockets were touched.” [See Northern Editorials on Secession, Howard C. Perkins, ed., 1965]
The North prevented southern independence because it threatened their financial interests. The South wanted independence for its own best interests, in the tradition of the American Founders.
It sought peaceful separation, but fought in self-defense when invaded and blockaded.
The Official Big Lie (a war to end slavery) was created and maintained to obscure the overthrow of the Founding Principles, and the true motivations that resulted in tragic and unnecessary death on an epic scale.
From an article by Steve Scroggins
In December of 1860 and January of 1861, many newspapers across the North and Midwest simply wanted to “let the South go in peace.” But the bankers, railroads and shippers soon informed the press of the financial implications of Southern independence.
The editorial tune changed dramatically in February and March of 1861 to “No, we must NOT let the South go,” and “what about our shipping?” and “what about our revenue?” As the New York Times noted on March 30th, “We were divided and confused until our pockets were touched.” [See Northern Editorials on Secession, Howard C. Perkins, ed., 1965]
The North prevented southern independence because it threatened their financial interests. The South wanted independence for its own best interests, in the tradition of the American Founders.
It sought peaceful separation, but fought in self-defense when invaded and blockaded.
The Official Big Lie (a war to end slavery) was created and maintained to obscure the overthrow of the Founding Principles, and the true motivations that resulted in tragic and unnecessary death on an epic scale.
From an article by Steve Scroggins
ROBERT E. LEE: THE SOLDIER
“He [Lee] was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a soldier without cruelty; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring…a Christian without hypocrisy…He was a Caesar, without his ambition; Frederick, without his tyranny; Napoleon, without his selfishness, and Washington, without his reward.”[1] – Senator Benjamin Harvey Hill
As a commander who won victory after victory despite fighting against long odds, Robert E. Lee’s ability as a soldier is unquestionable. Lee’s talents were recognized before the war, during the war, and after the war, by all sorts of different people. Early in 1861, U.S. General-in-Chief and hero of the Mexican War, Winfield Scott, described Lee as “the very best soldier that I ever saw in the field.”[2] Ulysses S. Grant, Lee’s most successful opponent, described himself as “sad and depressed” when Lee surrendered, and said he could not rejoice “at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and so valiantly and had suffered so much for a cause.”[3] Teddy Roosevelt clearly admired Lee.[4] Woodrow Wilson praised the General.[5] So did Franklin Delano Roosevelt.[6] During his time as President of the United States, World War II hero Dwight D. Eisenhower took time out of his day to write a private letter defending Lee from a critic.[7] Winston Churchill is supposed to have remarked: “Lee was the noblest American who had ever lived and one of the greatest commanders known to the annals of war.”[8] Despite being an excellent soldier, Lee did not welcome the breakup of the Union, or of war, both of which he prayed God would prevent.[9] In later life, he denounced Bismarck’s invasion of France.[10]
It should come as no surprise that, as a devout Christian, Lee pursued excellence in all that he put his hand to, dedicating his works to the Lord He served, labouring as unto God and not unto men. Neither should it be a surprise that Lee’s devout Christianity shaped the way he fought the war. Lee practiced what is known as limited or just warfare. According to the theory of just warfare as advanced by St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, wars must meet two criteria.[11] First, a combatant must establish jus ad bellum, the right to go to war.[12] Second, combatants must practice jus in bello, right conduct in war. As a soldier and gentleman, Lee’s concern was jus in bello, which prohibits tactics malum in se (evil in themselves), such as rape, pillaging, weapons of mass destruction, etc. Additionally, waging war on civilians is prohibited and prisoners must be treated humanely and with respect.[13]
There is perhaps no better illustration of Lee’s dedication to just warfare than General Orders No. 73, which he issued to the Army of Northern Virginia during the Gettysburg campaign in 1863. The orders state, in part: “the duties expected of us by civilization and Christianity are not less obligatory in the country of the enemy than in our own.”[14] Lee went on to remind his troops that they should confine their war-making to “armed men,” rather than “the unarmed and defenceless.”[15] Doing harm to the civilian population or disturbing private property would be considered “barbarous” by the commanding general, and such actions could not be carried out before the eyes of an all-seeing God without “offending against Him to whom vengeance belongeth.”[16] Lee ordered that all requisitioned supplies would be paid for.[17] He also ordered that any soldier who “insulted a woman by word, look, or act, would be instantly shot.”[18] He explained his orders to General Isaac Trimble, saying: “I cannot hope that Heaven will prosper our cause when we are violating its laws. I shall, therefore, carry on the war in Pennsylvania without offending the sanctions of a high civilization and of Christianity.”[19] Interesting, isn’t it, how civilization and Christianity were inextricably linked in Lee’s mind?
It is worth noting that these orders were issued after Union commanders had begun practicing total war against the South. When the braggart General John Pope was given command of Union forces in central Virginia in mid-1862, he immediately issued orders allowing his troops to subsist off the land while paying only for goods taken from Union loyalists, required his cavalry to do away with their supply trains, and held local citizenry responsible for any actions taken by guerrillas against his troops.[20] Orders were also issued requiring all male noncombatants along the route of march to swear an oath of allegiance or be arrested and expelled from the region. If they returned, they would be treated as spies, and any man or woman who corresponded with anyone in the Confederate Army–even a mother writing to her son–would be subject to execution as a spy.[21] Lee was furious at what he considered mistreatment of civilians, labelling Pope a “miscreant” to be “suppressed.”[22] Pope’s conduct paled in comparison to that of Colonel John Basil Turchin, who marched his brigade into Athens, Alabama on 2 May, 1862 and promptly set his troops to work pillaging, plundering, destroying, raping and gang-raping. Some of the villainous scum frightened a pregnant townswoman so badly that she miscarried and died. Turchin was court-martialed and dismissed from the army.[23] Lincoln intervened, countermanded Turchin’s dismissal, and promoted him to Brigadier General; the U.S. Senate approved Turchin’s promotion on 17 July, 1862.[24] In spite of this, Lee told his troops, “we cannot take vengeance for the wrongs our people have suffered.”[25] This was a deeply personal injunction; the Army of Northern Virginia included 103 Virginia units and nineteen Alabama units at the time Gen. Orders 73 were issued.[26]
Targeting civilians was the surest way to incur Lee’s wrath. At 10:00 A.M. on 11 December 1862, over one-hundred Union artillery pieces began lobbing shells into the town of Fredericksburg, setting large portions of it ablaze. Hundreds of women and children poured out of the town, looking for shelter from the artillery and the bitter December weather. Lee furiously exclaimed: “These people delight to destroy the weak and those who can make no defense; it just suits them!”[27] It wasn’t just Federals who sparked Lee’s ire at Fredericksburg. While the General inspected the positioning of the army’s artillery on the morning of 11 December, he noticed one battery poorly placed and inquired who had put it there. “Colonel Chilton,” replied the battery commander. Lee grew angry at this; Chilton was a staff officer and had no right to order units about, especially if his busy-bodying acted to the detriment of the troops. Lee’s neck grew red and his head jerked, but with characteristic self-restraint, he limited himself to remarking: “Colonel Chilton takes a lot upon himself.”[28]
One of Lee’s greatest difficulties throughout the war was ensuring that his troops were led by competent officers. When the war began, there were comparatively few men with professional military education available, and such education didn’t necessarily guarantee competence. The harsh school of combat had a way of weeding out the bad commanders, whom Lee generally had transferred to administrative positions or quiet backwaters.[29] Unfortunately, the school of combat also had a way of killing off many of the best officers, and this attrition only got worse as the war dragged on. The longer the odds became and the more desperate the fighting grew, the more officers exposed themselves to rally their troops – and the more they got themselves killed in the process.[30] The loss of officers at Chancellorsville was ghastly, and Gettysburg was even worse.[31] During the summer of 1864, the Second Corps lost two of its three division commanders killed.[32] Sometimes military law, which required promotions be assigned by seniority, prevented Lee from promoting a brilliant officer because a mediocre man held seniority of commission. Lee did all that he could do, and worked with what he had when circumstances got in the way.[33]
When Lee corrected officers, he did so to instruct and educate, not to humiliate or shame, and his rebukes were so tactful and courteous as to be inoffensive.[34] Men of ability who survived the fighting were sure to receive praise in Lee’s reports, and possibly promotion as well. Failure to be mentioned in a report was all the censure Lee would officially register; sometimes he would praise an officer’s troops without praising the officer in question.[35] Officers who were trying their best but still having difficulty learning were sure to receive understanding treatment at his hands. When one of Lee’s corps commanders, A.P. Hill, wished to court-martial a brigadier for a mistake he had made, Lee thus admonished Little Powell:
“These men are not an army; they are citizens defending their country. General Wright is not a soldier; he’s a lawyer. I cannot do many things that I could do with a trained army…I have to make the best of what I have…if you humiliated General Wright, the people of Georgia would not understand. Besides, whom would you put in his place? You’ll have to do what I do: When a man makes a mistake, I call him to my tent, talk to him, and use the authority of my position to make him do the right thing the next time.”[36]
Lee despised cruelty, spite, greed, and selfishness, and in rebuking these he was uncharacteristically undiplomatic.[37] On one occasion an officer launched into a rant about Grant’s cavalry destroying the army’s supply depot. The officer was upset, not because the troops had lost hundreds of tons of rations, but because the Yankees had stolen his personal cow and he now had no milk for his coffee. This officer declared that: “If I were in command of this army, I would notify General Grant that… I should not give his prisoners whom we hold a morsel of food, and if he wanted to save them from starvation, he would have to send rations here to them!” General Lee’s reply was livid and instant: “The prisoners that we have here, General –––––, are my prisoners; they are not General Grant’s prisoners, and as long as I have any rations at all I shall divide them with my prisoners.”[38]
Lee viewed leadership as servanthood. He served his superiors, his subordinates, his State, his people, and God. He communicated with President Davis freely, openly, and almost daily. His candor was always mingled with humility and proper military deference to civilian authority. Davis responded with complete trust and generally gave Lee a free hand.[39] To his generals he was almost always courteous, as noted above. But it wasn’t just those of high rank to whom he was courteous. He was as flawlessly polite and kindly thoughtful to civilians and junior officers as he was to presidents and generals. A farmer who visited the camps walked over and addressed him as “colonel” because of his plain appearance. Lee chatted with him for a while before the farmer declared that he had come to meet General Lee and asked if it was possible. “I am General Lee,” Lee told him, “and I am most happy to have met you.”[40] An exhausted staff officer who reported to Lee and then flung himself on the ground to sleep awoke to find himself covered by Lee’s waterproof poncho.[41] A colonel who had lost his gauntlets was given a pair of Lee’s own.[42] Despite receiving multiple invitations to soirees and dinners during the march through Maryland in 1862, Lee attended only one. The affair in question was attended by a multitude of officers and one bashful-looking corporal whom the higher-ranking soldiers snubbed. Lee walked over to the corporal, placed a hand on his shoulder, and praised his unit’s courage and performance.[43] When the General’s aide, Walter Taylor, became frustrated and petulant because of Lee’s own shortness of temper, Lee did not shout at him or ruin his career. Instead, he simply looked Taylor in the eye and told him: “Colonel Taylor, when I lose my temper, don’t let it make you angry.”[44]
In addition to the love Lee displayed for his troops through his constant efforts to properly feed, clothe, and equip them, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of recorded personal encounters which demonstrated his humility and respect for every member of the army, regardless of his rank or station.[45] On one occasion, a private of the 16th N.C. Infantry saw Lee examining a distant position through his binoculars, walked up, and addressed the General. Lee asked him what he needed, and the man responded by saying that he was out of chewing tobacco. Could the General please spare him some? Lee did not partake, so he referred the soldier to a staff-member who happily obliged him.[46] One day, upon returning to his headquarters, Lee found a curious soldier poking his head into the General’s tent. Lee told him: “Walk in, Captain, I am glad to see you.” The soldier replied: “I ain’t no captain, General Lee. I’s jest a private in the Ninth Virginia Cavalry.” Lee kindly responded: “Well, come on in, sir. If you aren’t a captain, you ought to be.”[47] During the march into Maryland in 1862, Lee and Powell Hill came upon a group of soldiers lying in the road. Hill ordered them out of the way, but Lee countermanded him, saying: “Never mind, General, we will ride around them. Lie still, men.” He then turned his horse out of the road and rode past them. Hill and the generals’ staff officers, of course, followed.[48] During the Gettysburg campaign, one sunbaked infantryman saw Lee sitting atop a nearby hill and dropped out of the ranks to speak with him. Lee asked him how he was and what he needed. The man asked for a rag to keep the sweat out of his eyes. Lee gave the soldier his own handkerchief and encouragingly ordered him back to his column.[49]
Personal sacrifice was also a way in which Lee demonstrated servant leadership. Lee’s staff was miniscule.[50] Unless illness compelled him to accept offers to stay in people’s homes, Lee lived in a tent like his troops. He shared his soldiers’ rations, and when people sent him presents of food or other luxuries, Lee donated them to the hospitals.[51] Despite having the opportunity to remain with his family in Richmond for Christmas in 1863, he deliberately returned to the front to spend Christmas with his troops.[52]
Lee also refused to let his pride or concern for his fame and reputation dictate his tactical or strategic decisions. When quizzed about a refusal to silence press criticism by initiating a battle, Lee responded that the battle would have resulted in no material advantage. “But,” replied General William E. Starke, “your reputation was suffering, the press was denouncing you, your own state was losing confidence in you, and the army needed a victory to add to its enthusiasm.” Lee’s reply was simple and unequivocal: “I could not afford to sacrifice the lives of five or six hundred of my people to silence public clamor.”[53] Numerous generals and politicians throughout history have thought public opinion more important than the lives of their troops. Happily for “Johnny Reb,” Robert E. Lee was not such a man.
Lee did not just demonstrate his Christian faith through his conduct of the war and love for his troops, but also through the way he personally treated his foes. In accordance with Christ’s command, Lee loved his enemies and prayed for them.[54] Lee showed love, compassion, and respect for his foes. After Union General Philip Kearny was killed at Chantilly, Lee sent the body to Pope under a flag of truce, along with a note in which he said “The body of General Philip Kearny was brought from the field last night, and he was reported dead. I send it forward under a flag of truce, thinking that possession of his remains may be a consolation to his family”.[55] Following Pickett’s Charge, a wounded Federal soldier saw Lee riding by and called out “Hurrah for the Union!” Lee rode over and dismounted; the Yankee thought Lee was going to kill him. Instead, the General knelt down, grasped his hand, looked him in the eye, and said: “My son, I hope you will soon be well.”[56] Once when Lee and an unnamed subordinate were reconnoitering enemy lines, the junior general exclaimed that he wished they were all dead. The army commander instantly reprimanded him: “How can you say so, General? Now, I wish that they were all at home attending to their own business, and leaving us to do the same.”[57] Lee expressed a similar sentiment to a Pennsylvania woman who visited his headquarters as the army marched northward in 1863, saying he wished he could go home and eat his own bread in peace.[58]
Lee’s love for his enemies continued after the war. In 1869, the Reverend J. William Jones arrived at Lee’s home for a visit, and saw the General speaking to a shabbily dressed man who left in a cheerful mood just as Jones arrived. Lee told him the man was an old soldier who had fallen on hard times. When Jones asked which unit he had belonged to, Lee quietly said: “He fought on the other side, but we must not remember that against him now.”[59] On one occasion after the war, a group of friends were visiting Lee’s home and a clergyman burst into the bitterest invective against the North and the government, expressing particular displeasure at Lee’s indictment by a vengeful grand jury. In company, Lee simply said it didn’t matter what they did to him, as he hadn’t long to live anyhow. Once he could get the pastor alone, Lee gently rebuked the reverend, who apologized. The General then told him: “I have fought against the people of the North because I believed they were seeking to wrest from the South our dearest rights. But I have never cherished toward them bitter or vindictive feelings, and have never seen the day when I did not pray for them.”
Reference-The Southern Perspective: The American Civil War by Earl Starbuck
“He [Lee] was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a soldier without cruelty; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring…a Christian without hypocrisy…He was a Caesar, without his ambition; Frederick, without his tyranny; Napoleon, without his selfishness, and Washington, without his reward.”[1] – Senator Benjamin Harvey Hill
As a commander who won victory after victory despite fighting against long odds, Robert E. Lee’s ability as a soldier is unquestionable. Lee’s talents were recognized before the war, during the war, and after the war, by all sorts of different people. Early in 1861, U.S. General-in-Chief and hero of the Mexican War, Winfield Scott, described Lee as “the very best soldier that I ever saw in the field.”[2] Ulysses S. Grant, Lee’s most successful opponent, described himself as “sad and depressed” when Lee surrendered, and said he could not rejoice “at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and so valiantly and had suffered so much for a cause.”[3] Teddy Roosevelt clearly admired Lee.[4] Woodrow Wilson praised the General.[5] So did Franklin Delano Roosevelt.[6] During his time as President of the United States, World War II hero Dwight D. Eisenhower took time out of his day to write a private letter defending Lee from a critic.[7] Winston Churchill is supposed to have remarked: “Lee was the noblest American who had ever lived and one of the greatest commanders known to the annals of war.”[8] Despite being an excellent soldier, Lee did not welcome the breakup of the Union, or of war, both of which he prayed God would prevent.[9] In later life, he denounced Bismarck’s invasion of France.[10]
It should come as no surprise that, as a devout Christian, Lee pursued excellence in all that he put his hand to, dedicating his works to the Lord He served, labouring as unto God and not unto men. Neither should it be a surprise that Lee’s devout Christianity shaped the way he fought the war. Lee practiced what is known as limited or just warfare. According to the theory of just warfare as advanced by St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, wars must meet two criteria.[11] First, a combatant must establish jus ad bellum, the right to go to war.[12] Second, combatants must practice jus in bello, right conduct in war. As a soldier and gentleman, Lee’s concern was jus in bello, which prohibits tactics malum in se (evil in themselves), such as rape, pillaging, weapons of mass destruction, etc. Additionally, waging war on civilians is prohibited and prisoners must be treated humanely and with respect.[13]
There is perhaps no better illustration of Lee’s dedication to just warfare than General Orders No. 73, which he issued to the Army of Northern Virginia during the Gettysburg campaign in 1863. The orders state, in part: “the duties expected of us by civilization and Christianity are not less obligatory in the country of the enemy than in our own.”[14] Lee went on to remind his troops that they should confine their war-making to “armed men,” rather than “the unarmed and defenceless.”[15] Doing harm to the civilian population or disturbing private property would be considered “barbarous” by the commanding general, and such actions could not be carried out before the eyes of an all-seeing God without “offending against Him to whom vengeance belongeth.”[16] Lee ordered that all requisitioned supplies would be paid for.[17] He also ordered that any soldier who “insulted a woman by word, look, or act, would be instantly shot.”[18] He explained his orders to General Isaac Trimble, saying: “I cannot hope that Heaven will prosper our cause when we are violating its laws. I shall, therefore, carry on the war in Pennsylvania without offending the sanctions of a high civilization and of Christianity.”[19] Interesting, isn’t it, how civilization and Christianity were inextricably linked in Lee’s mind?
It is worth noting that these orders were issued after Union commanders had begun practicing total war against the South. When the braggart General John Pope was given command of Union forces in central Virginia in mid-1862, he immediately issued orders allowing his troops to subsist off the land while paying only for goods taken from Union loyalists, required his cavalry to do away with their supply trains, and held local citizenry responsible for any actions taken by guerrillas against his troops.[20] Orders were also issued requiring all male noncombatants along the route of march to swear an oath of allegiance or be arrested and expelled from the region. If they returned, they would be treated as spies, and any man or woman who corresponded with anyone in the Confederate Army–even a mother writing to her son–would be subject to execution as a spy.[21] Lee was furious at what he considered mistreatment of civilians, labelling Pope a “miscreant” to be “suppressed.”[22] Pope’s conduct paled in comparison to that of Colonel John Basil Turchin, who marched his brigade into Athens, Alabama on 2 May, 1862 and promptly set his troops to work pillaging, plundering, destroying, raping and gang-raping. Some of the villainous scum frightened a pregnant townswoman so badly that she miscarried and died. Turchin was court-martialed and dismissed from the army.[23] Lincoln intervened, countermanded Turchin’s dismissal, and promoted him to Brigadier General; the U.S. Senate approved Turchin’s promotion on 17 July, 1862.[24] In spite of this, Lee told his troops, “we cannot take vengeance for the wrongs our people have suffered.”[25] This was a deeply personal injunction; the Army of Northern Virginia included 103 Virginia units and nineteen Alabama units at the time Gen. Orders 73 were issued.[26]
Targeting civilians was the surest way to incur Lee’s wrath. At 10:00 A.M. on 11 December 1862, over one-hundred Union artillery pieces began lobbing shells into the town of Fredericksburg, setting large portions of it ablaze. Hundreds of women and children poured out of the town, looking for shelter from the artillery and the bitter December weather. Lee furiously exclaimed: “These people delight to destroy the weak and those who can make no defense; it just suits them!”[27] It wasn’t just Federals who sparked Lee’s ire at Fredericksburg. While the General inspected the positioning of the army’s artillery on the morning of 11 December, he noticed one battery poorly placed and inquired who had put it there. “Colonel Chilton,” replied the battery commander. Lee grew angry at this; Chilton was a staff officer and had no right to order units about, especially if his busy-bodying acted to the detriment of the troops. Lee’s neck grew red and his head jerked, but with characteristic self-restraint, he limited himself to remarking: “Colonel Chilton takes a lot upon himself.”[28]
One of Lee’s greatest difficulties throughout the war was ensuring that his troops were led by competent officers. When the war began, there were comparatively few men with professional military education available, and such education didn’t necessarily guarantee competence. The harsh school of combat had a way of weeding out the bad commanders, whom Lee generally had transferred to administrative positions or quiet backwaters.[29] Unfortunately, the school of combat also had a way of killing off many of the best officers, and this attrition only got worse as the war dragged on. The longer the odds became and the more desperate the fighting grew, the more officers exposed themselves to rally their troops – and the more they got themselves killed in the process.[30] The loss of officers at Chancellorsville was ghastly, and Gettysburg was even worse.[31] During the summer of 1864, the Second Corps lost two of its three division commanders killed.[32] Sometimes military law, which required promotions be assigned by seniority, prevented Lee from promoting a brilliant officer because a mediocre man held seniority of commission. Lee did all that he could do, and worked with what he had when circumstances got in the way.[33]
When Lee corrected officers, he did so to instruct and educate, not to humiliate or shame, and his rebukes were so tactful and courteous as to be inoffensive.[34] Men of ability who survived the fighting were sure to receive praise in Lee’s reports, and possibly promotion as well. Failure to be mentioned in a report was all the censure Lee would officially register; sometimes he would praise an officer’s troops without praising the officer in question.[35] Officers who were trying their best but still having difficulty learning were sure to receive understanding treatment at his hands. When one of Lee’s corps commanders, A.P. Hill, wished to court-martial a brigadier for a mistake he had made, Lee thus admonished Little Powell:
“These men are not an army; they are citizens defending their country. General Wright is not a soldier; he’s a lawyer. I cannot do many things that I could do with a trained army…I have to make the best of what I have…if you humiliated General Wright, the people of Georgia would not understand. Besides, whom would you put in his place? You’ll have to do what I do: When a man makes a mistake, I call him to my tent, talk to him, and use the authority of my position to make him do the right thing the next time.”[36]
Lee despised cruelty, spite, greed, and selfishness, and in rebuking these he was uncharacteristically undiplomatic.[37] On one occasion an officer launched into a rant about Grant’s cavalry destroying the army’s supply depot. The officer was upset, not because the troops had lost hundreds of tons of rations, but because the Yankees had stolen his personal cow and he now had no milk for his coffee. This officer declared that: “If I were in command of this army, I would notify General Grant that… I should not give his prisoners whom we hold a morsel of food, and if he wanted to save them from starvation, he would have to send rations here to them!” General Lee’s reply was livid and instant: “The prisoners that we have here, General –––––, are my prisoners; they are not General Grant’s prisoners, and as long as I have any rations at all I shall divide them with my prisoners.”[38]
Lee viewed leadership as servanthood. He served his superiors, his subordinates, his State, his people, and God. He communicated with President Davis freely, openly, and almost daily. His candor was always mingled with humility and proper military deference to civilian authority. Davis responded with complete trust and generally gave Lee a free hand.[39] To his generals he was almost always courteous, as noted above. But it wasn’t just those of high rank to whom he was courteous. He was as flawlessly polite and kindly thoughtful to civilians and junior officers as he was to presidents and generals. A farmer who visited the camps walked over and addressed him as “colonel” because of his plain appearance. Lee chatted with him for a while before the farmer declared that he had come to meet General Lee and asked if it was possible. “I am General Lee,” Lee told him, “and I am most happy to have met you.”[40] An exhausted staff officer who reported to Lee and then flung himself on the ground to sleep awoke to find himself covered by Lee’s waterproof poncho.[41] A colonel who had lost his gauntlets was given a pair of Lee’s own.[42] Despite receiving multiple invitations to soirees and dinners during the march through Maryland in 1862, Lee attended only one. The affair in question was attended by a multitude of officers and one bashful-looking corporal whom the higher-ranking soldiers snubbed. Lee walked over to the corporal, placed a hand on his shoulder, and praised his unit’s courage and performance.[43] When the General’s aide, Walter Taylor, became frustrated and petulant because of Lee’s own shortness of temper, Lee did not shout at him or ruin his career. Instead, he simply looked Taylor in the eye and told him: “Colonel Taylor, when I lose my temper, don’t let it make you angry.”[44]
In addition to the love Lee displayed for his troops through his constant efforts to properly feed, clothe, and equip them, there are dozens, if not hundreds, of recorded personal encounters which demonstrated his humility and respect for every member of the army, regardless of his rank or station.[45] On one occasion, a private of the 16th N.C. Infantry saw Lee examining a distant position through his binoculars, walked up, and addressed the General. Lee asked him what he needed, and the man responded by saying that he was out of chewing tobacco. Could the General please spare him some? Lee did not partake, so he referred the soldier to a staff-member who happily obliged him.[46] One day, upon returning to his headquarters, Lee found a curious soldier poking his head into the General’s tent. Lee told him: “Walk in, Captain, I am glad to see you.” The soldier replied: “I ain’t no captain, General Lee. I’s jest a private in the Ninth Virginia Cavalry.” Lee kindly responded: “Well, come on in, sir. If you aren’t a captain, you ought to be.”[47] During the march into Maryland in 1862, Lee and Powell Hill came upon a group of soldiers lying in the road. Hill ordered them out of the way, but Lee countermanded him, saying: “Never mind, General, we will ride around them. Lie still, men.” He then turned his horse out of the road and rode past them. Hill and the generals’ staff officers, of course, followed.[48] During the Gettysburg campaign, one sunbaked infantryman saw Lee sitting atop a nearby hill and dropped out of the ranks to speak with him. Lee asked him how he was and what he needed. The man asked for a rag to keep the sweat out of his eyes. Lee gave the soldier his own handkerchief and encouragingly ordered him back to his column.[49]
Personal sacrifice was also a way in which Lee demonstrated servant leadership. Lee’s staff was miniscule.[50] Unless illness compelled him to accept offers to stay in people’s homes, Lee lived in a tent like his troops. He shared his soldiers’ rations, and when people sent him presents of food or other luxuries, Lee donated them to the hospitals.[51] Despite having the opportunity to remain with his family in Richmond for Christmas in 1863, he deliberately returned to the front to spend Christmas with his troops.[52]
Lee also refused to let his pride or concern for his fame and reputation dictate his tactical or strategic decisions. When quizzed about a refusal to silence press criticism by initiating a battle, Lee responded that the battle would have resulted in no material advantage. “But,” replied General William E. Starke, “your reputation was suffering, the press was denouncing you, your own state was losing confidence in you, and the army needed a victory to add to its enthusiasm.” Lee’s reply was simple and unequivocal: “I could not afford to sacrifice the lives of five or six hundred of my people to silence public clamor.”[53] Numerous generals and politicians throughout history have thought public opinion more important than the lives of their troops. Happily for “Johnny Reb,” Robert E. Lee was not such a man.
Lee did not just demonstrate his Christian faith through his conduct of the war and love for his troops, but also through the way he personally treated his foes. In accordance with Christ’s command, Lee loved his enemies and prayed for them.[54] Lee showed love, compassion, and respect for his foes. After Union General Philip Kearny was killed at Chantilly, Lee sent the body to Pope under a flag of truce, along with a note in which he said “The body of General Philip Kearny was brought from the field last night, and he was reported dead. I send it forward under a flag of truce, thinking that possession of his remains may be a consolation to his family”.[55] Following Pickett’s Charge, a wounded Federal soldier saw Lee riding by and called out “Hurrah for the Union!” Lee rode over and dismounted; the Yankee thought Lee was going to kill him. Instead, the General knelt down, grasped his hand, looked him in the eye, and said: “My son, I hope you will soon be well.”[56] Once when Lee and an unnamed subordinate were reconnoitering enemy lines, the junior general exclaimed that he wished they were all dead. The army commander instantly reprimanded him: “How can you say so, General? Now, I wish that they were all at home attending to their own business, and leaving us to do the same.”[57] Lee expressed a similar sentiment to a Pennsylvania woman who visited his headquarters as the army marched northward in 1863, saying he wished he could go home and eat his own bread in peace.[58]
Lee’s love for his enemies continued after the war. In 1869, the Reverend J. William Jones arrived at Lee’s home for a visit, and saw the General speaking to a shabbily dressed man who left in a cheerful mood just as Jones arrived. Lee told him the man was an old soldier who had fallen on hard times. When Jones asked which unit he had belonged to, Lee quietly said: “He fought on the other side, but we must not remember that against him now.”[59] On one occasion after the war, a group of friends were visiting Lee’s home and a clergyman burst into the bitterest invective against the North and the government, expressing particular displeasure at Lee’s indictment by a vengeful grand jury. In company, Lee simply said it didn’t matter what they did to him, as he hadn’t long to live anyhow. Once he could get the pastor alone, Lee gently rebuked the reverend, who apologized. The General then told him: “I have fought against the people of the North because I believed they were seeking to wrest from the South our dearest rights. But I have never cherished toward them bitter or vindictive feelings, and have never seen the day when I did not pray for them.”
Reference-The Southern Perspective: The American Civil War by Earl Starbuck
WOMEN OF THE CONFEDERACY
Defending the Heritage
Via Ray Davidson syndicated columnist:
“Our women gave their carpets to make blankets, their dresses to be made into shirts for the soldiers, and their linen to furnish lint for their wounds, and then, clad in home-spun, they gave themselves.”
The Reverend John Levi Underwood in his book, The Women of the Confederacy, published in 1906, gives testimony to Southern womanhood. He wrote of defiance when he recited two stories:
Union General Milroy had declared Marshal Law within his theater of operations restricting all movement of civilians from their homes. A local farmer, John Allen, had a milk cow that the family depended upon. His daughter, a spry 13 years old, went to see General Milroy to gain a pass to move the cow to pasture. General Milroy tartly replied, “I can’t do anything for you rebels and I will not let you pass. The rebellion has got to be crushed.” Little Miss Allen, not to be rebuffed, retorted, “Well, if you think you can crush the rebellion by starving John Allen’s cow, just crush away.”
In another instance he cited a note written by Sherman responding as to why he was making the wives and mothers of Confederate soldiers leave occupied Savannah, “You women are the toughest set I ever knew. The men would have given up long ago but for you. I believe you would keep this war up for thirty years.”
And perhaps it was a young Southern girl much like Chloe that inspired Underwood to write, “Gentle, but brave; modest, but independent. Seeking no recognition, the true Southern woman found it already won by her worth; courting no attention, at every turn it met her, to do willing homage to her native grace and genuine womanhood.”
So I have to say, thank you Shellman, and especially Chloe, for a moment of dreamtime. A dreamtime when the men and women of a new nation stood against a giant and suffered, as one, the humiliation of defeat. Though subjugated and with the banner furled, we must never forget.
Editor’s note: Ray Davidson is a syndicated columnist.
Defending the Heritage
Via Ray Davidson syndicated columnist:
“Our women gave their carpets to make blankets, their dresses to be made into shirts for the soldiers, and their linen to furnish lint for their wounds, and then, clad in home-spun, they gave themselves.”
The Reverend John Levi Underwood in his book, The Women of the Confederacy, published in 1906, gives testimony to Southern womanhood. He wrote of defiance when he recited two stories:
Union General Milroy had declared Marshal Law within his theater of operations restricting all movement of civilians from their homes. A local farmer, John Allen, had a milk cow that the family depended upon. His daughter, a spry 13 years old, went to see General Milroy to gain a pass to move the cow to pasture. General Milroy tartly replied, “I can’t do anything for you rebels and I will not let you pass. The rebellion has got to be crushed.” Little Miss Allen, not to be rebuffed, retorted, “Well, if you think you can crush the rebellion by starving John Allen’s cow, just crush away.”
In another instance he cited a note written by Sherman responding as to why he was making the wives and mothers of Confederate soldiers leave occupied Savannah, “You women are the toughest set I ever knew. The men would have given up long ago but for you. I believe you would keep this war up for thirty years.”
And perhaps it was a young Southern girl much like Chloe that inspired Underwood to write, “Gentle, but brave; modest, but independent. Seeking no recognition, the true Southern woman found it already won by her worth; courting no attention, at every turn it met her, to do willing homage to her native grace and genuine womanhood.”
So I have to say, thank you Shellman, and especially Chloe, for a moment of dreamtime. A dreamtime when the men and women of a new nation stood against a giant and suffered, as one, the humiliation of defeat. Though subjugated and with the banner furled, we must never forget.
Editor’s note: Ray Davidson is a syndicated columnist.
IN DEFENSE OF ROBERT E. LEE
HIS MEMORIAL IS NO BLIGHT.
Facts – Robert E. Lee:
Graduated from West Point in 1829, second in his class, the first student to graduate from West Point with out a single demerit.
Appointed to the elite U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Married to George Washington's grand daughter June 1831.
Served with honors in the U.S. Military 32 years.
Served with Ulysses Grant during the Mexican American war.
Offered command of the Union Forces by Abraham Lincoln.
Believed slavery was a great evil.
Freed the slaves inherited by his wife.
His wife taught slaves to read and write which was against the law prior to
the War for Southern Independence.
After the War for Southern Independence he served with Andrew Johnson’s program of reconstruction.
He became very popular in the Northern states and the barracks at West point were named in his honor.
He was a patriotic citizen and soldier who served our country his entire life.
His memorial is now being called a “blight'.
Robert E. Lee is a true Southron Hero of exemplary character.
HIS MEMORIAL IS NO BLIGHT.
Facts – Robert E. Lee:
Graduated from West Point in 1829, second in his class, the first student to graduate from West Point with out a single demerit.
Appointed to the elite U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
Married to George Washington's grand daughter June 1831.
Served with honors in the U.S. Military 32 years.
Served with Ulysses Grant during the Mexican American war.
Offered command of the Union Forces by Abraham Lincoln.
Believed slavery was a great evil.
Freed the slaves inherited by his wife.
His wife taught slaves to read and write which was against the law prior to
the War for Southern Independence.
After the War for Southern Independence he served with Andrew Johnson’s program of reconstruction.
He became very popular in the Northern states and the barracks at West point were named in his honor.
He was a patriotic citizen and soldier who served our country his entire life.
His memorial is now being called a “blight'.
Robert E. Lee is a true Southron Hero of exemplary character.
SOUTHERN TIDBITS
From a poem found in the June 1893 issue of Confederate Veteran:
To a Confederate Battle Flag
By Albert Sidney Morton June 1893 Confederate Veteran Magazine
"Thou art to me an epic song
Of right and truth opposed to wrong
Fear not that did'st live in vain
No flag e'er fell more free from stain
Thou art an emblem still to all
Who mourn thy too untimely fall
Thy cross our faith, thy blue our skies,
Thy stars the wraith of woman's eyes,
There the gore of gallant slain
Who died that o’er us peace might reign."
I felt these words fit a lot of us that are still giving them the honor they deserve.
SOUTHERN WOMEN… A FORCE TO BE RECKONED WITH…
On June 27, 1863 Sherman writes to his wife, Ellen…
“I doubt if history affords a parallel to the deep and bitter enmity of the women of the South. No one who sees them and hears them but must feel the intensity of their hate…”
I am sure that was the one thing Sherman took away from the South that he came by honestly.
Source: “Home letters of General Sherman,” by William Tecumseh Sherman, 1909
From a poem found in the June 1893 issue of Confederate Veteran:
To a Confederate Battle Flag
By Albert Sidney Morton June 1893 Confederate Veteran Magazine
"Thou art to me an epic song
Of right and truth opposed to wrong
Fear not that did'st live in vain
No flag e'er fell more free from stain
Thou art an emblem still to all
Who mourn thy too untimely fall
Thy cross our faith, thy blue our skies,
Thy stars the wraith of woman's eyes,
There the gore of gallant slain
Who died that o’er us peace might reign."
I felt these words fit a lot of us that are still giving them the honor they deserve.
SOUTHERN WOMEN… A FORCE TO BE RECKONED WITH…
On June 27, 1863 Sherman writes to his wife, Ellen…
“I doubt if history affords a parallel to the deep and bitter enmity of the women of the South. No one who sees them and hears them but must feel the intensity of their hate…”
I am sure that was the one thing Sherman took away from the South that he came by honestly.
Source: “Home letters of General Sherman,” by William Tecumseh Sherman, 1909
CROSS OF ST ANDREWS: SYMBOL OF FREEDOM
The South and the Confederate States of America have been harshly discriminated against and positive historical facts and figures have intentionally been suppressed. Dishonest Northern historians have unfairly caused Southern and Confederate history and its heroes, monuments, memorials, and flags to be regulated to a role of less importance than deserved in American history and to be viewed in a negative perspective by much of the American public.
U.S president Woodrow Wilson is quoted as saying “the role of slavery became the proclaimed cause of the Civil War because it was necessary to put the South at a moral disadvantage by transforming the contest from a war for Independence into a war waged for the maintenance and extension of slavery”. If slavery was all the Southern states wanted they could have kept it without a war or firing a shot. The North offered the South the Corwin Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in March 1861 that would have made slavery permanently legal in America if they would rejoin the union. The South refused and the Constitution of the Confederate States of America banned the international slave trade. Most educated Southerners were in favor of gradual orderly emancipation which would have prevented segregation and Jim Crow laws which were based on Northern black codes.
The words of Confederate General Patrick R. Cleburne who was killed at the battle of Franklin Tennessee on November 30, 1864 are becoming true:
“Every man should endeavor to understand the meaning of subjugation before it is too late. It means the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the war; will be impressed by the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, and our maimed veterans as fit objects for derision.”
Political correctness and Socialist Marxist Revisionism are attacking everything Southern and Confederate on national, state, and local levels all across America
The Confederate flag represents honor, faith, courage, dignity, integrity, chivalry, Christian values, respect for womanhood, strong family ties, patriotism, self- reliance, limited constitutional federal government, states rights, and belief in the free enterprise system. It symbolizes the noble spirit of the Southern people, the rich heritage, the traditions of the South and the dynamic and vigorous Southern culture. No other symbol so proudly says “Dixie” as the Cross of St. Andrew (Confederate Battle Flag) waving in the breeze. Liberals have falsely indoctrinated many black Americans to believe it represents racism, bigotry, and a painful reminder of slavery, but white Christian Southerners who fly the Confederate Battle Flag are not the enemy of responsible Black Americans who are working to better themselves.
The Confederate flag is the last flag to represent the concept of local control of ones’ life in America. In a larger sense it represents the same values and principles as the original U.S. Betsy Ross Flag: Limited Constitutional Federal Government, States Rights, Resistance to Tyranny, and Christian Principles and Values. Thus it represents “government of the people, by the people, and for the people with the consent of the governed”.
The Confederate flag is an internationally recognized symbol of resistance to tyranny. That is why it was flying over the Berlin Wall when it was being torn down in 1989 and has been flown by numerous countries or provinces seeking independence.
It reminds knowledgeable Americans that government is to be held accountable for its actions, and if those actions are viewed as not being in the best interest of the people, there is a price to be paid for it. This fact has not been lost upon the Socialist, Communist, liberal left and that is why they have spent inordinate amounts of money and energy trying to suppress this powerful symbol of freedom. The Confederate battle flag is a Christian symbol and that is why proponents of Secular Humanism (the belief that there is no God and man, science, and government can solve all problems) oppose it.
The flag also represents the valor and sacrifice of our Southern ancestors in their quest to gain independence and recognition as a sovereign nation. Confederate soldiers displayed tremendous bravery in the face of overwhelming odds and blatant tyranny and aggression on behalf of the Yankee government that invaded the Southern homeland. It was, is, and will continue to be the flag of the region Southerners call home, the Southland. We are Americans, true, but we are also proud Southerners.
Source: A. Gowens
The South and the Confederate States of America have been harshly discriminated against and positive historical facts and figures have intentionally been suppressed. Dishonest Northern historians have unfairly caused Southern and Confederate history and its heroes, monuments, memorials, and flags to be regulated to a role of less importance than deserved in American history and to be viewed in a negative perspective by much of the American public.
U.S president Woodrow Wilson is quoted as saying “the role of slavery became the proclaimed cause of the Civil War because it was necessary to put the South at a moral disadvantage by transforming the contest from a war for Independence into a war waged for the maintenance and extension of slavery”. If slavery was all the Southern states wanted they could have kept it without a war or firing a shot. The North offered the South the Corwin Amendment to the U.S. Constitution in March 1861 that would have made slavery permanently legal in America if they would rejoin the union. The South refused and the Constitution of the Confederate States of America banned the international slave trade. Most educated Southerners were in favor of gradual orderly emancipation which would have prevented segregation and Jim Crow laws which were based on Northern black codes.
The words of Confederate General Patrick R. Cleburne who was killed at the battle of Franklin Tennessee on November 30, 1864 are becoming true:
“Every man should endeavor to understand the meaning of subjugation before it is too late. It means the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy; that our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the war; will be impressed by the influences of history and education to regard our gallant dead as traitors, and our maimed veterans as fit objects for derision.”
Political correctness and Socialist Marxist Revisionism are attacking everything Southern and Confederate on national, state, and local levels all across America
The Confederate flag represents honor, faith, courage, dignity, integrity, chivalry, Christian values, respect for womanhood, strong family ties, patriotism, self- reliance, limited constitutional federal government, states rights, and belief in the free enterprise system. It symbolizes the noble spirit of the Southern people, the rich heritage, the traditions of the South and the dynamic and vigorous Southern culture. No other symbol so proudly says “Dixie” as the Cross of St. Andrew (Confederate Battle Flag) waving in the breeze. Liberals have falsely indoctrinated many black Americans to believe it represents racism, bigotry, and a painful reminder of slavery, but white Christian Southerners who fly the Confederate Battle Flag are not the enemy of responsible Black Americans who are working to better themselves.
The Confederate flag is the last flag to represent the concept of local control of ones’ life in America. In a larger sense it represents the same values and principles as the original U.S. Betsy Ross Flag: Limited Constitutional Federal Government, States Rights, Resistance to Tyranny, and Christian Principles and Values. Thus it represents “government of the people, by the people, and for the people with the consent of the governed”.
The Confederate flag is an internationally recognized symbol of resistance to tyranny. That is why it was flying over the Berlin Wall when it was being torn down in 1989 and has been flown by numerous countries or provinces seeking independence.
It reminds knowledgeable Americans that government is to be held accountable for its actions, and if those actions are viewed as not being in the best interest of the people, there is a price to be paid for it. This fact has not been lost upon the Socialist, Communist, liberal left and that is why they have spent inordinate amounts of money and energy trying to suppress this powerful symbol of freedom. The Confederate battle flag is a Christian symbol and that is why proponents of Secular Humanism (the belief that there is no God and man, science, and government can solve all problems) oppose it.
The flag also represents the valor and sacrifice of our Southern ancestors in their quest to gain independence and recognition as a sovereign nation. Confederate soldiers displayed tremendous bravery in the face of overwhelming odds and blatant tyranny and aggression on behalf of the Yankee government that invaded the Southern homeland. It was, is, and will continue to be the flag of the region Southerners call home, the Southland. We are Americans, true, but we are also proud Southerners.
Source: A. Gowens
MEMORABLE QUOTES FROM THE WAR OF NORTHERN AGRESSION:
Lincoln didn't want to make slavery an issue
"If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that . . . My paramount object in the struggle is to save the Union, and is not to either save or destroy slavery"
Abraham Lincoln, Letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862
(The Emancipation Proclamation was issued a month later, effective January 1, 1863)
Davis considered the Confederacy The Legitimate America
"I believe throughout his life Jefferson was dedicated to his conception of what America was and ought to be. He considered himself an absolutely loyal patriot. The Confederacy in his mind was an attempt to save what he considered the legitimate America. He considered himself and his fellow Confederates to be the true descendants of the founding fathers."
- William J. Cooper, Historian at LSU, on Jefferson Davis
Major General Patrick Cleburne CSA"I am with the South in life or in death, in victory or in defeat . . . I believe the North is about to wage a brutal and unholy war on a people who have done them no wrong, in violation of the Constitution and the fundamental principles of government. They no longer acknowledge that all government derives its validity from the consent of the governed. They are about to invade our peaceful homes, destroy our property, and inaugurate a servile insurrection, murder our men and dishonor our women. We propose no invasion of the North, no attack on them, and only ask to be left alone."
- Major General Patrick Cleburne C.S.A.
General Lee was an honorable and respected opponent"He possessed every virtue of the great commanders, without their vices. He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a private citizen without wrong; a neighbor without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy, and a man without guilt. He was a Caesar without his ambition; a Frederick without his tyranny; a Napoleon without his selfishness; and a Washington without his reward. He was obedient to authority as a servant, and loyal in authority as a true king. He was gentle as a woman in life; modest and pure as a virgin in thought; watchful as a Roman vestal in duty; submissive to law as Socrates, and grand in battle as Achilles."
"The Character of Lee" From the Address of the Honorable D.H. Hill before the Georgia branch of the Southern Historical Society at Atlanta, February 18, 1874.)
We must remember the majority of Southerners did not own slaves and most certainly did not fight so others could own them. "The real answer is quite simple. The South was fighting because it was invaded."
- Francis W. Springer
The following comments were made in letters to President Andrew Johnson, and can be found in the Papers of Andrew Johnson.
"We have much to say in vindication of our conduct, but this we must leave to history. The bloody conflict between brothers, is closed, and we 'come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.' The South had $2,000,000,000 invested in Slaves. It was very natural, that they should desire to protect, and not lose this amount of property. Their action in this effort, resulted in War. There was no desire to dissolve the Union, but to protect this property. The issue was made and it is decided."
- Sterling Cockrill, planter from Courtland, AL, 18 Sept. 1865
Lt. General John B Gordon
". . . It will be a glorious day for our country when all the children within its borders shall learn that the four years of fratricidal war between the North and South was waged by neither with criminal or unworthy intent, but by both to protect what they conceived to be threatened rights and imperiled liberty: that the issues which divided the sections were born when the Republic was born, and were forever buried in an ocean of fraternal blood."
- Lieutenant General John B. Gordon, CSA
Only at the moment when Lee handed Grant his sword was the Confederacy born; or to state matters another way, in the moment of death the Confederacy entered upon its immortality."
- Robert Penn Warren "The Legacy of the Civil War, 1961"
Stonewall Jackson had a sense of humor
At a dinner party, Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson was asked if he was the one who had made the remark about Union General Pope. "What remark was that?" asked the general. An orderly responded, "You know, the one about Pope's announcement he was going to make his saddle his headquarters, and then you are supposed to have said, "I can whip any man who does not know his headquarters from his hindquarters. Stonewall sheepishly smiled and kept eating.
The first U.S. General to use the Scorched Earth policy
"The Government of the United States has in North Alabama any and all rights they may choose to enforce in war, to take their lives, their homes, their lands, their everything . . . because war does exist there, and war is simply power unrestrained by constitution or compact . . . Next year their lands will be taken; for in war we can take them, and rightfully too; and in another year they may beg in vain for their lives." ". . . To the . . . persistent secessionists, why, death is mercy, and the quicker he or she is disposed of the better."
- Gen. W. T. Sherman (Union Army)
The 33rd President of the United States
". . . They tried to make my uncle Harrison into an informer, but he wouldn't do it. He was only a boy . . . They tried to hang him, time and again they tried it, 'stretching his neck', they called it, but he didn't say anything. I think he'd have died before he'd said anything. He's the one I'm named after. And I'm happy to say that there were people around at the time who said I took after him."
- President Harry S. Truman, speaking about what the Yankee "Redlegs" did to his uncle, at age thirteen during the 'War Between the States'.
"Sometimes I examine myself thoroughly and I will always come to the conclusion that I am not such a bad man at last as I am looked upon. God will give me justice if I am to be punished for the opinions of other people, who do not know my heart I cant help it. If I commit an error I do it without bad intention. My great crime on the world is blunder, I will get into scrapes without intention or any bad motive. I call upon my God to judge me, he knows that I love my friends and above all others my wife and children, the opinion of the world to contrary notwithstanding."
- Stand Watie to his wife Sarah C. Watie on April 24th 1864. Watie was a Cherokee Indian and leader of the First Cherokee Mounted Rifles, CSA. He fought on - - long after the South had surrendered
“It was necessary to put the South at a moral disadvantage by transforming the contest from a war waged against states fighting for their independence into a war waged against states fighting for the maintenance and extension of slavery…and the world, it might be hoped, would see it as a moral war, not a political; and the sympathy of nations would begin to run for the North, not for the South.” Woodrow Wilson, “A History of The American People”, page 231.
Lincoln didn't want to make slavery an issue
"If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that . . . My paramount object in the struggle is to save the Union, and is not to either save or destroy slavery"
Abraham Lincoln, Letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862
(The Emancipation Proclamation was issued a month later, effective January 1, 1863)
Davis considered the Confederacy The Legitimate America
"I believe throughout his life Jefferson was dedicated to his conception of what America was and ought to be. He considered himself an absolutely loyal patriot. The Confederacy in his mind was an attempt to save what he considered the legitimate America. He considered himself and his fellow Confederates to be the true descendants of the founding fathers."
- William J. Cooper, Historian at LSU, on Jefferson Davis
Major General Patrick Cleburne CSA"I am with the South in life or in death, in victory or in defeat . . . I believe the North is about to wage a brutal and unholy war on a people who have done them no wrong, in violation of the Constitution and the fundamental principles of government. They no longer acknowledge that all government derives its validity from the consent of the governed. They are about to invade our peaceful homes, destroy our property, and inaugurate a servile insurrection, murder our men and dishonor our women. We propose no invasion of the North, no attack on them, and only ask to be left alone."
- Major General Patrick Cleburne C.S.A.
General Lee was an honorable and respected opponent"He possessed every virtue of the great commanders, without their vices. He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a private citizen without wrong; a neighbor without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy, and a man without guilt. He was a Caesar without his ambition; a Frederick without his tyranny; a Napoleon without his selfishness; and a Washington without his reward. He was obedient to authority as a servant, and loyal in authority as a true king. He was gentle as a woman in life; modest and pure as a virgin in thought; watchful as a Roman vestal in duty; submissive to law as Socrates, and grand in battle as Achilles."
"The Character of Lee" From the Address of the Honorable D.H. Hill before the Georgia branch of the Southern Historical Society at Atlanta, February 18, 1874.)
We must remember the majority of Southerners did not own slaves and most certainly did not fight so others could own them. "The real answer is quite simple. The South was fighting because it was invaded."
- Francis W. Springer
The following comments were made in letters to President Andrew Johnson, and can be found in the Papers of Andrew Johnson.
"We have much to say in vindication of our conduct, but this we must leave to history. The bloody conflict between brothers, is closed, and we 'come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.' The South had $2,000,000,000 invested in Slaves. It was very natural, that they should desire to protect, and not lose this amount of property. Their action in this effort, resulted in War. There was no desire to dissolve the Union, but to protect this property. The issue was made and it is decided."
- Sterling Cockrill, planter from Courtland, AL, 18 Sept. 1865
Lt. General John B Gordon
". . . It will be a glorious day for our country when all the children within its borders shall learn that the four years of fratricidal war between the North and South was waged by neither with criminal or unworthy intent, but by both to protect what they conceived to be threatened rights and imperiled liberty: that the issues which divided the sections were born when the Republic was born, and were forever buried in an ocean of fraternal blood."
- Lieutenant General John B. Gordon, CSA
Only at the moment when Lee handed Grant his sword was the Confederacy born; or to state matters another way, in the moment of death the Confederacy entered upon its immortality."
- Robert Penn Warren "The Legacy of the Civil War, 1961"
Stonewall Jackson had a sense of humor
At a dinner party, Thomas J. (Stonewall) Jackson was asked if he was the one who had made the remark about Union General Pope. "What remark was that?" asked the general. An orderly responded, "You know, the one about Pope's announcement he was going to make his saddle his headquarters, and then you are supposed to have said, "I can whip any man who does not know his headquarters from his hindquarters. Stonewall sheepishly smiled and kept eating.
The first U.S. General to use the Scorched Earth policy
"The Government of the United States has in North Alabama any and all rights they may choose to enforce in war, to take their lives, their homes, their lands, their everything . . . because war does exist there, and war is simply power unrestrained by constitution or compact . . . Next year their lands will be taken; for in war we can take them, and rightfully too; and in another year they may beg in vain for their lives." ". . . To the . . . persistent secessionists, why, death is mercy, and the quicker he or she is disposed of the better."
- Gen. W. T. Sherman (Union Army)
The 33rd President of the United States
". . . They tried to make my uncle Harrison into an informer, but he wouldn't do it. He was only a boy . . . They tried to hang him, time and again they tried it, 'stretching his neck', they called it, but he didn't say anything. I think he'd have died before he'd said anything. He's the one I'm named after. And I'm happy to say that there were people around at the time who said I took after him."
- President Harry S. Truman, speaking about what the Yankee "Redlegs" did to his uncle, at age thirteen during the 'War Between the States'.
"Sometimes I examine myself thoroughly and I will always come to the conclusion that I am not such a bad man at last as I am looked upon. God will give me justice if I am to be punished for the opinions of other people, who do not know my heart I cant help it. If I commit an error I do it without bad intention. My great crime on the world is blunder, I will get into scrapes without intention or any bad motive. I call upon my God to judge me, he knows that I love my friends and above all others my wife and children, the opinion of the world to contrary notwithstanding."
- Stand Watie to his wife Sarah C. Watie on April 24th 1864. Watie was a Cherokee Indian and leader of the First Cherokee Mounted Rifles, CSA. He fought on - - long after the South had surrendered
“It was necessary to put the South at a moral disadvantage by transforming the contest from a war waged against states fighting for their independence into a war waged against states fighting for the maintenance and extension of slavery…and the world, it might be hoped, would see it as a moral war, not a political; and the sympathy of nations would begin to run for the North, not for the South.” Woodrow Wilson, “A History of The American People”, page 231.
CONFEDERATE BATTLE FLAG, I AM THEIR FLAG
In 1861, when they perceived their rights to be threatened, when those who would alter the nature of the government of their fathers were placed in charge, when threatened with change they could not accept, the mighty men of valor began to gather. A band of brothers, native to the Southern soil, they pledged themselves to a cause: the cause of defending family, fireside, and faith. Between the desolation of war and their homes they interposed their bodies and they chose me for their symbol. I AM THEIR FLAG... Dr. Michael Bradley
The first African slaves arrived in the American Colonies in 1619. Therefore, in 246 years of slavery in America the Confederate flag only flew for 4 of those years, the rest were under the US and the British flag.
Think about that when you want to start banning flags. In 1776 there were twice as many slaves in New York as in Georgia.
In 1861, when they perceived their rights to be threatened, when those who would alter the nature of the government of their fathers were placed in charge, when threatened with change they could not accept, the mighty men of valor began to gather. A band of brothers, native to the Southern soil, they pledged themselves to a cause: the cause of defending family, fireside, and faith. Between the desolation of war and their homes they interposed their bodies and they chose me for their symbol. I AM THEIR FLAG... Dr. Michael Bradley
The first African slaves arrived in the American Colonies in 1619. Therefore, in 246 years of slavery in America the Confederate flag only flew for 4 of those years, the rest were under the US and the British flag.
Think about that when you want to start banning flags. In 1776 there were twice as many slaves in New York as in Georgia.
FRIENDSHIP KNOWS NOT COLOR
A FRIEND LOVETH AT ALL TIMES: PROVERBS 17:17
I know our critics would like us to believe that every black man who wore gray did it only because they had no choice. I find that hard to believe, because it implies that friendships did not cross the color line back then. There are just too many first person accounts that speak to the contrary. In Manning’s account of the friendship between Frank Hampton and Kit Goodwyn, we see that Kit understood the “latch strings” to his freedom hung “within easy reach.” Dare I say it was his friendship that bound him to the Hamptons? Here is such an account given by Wade Manning, found in the collection of war memories of the veterans of Butler’s Cavalry.
Manning’s account is as follows:
“When the Hampton Legion was encamped near ‘Valle Crucis’ many a man arranged it so that family servants were permitted to attach themselves to the entourage of headquarters or mess organization. These colored boys followed the column on many desperate marches… who with inordinate pride wore the gray. The relations of master and man were oft times touching to a degree when with tender care they prepared the young master for burial…Kit Goodwyn loved “Mass Wade” (General Hampton); he simply adored “The Colonel” “Mass Frank,” and Kit has felt all the days of his life that with Hampton… the latch string hangs within easy reach…
Kit and the sound of bullets and of screeching shells were familiar friends and with gentle hands and on bended knee he helped sooth the last moments of a master [Frank Hampton at Brandy Station] no less than friend. In that one moment he prayed as you and I would have done, comrade, for a playmate, schoolmate, or friend - -he prayed for one loved by him, with the same tenderness that you and I prayed...”
Source: “Butler and His Cavalry,” by Ulysses Brooks, Published 1909.
A FRIEND LOVETH AT ALL TIMES: PROVERBS 17:17
I know our critics would like us to believe that every black man who wore gray did it only because they had no choice. I find that hard to believe, because it implies that friendships did not cross the color line back then. There are just too many first person accounts that speak to the contrary. In Manning’s account of the friendship between Frank Hampton and Kit Goodwyn, we see that Kit understood the “latch strings” to his freedom hung “within easy reach.” Dare I say it was his friendship that bound him to the Hamptons? Here is such an account given by Wade Manning, found in the collection of war memories of the veterans of Butler’s Cavalry.
Manning’s account is as follows:
“When the Hampton Legion was encamped near ‘Valle Crucis’ many a man arranged it so that family servants were permitted to attach themselves to the entourage of headquarters or mess organization. These colored boys followed the column on many desperate marches… who with inordinate pride wore the gray. The relations of master and man were oft times touching to a degree when with tender care they prepared the young master for burial…Kit Goodwyn loved “Mass Wade” (General Hampton); he simply adored “The Colonel” “Mass Frank,” and Kit has felt all the days of his life that with Hampton… the latch string hangs within easy reach…
Kit and the sound of bullets and of screeching shells were familiar friends and with gentle hands and on bended knee he helped sooth the last moments of a master [Frank Hampton at Brandy Station] no less than friend. In that one moment he prayed as you and I would have done, comrade, for a playmate, schoolmate, or friend - -he prayed for one loved by him, with the same tenderness that you and I prayed...”
Source: “Butler and His Cavalry,” by Ulysses Brooks, Published 1909.
NELSON WINBUSH: CHAMPION OF THE CONFEDERACY
This is Nelson Winbush, the grandson of a black confederate veteran who rode with Forrest, and he is an advocate for historical accuracy and honesty when it comes to the telling and retelling of our Civil War heritage.
Winbush’s grandfather, Louis Napoleon Nelson, was recruited as a slave by Nathan Bedford Forrest, but fought as a free man of color during the last 18 months of the war.
He was a Private in the 7th Tennessee Cavalry under Forrest and fought at pivotal battles such as Shiloh, Lookout Mountain, Bryce’s Crossroads and Vicksburg.
At Shiloh, he served as a chaplain even though he couldn’t read or write, which was a position never held by any “colored” Union soldier, and he consistently attended 39 United Confederate Veterans reunions.
He attended his final reunion in 1934, and a Sons of Confederate Veterans Chapter in West Tennessee is named in his honor.
Nelson remembers sitting on his grandfather’s knee listening to his Civil War stories until the age of five.
Winbush, 83, was born in Ripley, Tenn., the son of Isaac and Ganelle Winbush.
He grew up in his grandfather’s home, and left the ancestral residence in 1955 to take a job as a teacher in Kissimmee, Fla.
When his grandfather died, the casket was draped with the Confederate flag, and Winbush has since become a champion of the Confederate battle flag and its proper place in history.
He characterizes recent controversies over the display of the flag and the opposing sides of the debate as “just dumb."
Winbush still actively and proudly speaks about his ancestor’s service during the war and the lessons he learned sitting at his grandfather’s knee.
“At Shiloh, my grandfather served as a chaplain even though he couldn’t read or write,” said Winbush, who bolstered his points with photos, letters and newspapers that used to belong to his grandfather. “I’ve never heard of a black Yankee holding such an office, so that makes him a little different.”
Winbush said his grandfather, who also served as a forager and Cavalryman never had any qualms about fighting for the South.
He had plenty of chances to make a break for freedom, but never did.
Winbush said Southern blacks and whites often lived together as extended families, adding slaves and slave owners were outraged when Union forces raided their homes. He said history books rarely make mention of this.
“When the master and his older sons went to war, who did he leave his families with?” asked Winbush, whose grandfather remained with his former owners 12 years after the hostilities ended. “It was with the slaves. Were his (family members) mistreated? Hell, no!
“They were protected.”
According to Winbush, thousands of blacks, some of them free, fought for the Confederacy.
In fact, field reports submitted by Union officers involved in Forrest’s Murfreesboro raid reported a multitude of black confederate soldiers riding into town with Forrest on that fateful day in 1862.
Nelson Winbush grandson of Confederate veteran Louis Napoleon Nelson.
Winbush has come under fire by various groups over the years for his controversial views.
The NAACP and similar organizations have criticized Winbush for his support of what they believe are neo-Confederate causes; they think he misunderstands the history of the South.
But Winbush contends those groups misunderstand the history of the South.
Winbush has said in the past that he would have fought by his grandfather’s side in the 7th Tennessee Cavalry led by Gen. Nathan Bedford Forest.
“People ask why a black person would fight for the Confederacy. (It was) for the same damned reason a white Southerner did,” he said.
RE: The Southern Perspective, The American Civil War, McCarrol
This is Nelson Winbush, the grandson of a black confederate veteran who rode with Forrest, and he is an advocate for historical accuracy and honesty when it comes to the telling and retelling of our Civil War heritage.
Winbush’s grandfather, Louis Napoleon Nelson, was recruited as a slave by Nathan Bedford Forrest, but fought as a free man of color during the last 18 months of the war.
He was a Private in the 7th Tennessee Cavalry under Forrest and fought at pivotal battles such as Shiloh, Lookout Mountain, Bryce’s Crossroads and Vicksburg.
At Shiloh, he served as a chaplain even though he couldn’t read or write, which was a position never held by any “colored” Union soldier, and he consistently attended 39 United Confederate Veterans reunions.
He attended his final reunion in 1934, and a Sons of Confederate Veterans Chapter in West Tennessee is named in his honor.
Nelson remembers sitting on his grandfather’s knee listening to his Civil War stories until the age of five.
Winbush, 83, was born in Ripley, Tenn., the son of Isaac and Ganelle Winbush.
He grew up in his grandfather’s home, and left the ancestral residence in 1955 to take a job as a teacher in Kissimmee, Fla.
When his grandfather died, the casket was draped with the Confederate flag, and Winbush has since become a champion of the Confederate battle flag and its proper place in history.
He characterizes recent controversies over the display of the flag and the opposing sides of the debate as “just dumb."
Winbush still actively and proudly speaks about his ancestor’s service during the war and the lessons he learned sitting at his grandfather’s knee.
“At Shiloh, my grandfather served as a chaplain even though he couldn’t read or write,” said Winbush, who bolstered his points with photos, letters and newspapers that used to belong to his grandfather. “I’ve never heard of a black Yankee holding such an office, so that makes him a little different.”
Winbush said his grandfather, who also served as a forager and Cavalryman never had any qualms about fighting for the South.
He had plenty of chances to make a break for freedom, but never did.
Winbush said Southern blacks and whites often lived together as extended families, adding slaves and slave owners were outraged when Union forces raided their homes. He said history books rarely make mention of this.
“When the master and his older sons went to war, who did he leave his families with?” asked Winbush, whose grandfather remained with his former owners 12 years after the hostilities ended. “It was with the slaves. Were his (family members) mistreated? Hell, no!
“They were protected.”
According to Winbush, thousands of blacks, some of them free, fought for the Confederacy.
In fact, field reports submitted by Union officers involved in Forrest’s Murfreesboro raid reported a multitude of black confederate soldiers riding into town with Forrest on that fateful day in 1862.
Nelson Winbush grandson of Confederate veteran Louis Napoleon Nelson.
Winbush has come under fire by various groups over the years for his controversial views.
The NAACP and similar organizations have criticized Winbush for his support of what they believe are neo-Confederate causes; they think he misunderstands the history of the South.
But Winbush contends those groups misunderstand the history of the South.
Winbush has said in the past that he would have fought by his grandfather’s side in the 7th Tennessee Cavalry led by Gen. Nathan Bedford Forest.
“People ask why a black person would fight for the Confederacy. (It was) for the same damned reason a white Southerner did,” he said.
RE: The Southern Perspective, The American Civil War, McCarrol
THE ROAD TO GETTYSBURG 1863:
Henry Harrison the Secret Agent
Moxley Sorrel wrote that Harrison straggled into the lines on the night of June 28, 1863 “filthy and ragged, showing some rough work and exposure.”
But this filthy and ragged man conveyed secrets. He was a spy.
Upon hearing Harrison’s report, Sorrel immediately takes him to Longstreet, who listens intently as the scout describes in great detail the location of the Union army around Frederick, Maryland (North of the Potomac). Harrison also informs Longstreet that Gen. George Meade is in command of the Army of the Potomac, having replaced Gen. Joe Hooker.
Considering the intelligence “more accurate than we could have expected if we were relying upon our cavalry,” Longstreet writes a note suggesting the army head east, and sends it along with Harrison and another staff officer to Gen. Robert E. Lee.
Pay the man.
Initially, Lee refuses to meet with him. But Lee, having no report on the whereabouts of the Union army from Gen. J.E.B. Stuart, trusts Longstreet’s assessment and begins to alter his plans for his army.
The epic battle of Gettysburg begins three days later.
Source: American Civil War, The Southern Perspective
Henry Harrison the Secret Agent
Moxley Sorrel wrote that Harrison straggled into the lines on the night of June 28, 1863 “filthy and ragged, showing some rough work and exposure.”
But this filthy and ragged man conveyed secrets. He was a spy.
Upon hearing Harrison’s report, Sorrel immediately takes him to Longstreet, who listens intently as the scout describes in great detail the location of the Union army around Frederick, Maryland (North of the Potomac). Harrison also informs Longstreet that Gen. George Meade is in command of the Army of the Potomac, having replaced Gen. Joe Hooker.
Considering the intelligence “more accurate than we could have expected if we were relying upon our cavalry,” Longstreet writes a note suggesting the army head east, and sends it along with Harrison and another staff officer to Gen. Robert E. Lee.
Pay the man.
Initially, Lee refuses to meet with him. But Lee, having no report on the whereabouts of the Union army from Gen. J.E.B. Stuart, trusts Longstreet’s assessment and begins to alter his plans for his army.
The epic battle of Gettysburg begins three days later.
Source: American Civil War, The Southern Perspective
TO THE VICTOR GO THE SPOILS
Victors write history. The freeing of slaves was a byproduct of the war not the reason for it.
Taxes and spending policies were the main reason for Southern secession. In the early 1830s, South Carolina almost seceded over this issue alone. Just before Lincoln took office the Morrill Tariff passed; it doubled U.S. tariffs.
If the South had successfully seceded without interference, the North would have suffered severe economic consequences. Northern industry would have suffered the loss of business due to the elimination of protective tariffs. Increased taxes to make up for those lost by the South’s secession would have further damaged the Northern economy. The Northern economy also would have suffered due to reduced subsidies dependent on Southern tariffs.
On the other hand after secession, the South could have reduced tariffs, and still collected more revenue per capita. Lower costs for imported goods would have benefited both the Southern population and businesses. The South with lower tariffs than the North would have caused European imports to flow through the South to the West. This would have strengthened ties between the South and West, and it also would have promoted business in the South.
The South had significantly powerful incentives to secede, and equally powerful incentives not to remind the North about their true motives. When the States declared motives to secede, the majority anti-tariff crowd were mostly silent; the pro-slavery crowd filled the vacuum. From December 1860 through February 1861, the Gulf States, Georgia and South Carolina seceded.
The resulting actions by the North are fascinating, and turn popular history on its head.
The first proposed 13th Amendment (Corwin Amendment) was quickly passed. It would have made it unconstitutional to propose an Amendment banning slavery. By March 2, 1861, both the U.S. House and Senate had passed the amendment with the requisite two-thirds votes in each house. These two-thirds votes were obtained even without the seven seceded states. The amendment did not go to the states for ratification only because of the war.
Corwin Amendment: “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 by the laws of said State.”
On March 4, 1861, during Lincoln’s Inaugural Address he said:
The Corwin Amendment was fine with him.
"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution ... passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. ... I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."
Lincoln said that he had no right to interfere with slavery.
“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
Lincoln had every intention to enforce fugitive slave laws.
“No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping 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 service or labor may be due.”
He was determined to collect taxes.
“The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.”
The North was clearly demonstrating that the South had no reason to secede over slavery. With this apparent Northern goodwill, the seceded states were about to get everything they “said” they wanted. If the South was worried about slavery, they could have simply stayed in the Union. Instead they continued forming a new government. At that time, secession was the only thing that could have put slavery at risk.
Lincoln’s desire to collect taxes was why he held onto Fort Sumter, in Charleston Harbor. This was a place where tariffs were collected. This was also why the Confederates took the fort, in April 1861.
Up to this point Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas had not seceded; these states did not want to secede and did not think that it was a good idea. Lincoln ordered that the states still in the Union raise troops to conquer the seceded states. These four states recognized that Lincoln's order was unconstitutional and was an attack on state sovereignty. Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas seceded over State's Rights.
In July 1861, the U.S. Congress officially passed the Crittenden–Johnson Resolution declaring that the war was not over slavery.
In February 1862, the Confederate Constitution was finally ratified. The pro-slavery crowd lost. When compared to U.S. Constitution and what was being offered (The Corwin Amendment) the Confederate Constitution offered almost almost nothing extra to slaveowners. When considering that the fugitive slave laws would no longer apply in the north, you realize the slave owners gained less than nothing. Secession and war was the only thing that could have put slavery at risk. Secession to preserve slavery made absolutely no sense whatsoever. The majority of Confederates were not proslavery.
Open letter from Abraham Lincoln to Horace Greeley; August 22, 1862:
“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.”
In September 1862, when the war 1½ years old, Lincoln issued the first version of the Emancipation Proclamation. This was an ultimatum. He threatened to free slaves in any state still rebelling against the Union. He gave a deadline of January 1863.
In January 1863, the ultimatum was put in effect. Slaves in Confederate held territory were declared free. The Union continued to enforce slave laws in five states and parts of two states; these states were in Union occupied areas.
The purpose of the Emancipation Proclamation was never to free slaves. It was designed as means to win the war. Lincoln wanted to disrupt the Southern economy and raise new troops. This is not unprecedented; the U.S. Army did the same thing to the Seminole Indians during the Seminole War.
In September 1862, well over 100,000 soldiers were already dead. What did they fight and die for? If the South was fighting to preserve slavery, why didn’t they declare victory after the ultimatum and go home?
On June 15, 1864, three years into the war, the House of Representatives defeated the 13th Amendment, the amendment to free slaves. On January 31, 1865, when the war was almost over, the House of Representatives passed the 13th Amendment. The Union was still enforcing slave laws, six-months after Lee surrendered. On December 18, 1865, the 13th Amendment was ratified freeing all slaves. The 13th Amendment freed General Grant’s wife’s slaves. Clearly, the freeing of slaves was an afterthought.
Victors write history.
Re:Southern Perspective, The American Civil War
Victors write history. The freeing of slaves was a byproduct of the war not the reason for it.
Taxes and spending policies were the main reason for Southern secession. In the early 1830s, South Carolina almost seceded over this issue alone. Just before Lincoln took office the Morrill Tariff passed; it doubled U.S. tariffs.
If the South had successfully seceded without interference, the North would have suffered severe economic consequences. Northern industry would have suffered the loss of business due to the elimination of protective tariffs. Increased taxes to make up for those lost by the South’s secession would have further damaged the Northern economy. The Northern economy also would have suffered due to reduced subsidies dependent on Southern tariffs.
On the other hand after secession, the South could have reduced tariffs, and still collected more revenue per capita. Lower costs for imported goods would have benefited both the Southern population and businesses. The South with lower tariffs than the North would have caused European imports to flow through the South to the West. This would have strengthened ties between the South and West, and it also would have promoted business in the South.
The South had significantly powerful incentives to secede, and equally powerful incentives not to remind the North about their true motives. When the States declared motives to secede, the majority anti-tariff crowd were mostly silent; the pro-slavery crowd filled the vacuum. From December 1860 through February 1861, the Gulf States, Georgia and South Carolina seceded.
The resulting actions by the North are fascinating, and turn popular history on its head.
The first proposed 13th Amendment (Corwin Amendment) was quickly passed. It would have made it unconstitutional to propose an Amendment banning slavery. By March 2, 1861, both the U.S. House and Senate had passed the amendment with the requisite two-thirds votes in each house. These two-thirds votes were obtained even without the seven seceded states. The amendment did not go to the states for ratification only because of the war.
Corwin Amendment: “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 by the laws of said State.”
On March 4, 1861, during Lincoln’s Inaugural Address he said:
The Corwin Amendment was fine with him.
"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution ... passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service. ... I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."
Lincoln said that he had no right to interfere with slavery.
“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so."
Lincoln had every intention to enforce fugitive slave laws.
“No person held to service or labor in one State, under the laws thereof, escaping 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 service or labor may be due.”
He was determined to collect taxes.
“The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using of force against or among the people anywhere.”
The North was clearly demonstrating that the South had no reason to secede over slavery. With this apparent Northern goodwill, the seceded states were about to get everything they “said” they wanted. If the South was worried about slavery, they could have simply stayed in the Union. Instead they continued forming a new government. At that time, secession was the only thing that could have put slavery at risk.
Lincoln’s desire to collect taxes was why he held onto Fort Sumter, in Charleston Harbor. This was a place where tariffs were collected. This was also why the Confederates took the fort, in April 1861.
Up to this point Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas had not seceded; these states did not want to secede and did not think that it was a good idea. Lincoln ordered that the states still in the Union raise troops to conquer the seceded states. These four states recognized that Lincoln's order was unconstitutional and was an attack on state sovereignty. Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas seceded over State's Rights.
In July 1861, the U.S. Congress officially passed the Crittenden–Johnson Resolution declaring that the war was not over slavery.
In February 1862, the Confederate Constitution was finally ratified. The pro-slavery crowd lost. When compared to U.S. Constitution and what was being offered (The Corwin Amendment) the Confederate Constitution offered almost almost nothing extra to slaveowners. When considering that the fugitive slave laws would no longer apply in the north, you realize the slave owners gained less than nothing. Secession and war was the only thing that could have put slavery at risk. Secession to preserve slavery made absolutely no sense whatsoever. The majority of Confederates were not proslavery.
Open letter from Abraham Lincoln to Horace Greeley; August 22, 1862:
“My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.”
In September 1862, when the war 1½ years old, Lincoln issued the first version of the Emancipation Proclamation. This was an ultimatum. He threatened to free slaves in any state still rebelling against the Union. He gave a deadline of January 1863.
In January 1863, the ultimatum was put in effect. Slaves in Confederate held territory were declared free. The Union continued to enforce slave laws in five states and parts of two states; these states were in Union occupied areas.
The purpose of the Emancipation Proclamation was never to free slaves. It was designed as means to win the war. Lincoln wanted to disrupt the Southern economy and raise new troops. This is not unprecedented; the U.S. Army did the same thing to the Seminole Indians during the Seminole War.
In September 1862, well over 100,000 soldiers were already dead. What did they fight and die for? If the South was fighting to preserve slavery, why didn’t they declare victory after the ultimatum and go home?
On June 15, 1864, three years into the war, the House of Representatives defeated the 13th Amendment, the amendment to free slaves. On January 31, 1865, when the war was almost over, the House of Representatives passed the 13th Amendment. The Union was still enforcing slave laws, six-months after Lee surrendered. On December 18, 1865, the 13th Amendment was ratified freeing all slaves. The 13th Amendment freed General Grant’s wife’s slaves. Clearly, the freeing of slaves was an afterthought.
Victors write history.
Re:Southern Perspective, The American Civil War
A SAD JOURNAL ENTRY OF A TAR HEEL CONFEDERATE…
April—I suppose the end is near, for there is no more hope for the South to gain her independence. On the 10th of this month we were told by an officer that all those who wished to get out of prison by taking the oath of allegiance to the United States could do so in a very few days. There was quite a consultation among the prisoners. On the morning of the 12th we heard that Lee had surrendered on the 9th, and about 400, myself with them, took the cursed oath and were given transportation to wherever we wanted to go. I took mine to New York City to my parents, whom I have not seen since 1858.
Our cause is lost; our comrades who have given their lives for the independence of the South have died in vain; that is, the cause for which they gave their lives is lost, but they positively did not give their lives in vain. They gave it for a most righteous cause, even if the Cause was lost. Those that remain to see the end for which they fought—what have we left? Our sufferings and privations would be nothing had the end been otherwise, for we have suffered hunger, been without sufficient clothing, barefooted, lousy, and have suffered more than anyone can believe, except soldiers of the Southern Confederacy.
And the end of all is a desolated home to go to. When I commenced this diary of my life as a Confederate soldier, I was full of hope for the speedy termination of the war, and our independence. I was not quite nineteen years old. I am now twenty-three. The four years that I have given to my country I do not regret, nor am I sorry for one day that I have given—my only regret is that we have lost that for which we fought. Nor do I for one moment think that we lost it by any other way than by being outnumbered at least five if not ten to one. The world was open to the enemy, but shut out to us. I shall now close this diary in sorrow, but to the last I will say that, although but a private, I still say our Cause was just, nor do I regret one thing that I have done to cripple the North.
Source: Diary of a Tar Heel Confederate Soldier, By L. LEON, 1913.
Link to free e-book: http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/leon/leon.htm
April—I suppose the end is near, for there is no more hope for the South to gain her independence. On the 10th of this month we were told by an officer that all those who wished to get out of prison by taking the oath of allegiance to the United States could do so in a very few days. There was quite a consultation among the prisoners. On the morning of the 12th we heard that Lee had surrendered on the 9th, and about 400, myself with them, took the cursed oath and were given transportation to wherever we wanted to go. I took mine to New York City to my parents, whom I have not seen since 1858.
Our cause is lost; our comrades who have given their lives for the independence of the South have died in vain; that is, the cause for which they gave their lives is lost, but they positively did not give their lives in vain. They gave it for a most righteous cause, even if the Cause was lost. Those that remain to see the end for which they fought—what have we left? Our sufferings and privations would be nothing had the end been otherwise, for we have suffered hunger, been without sufficient clothing, barefooted, lousy, and have suffered more than anyone can believe, except soldiers of the Southern Confederacy.
And the end of all is a desolated home to go to. When I commenced this diary of my life as a Confederate soldier, I was full of hope for the speedy termination of the war, and our independence. I was not quite nineteen years old. I am now twenty-three. The four years that I have given to my country I do not regret, nor am I sorry for one day that I have given—my only regret is that we have lost that for which we fought. Nor do I for one moment think that we lost it by any other way than by being outnumbered at least five if not ten to one. The world was open to the enemy, but shut out to us. I shall now close this diary in sorrow, but to the last I will say that, although but a private, I still say our Cause was just, nor do I regret one thing that I have done to cripple the North.
Source: Diary of a Tar Heel Confederate Soldier, By L. LEON, 1913.
Link to free e-book: http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/leon/leon.htm
WHEN GENERAL FORREST SPEAKS
WHEN GENERAL FORREST SAYS, “IT’S GOD,” I DARE A MAN TO SAY DIFFERENTLY….
An incident occurring the night ensuing the recent battle of Tishamingo Creek illustrates alike the desperate character of the contest and the feelings of the General (Forrest) commanding in an hour of excessive trial. At a late hour of the night, he ceased for a few hours the pursuit of the enemy and we found him seated in earnest thought in a log hut on the side of the road, his exhausted staff asleep all around him.
A staff officer of General S.D. Lee had just arrived to inquire after the fate of the day. General Forrest was dictating a dispatch in answer to his inquiry and closed it with the expression: By the help of Almighty God we have won one of the most complete victories of the war.
Someone present hinted that hard fighting had a good deal to do with the victory. After a style usual to the general when deeply in earnest; he brought his clenched fist down on his thigh exclaiming, “I say by the help of God; and it was by His help, for without it we never could have whipped in the fight with the odds against us!”
Source: Christ in the Camp: Or, Religion in the Confederate Army, by John William Jones,
Link to free ebook: https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=ImlLAAAAYAAJ
WHEN GENERAL FORREST SAYS, “IT’S GOD,” I DARE A MAN TO SAY DIFFERENTLY….
An incident occurring the night ensuing the recent battle of Tishamingo Creek illustrates alike the desperate character of the contest and the feelings of the General (Forrest) commanding in an hour of excessive trial. At a late hour of the night, he ceased for a few hours the pursuit of the enemy and we found him seated in earnest thought in a log hut on the side of the road, his exhausted staff asleep all around him.
A staff officer of General S.D. Lee had just arrived to inquire after the fate of the day. General Forrest was dictating a dispatch in answer to his inquiry and closed it with the expression: By the help of Almighty God we have won one of the most complete victories of the war.
Someone present hinted that hard fighting had a good deal to do with the victory. After a style usual to the general when deeply in earnest; he brought his clenched fist down on his thigh exclaiming, “I say by the help of God; and it was by His help, for without it we never could have whipped in the fight with the odds against us!”
Source: Christ in the Camp: Or, Religion in the Confederate Army, by John William Jones,
Link to free ebook: https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=ImlLAAAAYAAJ
DIXELAND
“The South is our country; the North is the country of those who live there. We are an agricultural people; they are a manufacturing people. They are the descendants of the good old Puritan Plymouth Rock stock, and we of the South from the proud and aristocratic stock of Cavaliers. We believe in the doctrine of State Rights, they in the doctrine of centralization.”
Source: “Co Aytch,” by Sam Watkins, 1882
Photo: Sam Watkins
“The South is our country; the North is the country of those who live there. We are an agricultural people; they are a manufacturing people. They are the descendants of the good old Puritan Plymouth Rock stock, and we of the South from the proud and aristocratic stock of Cavaliers. We believe in the doctrine of State Rights, they in the doctrine of centralization.”
Source: “Co Aytch,” by Sam Watkins, 1882
Photo: Sam Watkins
THE OTHER SOUTH CAROLINA SECCESSION DOCUMENT
Matt Miller
Thomas DiLorenzo, in his excellent work The Real Lincoln, gives a very applicable example on the situation that our nation found itself in 1860 by likening it to a marriage. One party seeks control of the other while violating the marriage agreement, which subsequently ends in a divorce where one party holds a gun to their loved-one’s head saying, “you cannot leave.” I thought this was a brilliant example which illuminates the Southern situation of 1860, not only because it’s relevant, but because of one essential South Carolina document that’s rarely given the attention it deserves: Robert Rhett’s An Address of the People of South Carolina.
If you fly a Confederate flag, chances are you’ve heard the opposition say, “It’s all about slavery…because they [Confederates] said so in their founding documents.” Yet over the weekend, I took the time to carefully examine, in its entirety, the specific document they generally speak of. Unsurprisingly, many online forums do not give the entire version -- they simply copy and paste the sections which speak of slavery. And predictably, anyone who reads this document without proper historical context is blinded to the full truth. Do scientists or anyone seeking the truth, come to a conclusion based upon one single form of evidence, or does their thesis/theory/conclusion result from an array of evidence, physical or otherwise observed? History is no different.
When I hear someone mention the Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union, I ask them if they’ve read Robert Rhett’s 1860 piece. The answer is usually no. Yet this document not only reveals the various reasons for secession, but presents a far clearer picture of the part slavery played.
Within just the opening paragraph, it reads:
“The one great evil, from which all other evils have flowed, is the overthrow of the Constitution of the United States. The Government of the United States is no longer the government of Confederated Republics, but of a consolidated Democracy. It is no longer a free government, but a despotism.…The Southern States now stand exactly in the same position toward the Northern States that the Colonies did towards Great Britain. The Northern States, having the majority in congress, claim the same power of omnipotence in legislation as the British parliament.”
As you can see, the issues as seen by Robert Rhett, were about centralization of power and rule by decree of the democratic mob. Inherent rights are meaningless if the will of the mob is allowed to be exercised on every issue. Yet, the skeptic might still say that the overthrow of the Constitution, consolidation of democracy, and despotism spoken of is completely over the issue of slavery. This is what modern historians would suggest, but as one reads on the address leaves no room for doubt:
“…with the Southern States, towards the Northern States, in the vital matter of taxation. They are in a minority in Congress. Their representation in Congress is useless to protect them against unjust taxation; and they are taxed by the people of the North for their benefit, exactly as the people of Great Britain. . . the taxes laid by the Congress of the United States, have been laid with a view of subserving the interests of the North….Taxed by duties on imports, not for revenue…to promote, by prohibitions, Northern interests in the products of their mines and manufacturers…after the taxes are collected, three-fourths of them are expended at the North.”
As even the stubbornly dense can see, the concern of South Carolina was burdensome taxes being used to transfer wealth from the South to the North. The North demanded huge federal spending projects -- projects that were overwhelmingly funded by the South. Rhett’s address continues to explain how northern run policy based on greed was strangling the South, annihilating trade. Rhett likened it to tyranny and destruction of their future posterity if South Carolina did not separate:
“In their reckless lust for power…the majority, constituted form those who do not represent the sectional or local interests, will control and govern them. A free people cannot submit to such a government.”
Overall, it was a question of small government—did the States have right to govern themselves over the interests of the Federal government? It was never an issue simply about slavery, but concerning taxes, trade, and other sectional interests.
Putting slavery into context.
The issue of slavery is mentioned in both SC documents because Northerners were purposefully disobeying the Constitution. South Carolina saw this as one more justification to secede from an increasingly hostile neighbor. Northern states were violating the contract that all states had entered in to -- and South Carolina explicitly points that out. At the time, the United States Constitution, which all States agreed to adhere to, did not condemn slavery. The Constitution had explicitly been agreed to on the grounds that slavery was to be allowed and respected.
Slavery was so far down the priority list of the North that Abraham Lincoln wrote to every governor in the seceded Southern States offering solidification of slavery within the US Constitution permanently. It was known as the Corwin amendment (don’t be surprised when your college professor hasn’t a clue about this). As the Northern states increasingly violated the law -- failing to prosecute lawbreaking slaves or return them to their owners -- Southerners crept closer and closer to secession. The South even tolerated a full decade of Yankee rhetoric against slavery -- which lied, demonized, and stirred up controversy within their society. Simply put, the mention of slavery in both documents, especially within the immediate causes is an outraged reaction to the fiasco of John Brown, Nat Turner, and rhetoric of various radical abolitionist newspapers, but it was not the reason for secession.
There were a variety of reasons for the South wanting peaceful separation, and it wasn’t “all about slavery.” Robert Rhett’s The Address of the People of South Carolina proves this, along with a variety of other historical proofs: the Corwin Amendment, US Congressional Record, Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address, to name a few.
Source: The Confederate Shop, Matt Miller
Matt Miller
Thomas DiLorenzo, in his excellent work The Real Lincoln, gives a very applicable example on the situation that our nation found itself in 1860 by likening it to a marriage. One party seeks control of the other while violating the marriage agreement, which subsequently ends in a divorce where one party holds a gun to their loved-one’s head saying, “you cannot leave.” I thought this was a brilliant example which illuminates the Southern situation of 1860, not only because it’s relevant, but because of one essential South Carolina document that’s rarely given the attention it deserves: Robert Rhett’s An Address of the People of South Carolina.
If you fly a Confederate flag, chances are you’ve heard the opposition say, “It’s all about slavery…because they [Confederates] said so in their founding documents.” Yet over the weekend, I took the time to carefully examine, in its entirety, the specific document they generally speak of. Unsurprisingly, many online forums do not give the entire version -- they simply copy and paste the sections which speak of slavery. And predictably, anyone who reads this document without proper historical context is blinded to the full truth. Do scientists or anyone seeking the truth, come to a conclusion based upon one single form of evidence, or does their thesis/theory/conclusion result from an array of evidence, physical or otherwise observed? History is no different.
When I hear someone mention the Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union, I ask them if they’ve read Robert Rhett’s 1860 piece. The answer is usually no. Yet this document not only reveals the various reasons for secession, but presents a far clearer picture of the part slavery played.
Within just the opening paragraph, it reads:
“The one great evil, from which all other evils have flowed, is the overthrow of the Constitution of the United States. The Government of the United States is no longer the government of Confederated Republics, but of a consolidated Democracy. It is no longer a free government, but a despotism.…The Southern States now stand exactly in the same position toward the Northern States that the Colonies did towards Great Britain. The Northern States, having the majority in congress, claim the same power of omnipotence in legislation as the British parliament.”
As you can see, the issues as seen by Robert Rhett, were about centralization of power and rule by decree of the democratic mob. Inherent rights are meaningless if the will of the mob is allowed to be exercised on every issue. Yet, the skeptic might still say that the overthrow of the Constitution, consolidation of democracy, and despotism spoken of is completely over the issue of slavery. This is what modern historians would suggest, but as one reads on the address leaves no room for doubt:
“…with the Southern States, towards the Northern States, in the vital matter of taxation. They are in a minority in Congress. Their representation in Congress is useless to protect them against unjust taxation; and they are taxed by the people of the North for their benefit, exactly as the people of Great Britain. . . the taxes laid by the Congress of the United States, have been laid with a view of subserving the interests of the North….Taxed by duties on imports, not for revenue…to promote, by prohibitions, Northern interests in the products of their mines and manufacturers…after the taxes are collected, three-fourths of them are expended at the North.”
As even the stubbornly dense can see, the concern of South Carolina was burdensome taxes being used to transfer wealth from the South to the North. The North demanded huge federal spending projects -- projects that were overwhelmingly funded by the South. Rhett’s address continues to explain how northern run policy based on greed was strangling the South, annihilating trade. Rhett likened it to tyranny and destruction of their future posterity if South Carolina did not separate:
“In their reckless lust for power…the majority, constituted form those who do not represent the sectional or local interests, will control and govern them. A free people cannot submit to such a government.”
Overall, it was a question of small government—did the States have right to govern themselves over the interests of the Federal government? It was never an issue simply about slavery, but concerning taxes, trade, and other sectional interests.
Putting slavery into context.
The issue of slavery is mentioned in both SC documents because Northerners were purposefully disobeying the Constitution. South Carolina saw this as one more justification to secede from an increasingly hostile neighbor. Northern states were violating the contract that all states had entered in to -- and South Carolina explicitly points that out. At the time, the United States Constitution, which all States agreed to adhere to, did not condemn slavery. The Constitution had explicitly been agreed to on the grounds that slavery was to be allowed and respected.
Slavery was so far down the priority list of the North that Abraham Lincoln wrote to every governor in the seceded Southern States offering solidification of slavery within the US Constitution permanently. It was known as the Corwin amendment (don’t be surprised when your college professor hasn’t a clue about this). As the Northern states increasingly violated the law -- failing to prosecute lawbreaking slaves or return them to their owners -- Southerners crept closer and closer to secession. The South even tolerated a full decade of Yankee rhetoric against slavery -- which lied, demonized, and stirred up controversy within their society. Simply put, the mention of slavery in both documents, especially within the immediate causes is an outraged reaction to the fiasco of John Brown, Nat Turner, and rhetoric of various radical abolitionist newspapers, but it was not the reason for secession.
There were a variety of reasons for the South wanting peaceful separation, and it wasn’t “all about slavery.” Robert Rhett’s The Address of the People of South Carolina proves this, along with a variety of other historical proofs: the Corwin Amendment, US Congressional Record, Lincoln’s First Inaugural Address, to name a few.
Source: The Confederate Shop, Matt Miller
VIRGINA'S DEAD
Scarred on a hundred fields before,
Naked and starved and travel-sore,
Each man a tiger hunted,
They stood at bay as brave as Huns--
Last of the Old South's splendid sons,
Flanked by ten thousand shotted guns,
And by ten thousand fronted.
Scorched by the cannon's molten breath,
They'd climbed the trembling walls of death
And set their standards tattered --
Had charged at the bugle's stirring blare
Through bolted gloom and godless glare
From the dead's reddened gulches, where
The searching shrapnel shattered.
They formed -- that Carolina band --
With Grimes, the Spartan, in command.
And, at the word of Gordan,
Through splintered fire and stifling smoke --
They struck with lightning's scathing stoke, --
Those doomed and desperate men -- and broke
Across the iron cordon.
They turned in sullen, slow retreat --
Ah, there are laurels of defeat --
Turned, for the chief had spoken;
With one last shot hurled back the foes,
And prayed the trump of doom to blow,
Now that the Southern stars were low,
The Southern bars were broken.
Sometime the calm, impartial years
Will tell what made them dead to tears
Of loved ones left to languish: --
What nerved them for the lonely guard,
For cleaving blade and mangling shard, --
What gave them strength in tent and ward
To drain the dregs of anguish.
But the far ages will propound
What never sage hath lore to sound; --
Why, in such fires of rancor,
The God of love should find it meet
For Him, with Grant as sledge to beat
On Lee, the anvil at such heat,
Our nation's great sheet-anchor.
Cornelia J. M. Jordan
(13 August 1862)
Scarred on a hundred fields before,
Naked and starved and travel-sore,
Each man a tiger hunted,
They stood at bay as brave as Huns--
Last of the Old South's splendid sons,
Flanked by ten thousand shotted guns,
And by ten thousand fronted.
Scorched by the cannon's molten breath,
They'd climbed the trembling walls of death
And set their standards tattered --
Had charged at the bugle's stirring blare
Through bolted gloom and godless glare
From the dead's reddened gulches, where
The searching shrapnel shattered.
They formed -- that Carolina band --
With Grimes, the Spartan, in command.
And, at the word of Gordan,
Through splintered fire and stifling smoke --
They struck with lightning's scathing stoke, --
Those doomed and desperate men -- and broke
Across the iron cordon.
They turned in sullen, slow retreat --
Ah, there are laurels of defeat --
Turned, for the chief had spoken;
With one last shot hurled back the foes,
And prayed the trump of doom to blow,
Now that the Southern stars were low,
The Southern bars were broken.
Sometime the calm, impartial years
Will tell what made them dead to tears
Of loved ones left to languish: --
What nerved them for the lonely guard,
For cleaving blade and mangling shard, --
What gave them strength in tent and ward
To drain the dregs of anguish.
But the far ages will propound
What never sage hath lore to sound; --
Why, in such fires of rancor,
The God of love should find it meet
For Him, with Grant as sledge to beat
On Lee, the anvil at such heat,
Our nation's great sheet-anchor.
Cornelia J. M. Jordan
(13 August 1862)
THE WOMEN OF THE SOUTH
What had the women of the South been doing all this time? Would that I had a gifted pen to tell of the noble deeds done by them! They had not been idle. Wherever woman could work or administer comfort, there she was found.
As soon as Virginia seceded, they organized societies throughout the State for work. In Richmond they met daily at certain houses and in the basement of nearly every church, where they made bandages by the mile, lint by the hundred pounds--using all the old cotton and linen clothing they had for this purpose,--making haversacks, and clothing of all kinds. To show with what energy they could work when it was necessary, I will narrate a circumstance told me soon after it occurred: During the retreat of Johnston from Yorktown, Richmond was thought to be deficient in fortifications, and it was suggested that if the government had bags they might be filled with sand and earth and placed in position, thus forming a wall, and then with earth thrown against this on the outside, earthworks of great strength could be made very quickly,--but how to get enough bags was the trouble! The ladies hearing of this sent a committee to see the Secretary of War, offering to make the bags if he would supply the material. He gladly accepted their offer and in an hour he had delivered to the ladies, at various places which they had designated, many huge rolls of cotton. The ladies were ready; cutting and making commenced, and the work went on all night. The next morning thousands of finished bags were delivered to the authorities and in a few hours the work of erecting the fortifications was begun!
The hospital committees were ever present, administering to the sick and wounded. I have heard numerous soldiers say they were glad they were wounded, as the careful attention received from those women more than repaid them for the suffering they endured! Here is a little incident told me after the war, by one of the fashionable young ladies, who lived on one of the fashionable streets of Richmond during the war. She was one of the young ladies who composed one of the hospital committees. In one of the hospitals which she attended, there was a soldier from one of the southern states who was desperately wounded, whom devoted nursing saved. He appreciated it and showed his obligation as well as a man could by thanks. When he was well and was ordered to his command in the field, he asked this young lady if he might call on her at her home. She told him she would be glad to see him at any time, and gave him the member of her residence. A day or two afterwards he called, and after conversing a short while, he told her he knew that the care given him by the ladies had saved his life, and he had asked to call in order that he might thank her and at the same time he wished to make her a little present. This had given him a great deal of thought, as his means were very limited, but he had bought her what he considered the best thing in the world, and he presented her with a small package of "goobers" (peanuts), saying he wished he were able to give her a bushel! She said to me that she considered that the most valuable present she ever received, and prized it as such, because it came from the man's heart; and she thinks it took every cent of money he had to purchase it!
There were committees to look after the poor who had a hard time, as all were poor! They did their duty as nobly and faithfully as the others.
Many households had no male person in them. This entailed much work and anxiety on the women at the head of them, and especially was this true in the country, where it was necessary to attend to the business of the farm, as well as that of the house. Many farms, and some large ones, were operated very successfully by women.
After the war they shared every hardship cheerfully, and, with an abiding faith in the men, they upheld them in all honorable work, and welcomed their old acquaintances to their homes with great cordiality, regardless of their rough hands and ragged clothing.
Source: One of Jackson's Foot Cavalry his Experience and what he saw During the War 1861-1865, Including a History of "F Company," Richmond, Va.,21st Regiment Virginia Infantry, Second Brigade, Jackson's Division, Second Corps, A. N. Va. by Worsham, John H., Pgs. 295-298, 1912.
What had the women of the South been doing all this time? Would that I had a gifted pen to tell of the noble deeds done by them! They had not been idle. Wherever woman could work or administer comfort, there she was found.
As soon as Virginia seceded, they organized societies throughout the State for work. In Richmond they met daily at certain houses and in the basement of nearly every church, where they made bandages by the mile, lint by the hundred pounds--using all the old cotton and linen clothing they had for this purpose,--making haversacks, and clothing of all kinds. To show with what energy they could work when it was necessary, I will narrate a circumstance told me soon after it occurred: During the retreat of Johnston from Yorktown, Richmond was thought to be deficient in fortifications, and it was suggested that if the government had bags they might be filled with sand and earth and placed in position, thus forming a wall, and then with earth thrown against this on the outside, earthworks of great strength could be made very quickly,--but how to get enough bags was the trouble! The ladies hearing of this sent a committee to see the Secretary of War, offering to make the bags if he would supply the material. He gladly accepted their offer and in an hour he had delivered to the ladies, at various places which they had designated, many huge rolls of cotton. The ladies were ready; cutting and making commenced, and the work went on all night. The next morning thousands of finished bags were delivered to the authorities and in a few hours the work of erecting the fortifications was begun!
The hospital committees were ever present, administering to the sick and wounded. I have heard numerous soldiers say they were glad they were wounded, as the careful attention received from those women more than repaid them for the suffering they endured! Here is a little incident told me after the war, by one of the fashionable young ladies, who lived on one of the fashionable streets of Richmond during the war. She was one of the young ladies who composed one of the hospital committees. In one of the hospitals which she attended, there was a soldier from one of the southern states who was desperately wounded, whom devoted nursing saved. He appreciated it and showed his obligation as well as a man could by thanks. When he was well and was ordered to his command in the field, he asked this young lady if he might call on her at her home. She told him she would be glad to see him at any time, and gave him the member of her residence. A day or two afterwards he called, and after conversing a short while, he told her he knew that the care given him by the ladies had saved his life, and he had asked to call in order that he might thank her and at the same time he wished to make her a little present. This had given him a great deal of thought, as his means were very limited, but he had bought her what he considered the best thing in the world, and he presented her with a small package of "goobers" (peanuts), saying he wished he were able to give her a bushel! She said to me that she considered that the most valuable present she ever received, and prized it as such, because it came from the man's heart; and she thinks it took every cent of money he had to purchase it!
There were committees to look after the poor who had a hard time, as all were poor! They did their duty as nobly and faithfully as the others.
Many households had no male person in them. This entailed much work and anxiety on the women at the head of them, and especially was this true in the country, where it was necessary to attend to the business of the farm, as well as that of the house. Many farms, and some large ones, were operated very successfully by women.
After the war they shared every hardship cheerfully, and, with an abiding faith in the men, they upheld them in all honorable work, and welcomed their old acquaintances to their homes with great cordiality, regardless of their rough hands and ragged clothing.
Source: One of Jackson's Foot Cavalry his Experience and what he saw During the War 1861-1865, Including a History of "F Company," Richmond, Va.,21st Regiment Virginia Infantry, Second Brigade, Jackson's Division, Second Corps, A. N. Va. by Worsham, John H., Pgs. 295-298, 1912.
THE DISMANTLING OF AMERICA
The Removal of Robert E Lee Richmond Virginia Monument Avenue
One of the things that has bothered me the most about the monument situation is the idea that a single sitting board or assembly (presumably elected for a variety of reasons besides being art or social critics) should be able to immediately execute the dismantling of commemorative statuary and art that existed long before they took office.
Monuments and immovable art are designed to inspire future generations to examine them- perhaps with admiration but more likely with curiosity and perhaps astonishment and occasionally scorn. The judgement can change as the decades and centuries pass. That’s exactly the point.
Richmond used to be a center of important people and important decisions and its landscape should reflect that history rather than succumbing to the movement to make it the sanitized capital of craft beer, tattoo parlors, and modern architectural mediocrity.
The idea of “adding to” rather than “subtracting from” is a lost premise in our modern self-righteous vindictive society that likes to masquerade as enlightened, conscious, and just while also rabidly emulating every mob of arrogant radicals in history.
Are we really empowering the ever changing rabble of increasingly undistinguished and hyper partisan elected officials to instantly lay waste to the work and cultural heritage of previous generations?
It seems very unwise. Especially when you consider that legitimate payback is likely coming.
I can see a time very soon when the first female Speaker Eilleen Filler Corn’s painting will be moved to the basement mens restrooms with a disclaimer that she lied to a court of law and was fined by the judge (all true) and Ralph Northam’s Governors portrait will be “decommissioned” and sold off to pay for a Jim Crow museum. Or perhaps just burned in a ceremonial denunciation of old Virginia family racists.
Is that what we want?
A constant race to discredit and destroy everyone that the side momentarily in power hates? Because I promise that’s what’s coming and- as of now- I can’t really say why it shouldn’t happen.
Let’s be clear- the removal of Lee is not about to unify our society.
Like so many of the progressive Democrat policies being advanced right now with the talibanesque removal of historical art and statuary our current leaders are sowing the seeds of discord for generations to come.
It seems to me that timeless political and cultural wisdom is not on display anywhere in modern Virginia and this mindset of immediate self-righteousness, like the hands of a ticking clock, will inevitably come back around.
Somehow I think the verdict of future generations on our current leaders will be equally unkind- and yet ironically more accurate than today’s judgment of the past.
The JOHN Reid Show WRVA
The Removal of Robert E Lee Richmond Virginia Monument Avenue
One of the things that has bothered me the most about the monument situation is the idea that a single sitting board or assembly (presumably elected for a variety of reasons besides being art or social critics) should be able to immediately execute the dismantling of commemorative statuary and art that existed long before they took office.
Monuments and immovable art are designed to inspire future generations to examine them- perhaps with admiration but more likely with curiosity and perhaps astonishment and occasionally scorn. The judgement can change as the decades and centuries pass. That’s exactly the point.
Richmond used to be a center of important people and important decisions and its landscape should reflect that history rather than succumbing to the movement to make it the sanitized capital of craft beer, tattoo parlors, and modern architectural mediocrity.
The idea of “adding to” rather than “subtracting from” is a lost premise in our modern self-righteous vindictive society that likes to masquerade as enlightened, conscious, and just while also rabidly emulating every mob of arrogant radicals in history.
Are we really empowering the ever changing rabble of increasingly undistinguished and hyper partisan elected officials to instantly lay waste to the work and cultural heritage of previous generations?
It seems very unwise. Especially when you consider that legitimate payback is likely coming.
I can see a time very soon when the first female Speaker Eilleen Filler Corn’s painting will be moved to the basement mens restrooms with a disclaimer that she lied to a court of law and was fined by the judge (all true) and Ralph Northam’s Governors portrait will be “decommissioned” and sold off to pay for a Jim Crow museum. Or perhaps just burned in a ceremonial denunciation of old Virginia family racists.
Is that what we want?
A constant race to discredit and destroy everyone that the side momentarily in power hates? Because I promise that’s what’s coming and- as of now- I can’t really say why it shouldn’t happen.
Let’s be clear- the removal of Lee is not about to unify our society.
Like so many of the progressive Democrat policies being advanced right now with the talibanesque removal of historical art and statuary our current leaders are sowing the seeds of discord for generations to come.
It seems to me that timeless political and cultural wisdom is not on display anywhere in modern Virginia and this mindset of immediate self-righteousness, like the hands of a ticking clock, will inevitably come back around.
Somehow I think the verdict of future generations on our current leaders will be equally unkind- and yet ironically more accurate than today’s judgment of the past.
The JOHN Reid Show WRVA
LITTLE KNOWN FACTS ON GENERAL FORREST
The Memphis Appeal
Thursday November 1, 1877
"Strange as it might appear to those ignorant of General Forrest's true character, hundreds of colored men, women, and children flocked to Colonel Jesse Forrest's residence...to view the remains...
...the colored people...evidenced a genuine sorrow in the death of the great soldier. Yesterday morning, over five hundred colored persons viewed the remains. Of this number not a single one was heard to say anything but what was in praise of General Forrest. The negroes had opportunity to see and know his goodness and recognize his charity and benevolence. Though crude and simple in what they said yet their words came from the heart and were sincere tributes to the excellence of the deceased.
At the church were assembled thousands of persons both black and white. The sidewalks and even the streets for several blocks were thronged and jammed with people.
...the crowd pressed in closer to get another view...Among the number were a large number of colored people...who were most deeply affected. The latter were heard to express their love for General Forrest...They were also heard to say that they feared they could not get another so kind and good as he had been."
Forrest a force to be reckoned with:
Excerpt from Bust Hell Wide Open:
Meanwhile Colonel Matthew Starr's 6th Illinois Calvary set out in pursuit.It halted when the northerners found Forrest's rear guard across their path in line of battle. Because the rebels outnumbered him two to one Starr declined to attack. Instead, he drew his sword and dashed out alone challenging the Rebel commander to a personal duel. Forrest responded immediately and the two leaders were soon locked in mortal combat in a scene out of the Middle Ages. The fight ended when Forrest ran his saber clear through Starr's chest and out his back killing him instantly.
"He was no more in the hands of general Forrest than a butterfly would be in the claws of an eagle," one Rebel recalled.
The Memphis Appeal
Thursday November 1, 1877
"Strange as it might appear to those ignorant of General Forrest's true character, hundreds of colored men, women, and children flocked to Colonel Jesse Forrest's residence...to view the remains...
...the colored people...evidenced a genuine sorrow in the death of the great soldier. Yesterday morning, over five hundred colored persons viewed the remains. Of this number not a single one was heard to say anything but what was in praise of General Forrest. The negroes had opportunity to see and know his goodness and recognize his charity and benevolence. Though crude and simple in what they said yet their words came from the heart and were sincere tributes to the excellence of the deceased.
At the church were assembled thousands of persons both black and white. The sidewalks and even the streets for several blocks were thronged and jammed with people.
...the crowd pressed in closer to get another view...Among the number were a large number of colored people...who were most deeply affected. The latter were heard to express their love for General Forrest...They were also heard to say that they feared they could not get another so kind and good as he had been."
Forrest a force to be reckoned with:
Excerpt from Bust Hell Wide Open:
Meanwhile Colonel Matthew Starr's 6th Illinois Calvary set out in pursuit.It halted when the northerners found Forrest's rear guard across their path in line of battle. Because the rebels outnumbered him two to one Starr declined to attack. Instead, he drew his sword and dashed out alone challenging the Rebel commander to a personal duel. Forrest responded immediately and the two leaders were soon locked in mortal combat in a scene out of the Middle Ages. The fight ended when Forrest ran his saber clear through Starr's chest and out his back killing him instantly.
"He was no more in the hands of general Forrest than a butterfly would be in the claws of an eagle," one Rebel recalled.
TRUTH ABOUT THOSE DAMN YANKEES...
When left to their own devices, former slaves reconstituted their families as best they could. In Northern Virginia, on the outskirts of the nation’s capital, a group of sixteen families established a small settlement, with men working as laborers in nearby military depots and the women tending the children, and keeping house in the shanties they proudly called home. The wife of an army chaplain described how their efforts came to naught when the Federal government unaccountably changed its policy respecting the settlement.
“About ten days after this conversation a body of Union soldiers entered the village claiming to have been sent by Genl Augur with peremptory orders “to clear out this village.” This order was executed so literally that even a dying child was ordered out of the house — The grandmother who had taken care of it since its mothers death begged leave to stay until the child died, but she was refused.
The men who were absent at work, came home at night to find empty houses, and their families gone, they knew not whither! — Some of them came to Lieut. Shepard to enquire for their lost wives and children —
In tears and indignation, they protested against a tyranny worse than their past experiences of slavery — One man said, “I going back to my old master — I never saw hard times till since I called myself a freeman.
Source: Families & Freedom: A Documentary History of African-American Kinship in the Civil War Era, pp.67-72, Edited by Ira Berlin and Leslie S. Rowland
When left to their own devices, former slaves reconstituted their families as best they could. In Northern Virginia, on the outskirts of the nation’s capital, a group of sixteen families established a small settlement, with men working as laborers in nearby military depots and the women tending the children, and keeping house in the shanties they proudly called home. The wife of an army chaplain described how their efforts came to naught when the Federal government unaccountably changed its policy respecting the settlement.
“About ten days after this conversation a body of Union soldiers entered the village claiming to have been sent by Genl Augur with peremptory orders “to clear out this village.” This order was executed so literally that even a dying child was ordered out of the house — The grandmother who had taken care of it since its mothers death begged leave to stay until the child died, but she was refused.
The men who were absent at work, came home at night to find empty houses, and their families gone, they knew not whither! — Some of them came to Lieut. Shepard to enquire for their lost wives and children —
In tears and indignation, they protested against a tyranny worse than their past experiences of slavery — One man said, “I going back to my old master — I never saw hard times till since I called myself a freeman.
Source: Families & Freedom: A Documentary History of African-American Kinship in the Civil War Era, pp.67-72, Edited by Ira Berlin and Leslie S. Rowland
GENERAL ALBERT GALLATIN JENKINS
Happy Confederate birthday to Albert Gallatin Jenkins (November 10, 1830 – May 21, 1864) an attorney, planter, representative to the United States Congress and First Confederate Congress, and a Confederate brigadier general during the American Civil War. The commander of a brigade of cavalry from what became West Virginia, he was mortally wounded at the Battle of Cloyd's Mountain near Dublin, Virginia.
Early life and career
Jenkins was born to wealthy plantation owner Capt. William Jenkins and his wife Jeanette Grigsby McNutt in Cabell County, Virginia, now West Virginia. At the age of fifteen, he attended Marshall Academy. He graduated from Jefferson College in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, in 1848 and from Harvard Law School in 1850. Jenkins was admitted to the bar that same year and established a practice in Charleston, before inheriting a portion of his father's sprawling plantation in 1859. He was named a delegate to the Democratic National Convention in Cincinnati in 1856, and was elected as a Democrat to the Thirty-fifth and Thirty-sixth United States Congresses.
Civil War
With the outbreak of the Civil War and Virginia's subsequent secession, Jenkins declined running for a third term and resigned from Congress in early 1861. He returned home and raised a company of mounted partisan rangers. By June, his company had enrolled in the Confederate army as a part of the 8th Virginia Cavalry, with Jenkins as its colonel. By the end of the year, his men had become such a nuisance to Federal interests in western Virginia that Governor Francis H. Pierpont appealed to President Abraham Lincoln to send in a strong leader to stamp out rebellion in the region. Early in 1862, Jenkins left the field to become a delegate to the First Confederate Congress. He was appointed brigadier general August 1, 1862, and returned to active duty. Throughout the fall, his men performed well, continuing to harass Union troops and supply lines, including the vital Baltimore & Ohio Railroad.
In September, Jenkins's cavalry raided northern Kentucky and West Virginia, and briefly entered extreme southern Ohio near Buffington Island, becoming the one of the first organized Confederate units to enter a Northern state. In December, Robert E. Lee requested that Jenkins and his men transfer to the Shenandoah Valley.
After spending the winter foraging for supplies, he led his men on a raid in March 1863 through western Virginia. During the Gettysburg Campaign, Jenkins' brigade formed the cavalry screen for Richard S. Ewell's Second Corps. Jenkins led his men through the Cumberland Valley into Pennsylvania and seized Chambersburg, burning down nearby railroad structures and bridges. He accompanied Ewell's column to Carlisle, briefly skirmishing with Union militia at the Battle of Sporting Hill near Harrisburg. During the subsequent Battle of Gettysburg, Jenkins was wounded on July 2 and missed the rest of the fighting. He did not recover sufficiently to rejoin his command until autumn.
He spent the early part of 1864 raising and organizing a large cavalry force for service in western Virginia. By May, Jenkins had been appointed Commander of the Department of Western Virginia with his headquarters at Dublin. Hearing that Union Brig. Gen. George Crook had been dispatched from the Kanawha Valley with a large force, Jenkins took the field to contest the Federal arrival. On May 9, 1864, he was severely wounded and captured during the Battle of Cloyd's Mountain. A Union surgeon amputated Jenkins' arm, but he never recovered, dying twelve days later. He was initially buried in New Dublin Presbyterian Cemetery. After the war, his remains were reinterred at his home in Greenbottom, near Huntington, West Virginia. He was later reinterred in the Confederate plot in Spring Hill Cemetery in Huntington.
Memorialization
Jenkins's home, Green Bottom, has been restored and is now a museum run by the West Virginia Division of Culture and History. In 1937, Marshall University constructed Jenkins Hall, naming it in honor of the distinguished Confederate cavalry officer. In 2005, a monument to General Jenkins was erected in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, commemorating his service during the Gettysburg Campaign.
Source: Southern Perspective, The American Civil War
Happy Confederate birthday to Albert Gallatin Jenkins (November 10, 1830 – May 21, 1864) an attorney, planter, representative to the United States Congress and First Confederate Congress, and a Confederate brigadier general during the American Civil War. The commander of a brigade of cavalry from what became West Virginia, he was mortally wounded at the Battle of Cloyd's Mountain near Dublin, Virginia.
Early life and career
Jenkins was born to wealthy plantation owner Capt. William Jenkins and his wife Jeanette Grigsby McNutt in Cabell County, Virginia, now West Virginia. At the age of fifteen, he attended Marshall Academy. He graduated from Jefferson College in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, in 1848 and from Harvard Law School in 1850. Jenkins was admitted to the bar that same year and established a practice in Charleston, before inheriting a portion of his father's sprawling plantation in 1859. He was named a delegate to the Democratic National Convention in Cincinnati in 1856, and was elected as a Democrat to the Thirty-fifth and Thirty-sixth United States Congresses.
Civil War
With the outbreak of the Civil War and Virginia's subsequent secession, Jenkins declined running for a third term and resigned from Congress in early 1861. He returned home and raised a company of mounted partisan rangers. By June, his company had enrolled in the Confederate army as a part of the 8th Virginia Cavalry, with Jenkins as its colonel. By the end of the year, his men had become such a nuisance to Federal interests in western Virginia that Governor Francis H. Pierpont appealed to President Abraham Lincoln to send in a strong leader to stamp out rebellion in the region. Early in 1862, Jenkins left the field to become a delegate to the First Confederate Congress. He was appointed brigadier general August 1, 1862, and returned to active duty. Throughout the fall, his men performed well, continuing to harass Union troops and supply lines, including the vital Baltimore & Ohio Railroad.
In September, Jenkins's cavalry raided northern Kentucky and West Virginia, and briefly entered extreme southern Ohio near Buffington Island, becoming the one of the first organized Confederate units to enter a Northern state. In December, Robert E. Lee requested that Jenkins and his men transfer to the Shenandoah Valley.
After spending the winter foraging for supplies, he led his men on a raid in March 1863 through western Virginia. During the Gettysburg Campaign, Jenkins' brigade formed the cavalry screen for Richard S. Ewell's Second Corps. Jenkins led his men through the Cumberland Valley into Pennsylvania and seized Chambersburg, burning down nearby railroad structures and bridges. He accompanied Ewell's column to Carlisle, briefly skirmishing with Union militia at the Battle of Sporting Hill near Harrisburg. During the subsequent Battle of Gettysburg, Jenkins was wounded on July 2 and missed the rest of the fighting. He did not recover sufficiently to rejoin his command until autumn.
He spent the early part of 1864 raising and organizing a large cavalry force for service in western Virginia. By May, Jenkins had been appointed Commander of the Department of Western Virginia with his headquarters at Dublin. Hearing that Union Brig. Gen. George Crook had been dispatched from the Kanawha Valley with a large force, Jenkins took the field to contest the Federal arrival. On May 9, 1864, he was severely wounded and captured during the Battle of Cloyd's Mountain. A Union surgeon amputated Jenkins' arm, but he never recovered, dying twelve days later. He was initially buried in New Dublin Presbyterian Cemetery. After the war, his remains were reinterred at his home in Greenbottom, near Huntington, West Virginia. He was later reinterred in the Confederate plot in Spring Hill Cemetery in Huntington.
Memorialization
Jenkins's home, Green Bottom, has been restored and is now a museum run by the West Virginia Division of Culture and History. In 1937, Marshall University constructed Jenkins Hall, naming it in honor of the distinguished Confederate cavalry officer. In 2005, a monument to General Jenkins was erected in Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania, commemorating his service during the Gettysburg Campaign.
Source: Southern Perspective, The American Civil War
SOUTH CAROLINA'S WADE HAMPTON:
THEIR NATHAN BEDFORD FORREST
All in all, Hampton was a high-minded, middle-aged man of position and responsibility, a conservative who believed in temperance, prudence, caution, and duty. When war came, he saw his duty clearly enough. His properties spread over South Carolina and Mississippi. He was a Southerner, and he would stand by his people. He knew that men of his estate raised regiments of their own and offered them to the governor. He did the same, though in his case he modeled his military muster upon that of the ancient Romans, creating Wade Hampton’s Legion, which he recruited and fitted out with a gubernatorial agreement that he and the state would share some of the expenses. He imported artillery pieces and Enfield rifles from England, and planned to distribute them among one company of artillery, six companies of infantry, and four of cavalry. With Southern gallantry, he told the governor that he was willing himself to enlist, if he was unworthy of a commission. The governor dismissed that with a stuff and poppycock and commissioned him a colonel. Now the colonel was the commander of a legion of a thousand men. Riding at the head of his legion, leaving behind his estates , his was a thoroughly classical beginning.
Wade Hampton’s Legion saw action at First Manassas, where the Legion stood, like Jackson’s men, as a stone wall repelling the fierce Union assault that nearly surrounded it. Hampton had one horse killed beneath him by an artillery shell, but kept his men in good order, maintaining a steady stream of well-directed fire. Leading by example, he picked up a rifle and fired his own volleys at the Yankees. Hit by shrapnel in the face, temporarily blinded by blood, he continued to issue orders until he was convinced to turn over command. His performance on the field won the praise not only of General P. G. T. Beauregard but of Jefferson Davis, who visited the wounded warrior to offer his personal thanks and congratulations for a battle well fought.
Hampton was made a brigadier general in May 1862, and his legion served everywhere from Dumfries, were it was to harass Yankee movements, commercial and military, on the Potomac and Occoquan Rivers; to the Peninsula, where it covered Joseph E. Johnston’s retreat and smacked the pursuing Federals at Eltham’s Landing along the York River; to the defense of Richmond, where, at the Battle of Fair Oaks Seven Pines, Hampton gave the memorable order to his men, not to fire “until you can feel the enemy on your bayonets.” What Hampton soon felt was a Minié ball in his boot, which regimental doctors operated on while he remained in the saddle directing his men in the fight. The wound left Hampton with a permanent limp and brought him new orders.
He returned from his convalescing to find the army reorganized, his legion broken up, and he was assigned first as a brigadier under Stonewall Jackson’s command and then as a brigade commander of cavalry under the newly elevated Major General Jeb Stuart.
Source: Lincoln's War - The Palmetto Confederates - Carl Miller
THEIR NATHAN BEDFORD FORREST
All in all, Hampton was a high-minded, middle-aged man of position and responsibility, a conservative who believed in temperance, prudence, caution, and duty. When war came, he saw his duty clearly enough. His properties spread over South Carolina and Mississippi. He was a Southerner, and he would stand by his people. He knew that men of his estate raised regiments of their own and offered them to the governor. He did the same, though in his case he modeled his military muster upon that of the ancient Romans, creating Wade Hampton’s Legion, which he recruited and fitted out with a gubernatorial agreement that he and the state would share some of the expenses. He imported artillery pieces and Enfield rifles from England, and planned to distribute them among one company of artillery, six companies of infantry, and four of cavalry. With Southern gallantry, he told the governor that he was willing himself to enlist, if he was unworthy of a commission. The governor dismissed that with a stuff and poppycock and commissioned him a colonel. Now the colonel was the commander of a legion of a thousand men. Riding at the head of his legion, leaving behind his estates , his was a thoroughly classical beginning.
Wade Hampton’s Legion saw action at First Manassas, where the Legion stood, like Jackson’s men, as a stone wall repelling the fierce Union assault that nearly surrounded it. Hampton had one horse killed beneath him by an artillery shell, but kept his men in good order, maintaining a steady stream of well-directed fire. Leading by example, he picked up a rifle and fired his own volleys at the Yankees. Hit by shrapnel in the face, temporarily blinded by blood, he continued to issue orders until he was convinced to turn over command. His performance on the field won the praise not only of General P. G. T. Beauregard but of Jefferson Davis, who visited the wounded warrior to offer his personal thanks and congratulations for a battle well fought.
Hampton was made a brigadier general in May 1862, and his legion served everywhere from Dumfries, were it was to harass Yankee movements, commercial and military, on the Potomac and Occoquan Rivers; to the Peninsula, where it covered Joseph E. Johnston’s retreat and smacked the pursuing Federals at Eltham’s Landing along the York River; to the defense of Richmond, where, at the Battle of Fair Oaks Seven Pines, Hampton gave the memorable order to his men, not to fire “until you can feel the enemy on your bayonets.” What Hampton soon felt was a Minié ball in his boot, which regimental doctors operated on while he remained in the saddle directing his men in the fight. The wound left Hampton with a permanent limp and brought him new orders.
He returned from his convalescing to find the army reorganized, his legion broken up, and he was assigned first as a brigadier under Stonewall Jackson’s command and then as a brigade commander of cavalry under the newly elevated Major General Jeb Stuart.
Source: Lincoln's War - The Palmetto Confederates - Carl Miller
WADE HAMPTON AND THE GREAT BEEFSTEAK RAID
The Beefsteak Raid was a Confederate cavalry raid that took place in September 1864 as part of the Siege of Petersburg during the American Civil War. Confederate Maj. Gen. Wade Hampton led a force of 3,000 troopers of the Confederate States Army on what was to become a 100-mile ride to acquire cattle that were intended for consumption by the Union Army, which was laying a combined siege to the cities of Richmond and Petersburg, Virginia. Always lacking in supplies, the Confederate forces that were defending the capital of Richmond were beginning to run out of food. A report by General Robert E. Lee on August 22, 1864, stated that corn to feed the Southern soldiers was exhausted. A scout, Sergeant George D. Shadburne, informed General Hampton on September 5 that there were 3,000 lightly defended cattle behind Union lines, at Edmund Ruffin's plantation on Coggin's Point, 5 miles down the James River from Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant's headquarters. Believing the cattle were defended by only 120 Union soldiers and 30 civilians; the actual force was larger, but still less than 500... Hampton arranged for 3,000 Confederate troops to follow him. These men included "several certified Texas cattle thieves"
Source: Lincoln's War - The Palmetto Confederates - Carl Miller
The Beefsteak Raid was a Confederate cavalry raid that took place in September 1864 as part of the Siege of Petersburg during the American Civil War. Confederate Maj. Gen. Wade Hampton led a force of 3,000 troopers of the Confederate States Army on what was to become a 100-mile ride to acquire cattle that were intended for consumption by the Union Army, which was laying a combined siege to the cities of Richmond and Petersburg, Virginia. Always lacking in supplies, the Confederate forces that were defending the capital of Richmond were beginning to run out of food. A report by General Robert E. Lee on August 22, 1864, stated that corn to feed the Southern soldiers was exhausted. A scout, Sergeant George D. Shadburne, informed General Hampton on September 5 that there were 3,000 lightly defended cattle behind Union lines, at Edmund Ruffin's plantation on Coggin's Point, 5 miles down the James River from Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant's headquarters. Believing the cattle were defended by only 120 Union soldiers and 30 civilians; the actual force was larger, but still less than 500... Hampton arranged for 3,000 Confederate troops to follow him. These men included "several certified Texas cattle thieves"
Source: Lincoln's War - The Palmetto Confederates - Carl Miller
EATING BLACK EYED PEAS ON NEW YEAR'S DAY:
THE HISTORY
If you grew up in the south or southwestern parts of this country, then you can relate. I grew up with this belief, but did not know the real reason. My mother always served black eyed peas on New Year's Day, and she said it would bring good luck in the new year. I've carried this tradition forward, but never knew the reason behind it. It became a way of remembrance of my mother and grandmother. Black Eyed Peas "The Real Story," is much more interesting and has gone untold in fear that feelings would be hurt. It’s a story of war, the most brutal and bloody war in US history. Military might and power pushed upon civilians, women, children and elderly. Never seen as a war crime, this was the policy of the greatest nation on earth trying to maintain that status at all costs.
An unhealed wound remains in the hearts of some people of the southern states even today; on the other hand, the policy of slavery has been an open wound that has also been slow to heal but is okay to talk about. The story of *THE BLACK EYED PEA* being considered good luck relates directly back to Sherman's Bloody March to the Sea in late 1864. It was called The Savannah Campaign and was lead by Major General William T. Sherman. The Civil War campaign began on Nov. 15, 1864, when Sherman's' troops marched from the captured city of Atlanta ,Georgia, and ended at the port of Savannah on 12/22/1864. When the smoke cleared, the southerners who had survived the onslaught came out of hiding. They found that the blue-belly aggressors had looted and stolen everything of value, and everything you could eat, including all livestock.
Death and destruction were everywhere. While in hiding, few had enough to eat, and starvation was now upon the survivors.There was no international aid, no Red Cross meal trucks. The Northern army had taken everything they could carry and eaten everything they could eat. But they couldn’t take it all. The devastated people of the south found for some unknown reason that Sherman's bloodthirsty troops had left silos full of blackeyed peas. At the time in the north, the lowly black eyed pea was only used to feed stock. The northern troops saw it as the thing of least value. Taking grain for their horses and livestock and other crops to feed themselves, they just couldn’t take everything. So they left the black eyed peas in great quantities, assuming it would be of no use to the survivors, since all the livestock it could feed had either been taken or eaten. Southerners awoke to face a new year in this devastation and were facing massive starvation if not for the good luck of having the black eyed peas to eat. From New Years Day 1866 forward, the tradition grew to eat black eyed peas on New Year’s Day for good luck.
I will have my Black Eyed Peas this New Year's Day!
THE HISTORY
If you grew up in the south or southwestern parts of this country, then you can relate. I grew up with this belief, but did not know the real reason. My mother always served black eyed peas on New Year's Day, and she said it would bring good luck in the new year. I've carried this tradition forward, but never knew the reason behind it. It became a way of remembrance of my mother and grandmother. Black Eyed Peas "The Real Story," is much more interesting and has gone untold in fear that feelings would be hurt. It’s a story of war, the most brutal and bloody war in US history. Military might and power pushed upon civilians, women, children and elderly. Never seen as a war crime, this was the policy of the greatest nation on earth trying to maintain that status at all costs.
An unhealed wound remains in the hearts of some people of the southern states even today; on the other hand, the policy of slavery has been an open wound that has also been slow to heal but is okay to talk about. The story of *THE BLACK EYED PEA* being considered good luck relates directly back to Sherman's Bloody March to the Sea in late 1864. It was called The Savannah Campaign and was lead by Major General William T. Sherman. The Civil War campaign began on Nov. 15, 1864, when Sherman's' troops marched from the captured city of Atlanta ,Georgia, and ended at the port of Savannah on 12/22/1864. When the smoke cleared, the southerners who had survived the onslaught came out of hiding. They found that the blue-belly aggressors had looted and stolen everything of value, and everything you could eat, including all livestock.
Death and destruction were everywhere. While in hiding, few had enough to eat, and starvation was now upon the survivors.There was no international aid, no Red Cross meal trucks. The Northern army had taken everything they could carry and eaten everything they could eat. But they couldn’t take it all. The devastated people of the south found for some unknown reason that Sherman's bloodthirsty troops had left silos full of blackeyed peas. At the time in the north, the lowly black eyed pea was only used to feed stock. The northern troops saw it as the thing of least value. Taking grain for their horses and livestock and other crops to feed themselves, they just couldn’t take everything. So they left the black eyed peas in great quantities, assuming it would be of no use to the survivors, since all the livestock it could feed had either been taken or eaten. Southerners awoke to face a new year in this devastation and were facing massive starvation if not for the good luck of having the black eyed peas to eat. From New Years Day 1866 forward, the tradition grew to eat black eyed peas on New Year’s Day for good luck.
I will have my Black Eyed Peas this New Year's Day!
CELEBRATING LEE AND JACKSON
Happy Lee Jackson Day Dixieland! I am a Southerner and I am a Southern Nationalist and I believe Jesus is Lord. I am not ashamed of my Southern History and Heritage; my Ancestors fought for a cause they believed just and I believe that cause was just. I will do my part to defend Southern Heritage and I will defend Biblical ways because Jesus is the King of Kings. As we come into this Holiday weekend I will be celebrating Lee Jackson Day not the Yankee empire holiday. The godless may destroy our Southern Monuments and our Heroic Statues and even try to ban our beloved Confederate Flag but we will not stop honoring our Ancestors, our Southetn Heritage and our Southern Culture. With every Monument or Heroic Statue destroyed a new Confederate Flag goes up... so have a blessed Holiday weekend as we celebrate General Robert E. Lee and General Thomas J. Stonewall Jackson, two fine Christian, Southern Generals who fought valiantly for our beloved South. We thank them for their sacrifice and loyal service. God Bless the South and may God save our Southern Heritage. Deo Vindice.
Happy Lee Jackson Day Dixieland! I am a Southerner and I am a Southern Nationalist and I believe Jesus is Lord. I am not ashamed of my Southern History and Heritage; my Ancestors fought for a cause they believed just and I believe that cause was just. I will do my part to defend Southern Heritage and I will defend Biblical ways because Jesus is the King of Kings. As we come into this Holiday weekend I will be celebrating Lee Jackson Day not the Yankee empire holiday. The godless may destroy our Southern Monuments and our Heroic Statues and even try to ban our beloved Confederate Flag but we will not stop honoring our Ancestors, our Southetn Heritage and our Southern Culture. With every Monument or Heroic Statue destroyed a new Confederate Flag goes up... so have a blessed Holiday weekend as we celebrate General Robert E. Lee and General Thomas J. Stonewall Jackson, two fine Christian, Southern Generals who fought valiantly for our beloved South. We thank them for their sacrifice and loyal service. God Bless the South and may God save our Southern Heritage. Deo Vindice.
JEB STEWART'S PLUMED HAT
During a burial truce following the Confederate victory at the Battle of Cedar Mountain, Confederate General J.E.B. Stuart suggested to his old friend, Union General Samuel Crawford, that the leftist Yankee press would somehow find a way to spin the Union defeat as a victory.
Union General Crawford replied that not even the “reckless New York Herald” could find a way to make the battle seem a victory.
Thus, Stuart offered a bet: Crawford would owe him a new hat if the Yankee fake news media proclaimed the Battle of Cedar Mountain a Union triumph.
A few days later Stuart received a package in camp from Crawford. It contained a copy of the New York Herald and a new plumed hat.
Source: The Virginia Flaggers
During a burial truce following the Confederate victory at the Battle of Cedar Mountain, Confederate General J.E.B. Stuart suggested to his old friend, Union General Samuel Crawford, that the leftist Yankee press would somehow find a way to spin the Union defeat as a victory.
Union General Crawford replied that not even the “reckless New York Herald” could find a way to make the battle seem a victory.
Thus, Stuart offered a bet: Crawford would owe him a new hat if the Yankee fake news media proclaimed the Battle of Cedar Mountain a Union triumph.
A few days later Stuart received a package in camp from Crawford. It contained a copy of the New York Herald and a new plumed hat.
Source: The Virginia Flaggers
FORREST…The Wizard of the Saddle
Born July 13, 1821 in Chapel Hill, Tennessee – a small town on the Duck River. When his father, a blacksmith, died when he was 16, Forrest moved to the Memphis Delta and eventually became a successful businessman.
At the outbreak of the War, Forrest volunteered as a Private before deciding to raise and equip an entire unit at his own expense. He was commissioned lieutenant colonel, and issued this call to arms in June, 1861: “I wish none but those who desire to be actively engaged. COME ON BOYS, IF YOU WANT A HEAP OF FUN AND TO KILL SOME YANKEES!”
When Robert E. Lee surrendered to Grant in April, Forrest surrendered as well, declaring that, “any man who is in favor of a further prosecution of this war is a fit subject for a lunatic asylum.” Over the course of the conflict, Forrest had given as much as probably any man for the cause. He had had 29 horses shot from under him, killed or seriously wounded at least thirty enemy soldiers in hand-to-hand combat, and had been himself wounded four times.
Forrest died of Diabetes in Memphis on October 29, 1877.
Source: Defending the Heritage
Born July 13, 1821 in Chapel Hill, Tennessee – a small town on the Duck River. When his father, a blacksmith, died when he was 16, Forrest moved to the Memphis Delta and eventually became a successful businessman.
At the outbreak of the War, Forrest volunteered as a Private before deciding to raise and equip an entire unit at his own expense. He was commissioned lieutenant colonel, and issued this call to arms in June, 1861: “I wish none but those who desire to be actively engaged. COME ON BOYS, IF YOU WANT A HEAP OF FUN AND TO KILL SOME YANKEES!”
When Robert E. Lee surrendered to Grant in April, Forrest surrendered as well, declaring that, “any man who is in favor of a further prosecution of this war is a fit subject for a lunatic asylum.” Over the course of the conflict, Forrest had given as much as probably any man for the cause. He had had 29 horses shot from under him, killed or seriously wounded at least thirty enemy soldiers in hand-to-hand combat, and had been himself wounded four times.
Forrest died of Diabetes in Memphis on October 29, 1877.
Source: Defending the Heritage
Lt. General Nathan Bedford Forrest
Farewell Address to His Troops
Headquarters, Forrest's Cavalry Corps
Gainsville, Alabama
May 9, 1865
The following text is from General Forrest's farewell address to his troops. It is a particularly interesting prelude to the experiences the South had during Reconstruction. Imagine that you are one of Forrest's troops on the receiving end of this proclamation. It is at the same time, very sobering and inspiring.
SOLDIERS:
By an agreement made between Liet.-Gen. Taylor, commanding the Department of Alabama. Mississippi, and East Louisiana, and Major-Gen. Canby, commanding United States forces, the troops of this department have been surrendered.
I do not think it proper or necessary at this time to refer to causes which have reduced us to this extremity; nor is it now a matter of material consequence to us how such results were brought about. That we are BEATEN is a self-evident fact, and any further resistance on our part would justly be regarded as the very height of folly and rashness.
The armies of Generals LEE and JOHNSON having surrendered. You are the last of all the troops of the Confederate States Army east of the Mississippi River to lay down your arms.
The Cause for which you have so long and so manfully struggled, and for which you have braved dangers, endured privations, and sufferings, and made so many sacrifices, is today hopeless. The government which we sought to establish and perpetuate, is at an end. Reason dictates and humanity demands that no more blood be shed. Fully realizing and feeling that such is the case, it is your duty and mine to lay down our arms -- submit to the “powers that be” -- and to aid in restoring peace and establishing law and order throughout the land.
The terms upon which you were surrendered are favorable, and should be satisfactory and acceptable to all. They manifest a spirit of magnanimity and liberality, on the part of the Federal authorities, which should be met, on our part, by a faithful compliance with all the stipulations and conditions therein expressed. As your Commander, I sincerely hope that every officer and soldier of my command will cheerfully obey the orders given, and carry out in good faith all the terms of the cartel.
Those who neglect the terms and refuse to be paroled, may assuredly expect, when arrested, to be sent North and imprisoned. Let those who are absent from their commands, from whatever cause, report at once to this place, or to Jackson, Miss.; or, if too remote from either, to the nearest United States post or garrison, for parole.
Civil war, such as you have just passed through naturally engenders feelings of animosity, hatred, and revenge. It is our duty to divest ourselves of all such feelings; and as far as it is in our power to do so, to cultivate friendly feelings towards those with whom we have so long contended, and heretofore so widely, but honestly, differed. Neighborhood feuds, personal animosities, and private differences should be blotted out; and, when you return home, a manly, straightforward course of conduct will secure the respect of your enemies. Whatever your responsibilities may be to Government, to society, or to individuals meet them like men.
The attempt made to establish a separate and independent Confederation has failed; but the consciousness of having done your duty faithfully, and to the end, will, in some measure, repay for the hardships you have undergone.
In bidding you farewell, rest assured that you carry with you my best wishes for your future welfare and happiness. Without, in any way, referring to the merits of the Cause in which we have been engaged, your courage and determination, as exhibited on many hard-fought fields, has elicited the respect and admiration of friend and foe. And I now cheerfully and gratefully acknowledge my indebtedness to the officers and men of my command whose zeal, fidelity and unflinching bravery have been the great source of my past success in arms.
I have never, on the field of battle, sent you where I was unwilling to go myself; nor would I now advise you to a course which I felt myself unwilling to pursue. You have been good soldiers, you can be good citizens. Obey the laws, preserve your honor, and the Government to which you have surrendered can afford to be, and will be, magnanimous.
N.B. Forrest, Lieut.-General
Headquarters, Forrest's Cavalry Corps
Gainesville, Alabama
May 9, 1865
Source: The Nathan Bedford Forrest Forum
Farewell Address to His Troops
Headquarters, Forrest's Cavalry Corps
Gainsville, Alabama
May 9, 1865
The following text is from General Forrest's farewell address to his troops. It is a particularly interesting prelude to the experiences the South had during Reconstruction. Imagine that you are one of Forrest's troops on the receiving end of this proclamation. It is at the same time, very sobering and inspiring.
SOLDIERS:
By an agreement made between Liet.-Gen. Taylor, commanding the Department of Alabama. Mississippi, and East Louisiana, and Major-Gen. Canby, commanding United States forces, the troops of this department have been surrendered.
I do not think it proper or necessary at this time to refer to causes which have reduced us to this extremity; nor is it now a matter of material consequence to us how such results were brought about. That we are BEATEN is a self-evident fact, and any further resistance on our part would justly be regarded as the very height of folly and rashness.
The armies of Generals LEE and JOHNSON having surrendered. You are the last of all the troops of the Confederate States Army east of the Mississippi River to lay down your arms.
The Cause for which you have so long and so manfully struggled, and for which you have braved dangers, endured privations, and sufferings, and made so many sacrifices, is today hopeless. The government which we sought to establish and perpetuate, is at an end. Reason dictates and humanity demands that no more blood be shed. Fully realizing and feeling that such is the case, it is your duty and mine to lay down our arms -- submit to the “powers that be” -- and to aid in restoring peace and establishing law and order throughout the land.
The terms upon which you were surrendered are favorable, and should be satisfactory and acceptable to all. They manifest a spirit of magnanimity and liberality, on the part of the Federal authorities, which should be met, on our part, by a faithful compliance with all the stipulations and conditions therein expressed. As your Commander, I sincerely hope that every officer and soldier of my command will cheerfully obey the orders given, and carry out in good faith all the terms of the cartel.
Those who neglect the terms and refuse to be paroled, may assuredly expect, when arrested, to be sent North and imprisoned. Let those who are absent from their commands, from whatever cause, report at once to this place, or to Jackson, Miss.; or, if too remote from either, to the nearest United States post or garrison, for parole.
Civil war, such as you have just passed through naturally engenders feelings of animosity, hatred, and revenge. It is our duty to divest ourselves of all such feelings; and as far as it is in our power to do so, to cultivate friendly feelings towards those with whom we have so long contended, and heretofore so widely, but honestly, differed. Neighborhood feuds, personal animosities, and private differences should be blotted out; and, when you return home, a manly, straightforward course of conduct will secure the respect of your enemies. Whatever your responsibilities may be to Government, to society, or to individuals meet them like men.
The attempt made to establish a separate and independent Confederation has failed; but the consciousness of having done your duty faithfully, and to the end, will, in some measure, repay for the hardships you have undergone.
In bidding you farewell, rest assured that you carry with you my best wishes for your future welfare and happiness. Without, in any way, referring to the merits of the Cause in which we have been engaged, your courage and determination, as exhibited on many hard-fought fields, has elicited the respect and admiration of friend and foe. And I now cheerfully and gratefully acknowledge my indebtedness to the officers and men of my command whose zeal, fidelity and unflinching bravery have been the great source of my past success in arms.
I have never, on the field of battle, sent you where I was unwilling to go myself; nor would I now advise you to a course which I felt myself unwilling to pursue. You have been good soldiers, you can be good citizens. Obey the laws, preserve your honor, and the Government to which you have surrendered can afford to be, and will be, magnanimous.
N.B. Forrest, Lieut.-General
Headquarters, Forrest's Cavalry Corps
Gainesville, Alabama
May 9, 1865
Source: The Nathan Bedford Forrest Forum
WORDS OF WISDOM FROM GENERAL JUBAL EARLY
“When the passions and infatuations of the day shall have been dissipated by time, and all the results of the late war shall have passed into irrevocable history, the future chronicler of that history will have a most important duty to perform, and posterity, while poring over its pages, will be lost in wonder at the follies and crimes committed in this generation…
“Each generation of men owes the debt to posterity to hand down to it a correct history of the more important events that have transpired in its day. The history of every people is the common inheritance of mankind, because of the lessons it teaches. .. No people loving the truth of history can have any object or motive in suppressing or mutilating any fact which may be material to its proper elucidation.”
Source: “AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH AND NARRATIVE OF THE WAR BETWEEN THE STATES,” by Lieutenant General Jubal Anderson Early C. S. A.
“When the passions and infatuations of the day shall have been dissipated by time, and all the results of the late war shall have passed into irrevocable history, the future chronicler of that history will have a most important duty to perform, and posterity, while poring over its pages, will be lost in wonder at the follies and crimes committed in this generation…
“Each generation of men owes the debt to posterity to hand down to it a correct history of the more important events that have transpired in its day. The history of every people is the common inheritance of mankind, because of the lessons it teaches. .. No people loving the truth of history can have any object or motive in suppressing or mutilating any fact which may be material to its proper elucidation.”
Source: “AUTOBIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH AND NARRATIVE OF THE WAR BETWEEN THE STATES,” by Lieutenant General Jubal Anderson Early C. S. A.
MY FAVORITE GENERAL
NATHAN BEDFORD FORREST
Bishop Thomas F. Gailor writing about Nathan Bedford Forrest --
He was a man of immense physical strength and size, and as resolute and audacious in personal encounters as in open battle. His temper was terrific when roused, and his language was often violent and profane, but never vulgar nor obscene. He detested uncleanness, as he despised wanton cruelty and oppression. In the midst of a battle, when his own life was in peril, he was known to rescue a woman and a child from danger and carry them to a place of safety. While he thrashed a scout with hickory withes for giving him second-hand information, he degraded one of his best officers for trifling with the affections of a woman. He was unlearned, but not illiterate. A pen, he said once, reminded him of a snake; and his spelling was consistently wrong: but his natural eloquence could move his troops to enthusiasm. He did not know the first principles of the drill, being astonished at the effect of a trumpet call upon disciplined soldiers, and yet in his general plan of battle he instinctively adopted the matured tactics of Napoleon. He exercised an authority as a general that was absolutely intolerant of the slightest variation or disobedience, and yet he was the genial companion of his subordinates and was foremost in exposing himself in every battle. He had twenty-nine horses killed under him, and with his own hand slew thirty men. To him, as he said, "war means killing," and in the smoke and fire of actual conflict he was the incarnation of war. What he would have accomplished, had he been earlier recognized and placed in independent command, no one can say; but that he deserves the praise and the immortal honor of his countrymen, for whose cause he so unselfishly and so nobly fought, no one can deny. As Lord Wolseley eloquently and truly says: "Forrest had fought like a knight-errant for the cause he believed to be that of justice and right. No man who drew a sword for his country in that fratricidal struggle deserves better of her, and, as long as the chivalrous deeds of her sons find poets to describe them, and fair women to sing them, the name of this gallant general will be remembered with affection and sincere admiration. A man with such a record needs no ancestry."
Source: The Virginia Flaggers.
NATHAN BEDFORD FORREST
Bishop Thomas F. Gailor writing about Nathan Bedford Forrest --
He was a man of immense physical strength and size, and as resolute and audacious in personal encounters as in open battle. His temper was terrific when roused, and his language was often violent and profane, but never vulgar nor obscene. He detested uncleanness, as he despised wanton cruelty and oppression. In the midst of a battle, when his own life was in peril, he was known to rescue a woman and a child from danger and carry them to a place of safety. While he thrashed a scout with hickory withes for giving him second-hand information, he degraded one of his best officers for trifling with the affections of a woman. He was unlearned, but not illiterate. A pen, he said once, reminded him of a snake; and his spelling was consistently wrong: but his natural eloquence could move his troops to enthusiasm. He did not know the first principles of the drill, being astonished at the effect of a trumpet call upon disciplined soldiers, and yet in his general plan of battle he instinctively adopted the matured tactics of Napoleon. He exercised an authority as a general that was absolutely intolerant of the slightest variation or disobedience, and yet he was the genial companion of his subordinates and was foremost in exposing himself in every battle. He had twenty-nine horses killed under him, and with his own hand slew thirty men. To him, as he said, "war means killing," and in the smoke and fire of actual conflict he was the incarnation of war. What he would have accomplished, had he been earlier recognized and placed in independent command, no one can say; but that he deserves the praise and the immortal honor of his countrymen, for whose cause he so unselfishly and so nobly fought, no one can deny. As Lord Wolseley eloquently and truly says: "Forrest had fought like a knight-errant for the cause he believed to be that of justice and right. No man who drew a sword for his country in that fratricidal struggle deserves better of her, and, as long as the chivalrous deeds of her sons find poets to describe them, and fair women to sing them, the name of this gallant general will be remembered with affection and sincere admiration. A man with such a record needs no ancestry."
Source: The Virginia Flaggers.
CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT:
ETERNAL TRUTHS
Wade Hampton, October 29, 1873. We must continue to teach or children the principles for which our ancestors fought to defend. --
"As it was the duty of every man to devote himself to the service of his country in that great struggle which has just ended so disastrously, not only to the South, but to the cause of constitutional government under republican institutions in the New World; so, now, when that country is prostrate in the dust, weeping for her dead who died in vain to save her liberties, every patriotic impulse should urge her surviving children to vindicate the great principles for which she fought, to justify the motives that actuated her, to explain to the world the ever-living truths she sought to maintain, to show the unexampled triumphs of her heroic armies, and to place on the eternal record an appeal from the distorted and vindictive judgment of her enemies, to the impartial tribunal of history, and to that dread Judge on high who alone can condemn or acquit. These are the imperative duties imposed on us of the South; and the chief peril of the times is that, in our daily struggle with adverse fortune, in our despair at the evil that has fallen on us, we forget those obligations to the eternal principles for which we fought; to the martyred dead, who gave up their lives for their principles; to the living, who strove in vain to maintain them; and to our children, who should be taught to cling to them with unswerving fidelity."
Source: The Virginia Flaggers
ETERNAL TRUTHS
Wade Hampton, October 29, 1873. We must continue to teach or children the principles for which our ancestors fought to defend. --
"As it was the duty of every man to devote himself to the service of his country in that great struggle which has just ended so disastrously, not only to the South, but to the cause of constitutional government under republican institutions in the New World; so, now, when that country is prostrate in the dust, weeping for her dead who died in vain to save her liberties, every patriotic impulse should urge her surviving children to vindicate the great principles for which she fought, to justify the motives that actuated her, to explain to the world the ever-living truths she sought to maintain, to show the unexampled triumphs of her heroic armies, and to place on the eternal record an appeal from the distorted and vindictive judgment of her enemies, to the impartial tribunal of history, and to that dread Judge on high who alone can condemn or acquit. These are the imperative duties imposed on us of the South; and the chief peril of the times is that, in our daily struggle with adverse fortune, in our despair at the evil that has fallen on us, we forget those obligations to the eternal principles for which we fought; to the martyred dead, who gave up their lives for their principles; to the living, who strove in vain to maintain them; and to our children, who should be taught to cling to them with unswerving fidelity."
Source: The Virginia Flaggers
FOR LIBERTY AND SELF GOVERNMENT:
THE SACRED HERITAGE
Straight from a Confederate Soldier:
First person accounts are the best way to know what was in the minds and hearts of those who fought for the Southern cause.
No way some modern day “historian” on History Channel knows better. Here are the words of a Confederate soldier:
“Now with these facts before him, the historian will find it impossible to believe that these men drew their swords and did these heroic deeds and bore these incredible hardships for four long years for the sake of the institution of slavery.
“Everyone who was conversant with the opinions of the soldiers of the Southern Army, knows that they did not wage that tremendous conflict for slavery. That was a subject very little in their thoughts or on their lips. Not one in twenty of those grim veterans, who were so terrible on the battlefield, had any financial interest in slavery.
“No, they were fighting for liberty, for the right of self-government. They believed the Federal authorities were assailing that right. It was the sacred heritage of Anglo-Saxon freedom, of local self-government, won at Runnymede, which they believed in peril when they flew to arms as one man, from the Potomac to the Rio Grande.
“They may have been right, or they may have been wrong, but that was the issue they made. On that they stood. For that they died.”
Source: THE SOUL OF LEE, BY ONE OF HIS SOLDIERS RANDOLPH H. McKIM, 1918.
THE SACRED HERITAGE
Straight from a Confederate Soldier:
First person accounts are the best way to know what was in the minds and hearts of those who fought for the Southern cause.
No way some modern day “historian” on History Channel knows better. Here are the words of a Confederate soldier:
“Now with these facts before him, the historian will find it impossible to believe that these men drew their swords and did these heroic deeds and bore these incredible hardships for four long years for the sake of the institution of slavery.
“Everyone who was conversant with the opinions of the soldiers of the Southern Army, knows that they did not wage that tremendous conflict for slavery. That was a subject very little in their thoughts or on their lips. Not one in twenty of those grim veterans, who were so terrible on the battlefield, had any financial interest in slavery.
“No, they were fighting for liberty, for the right of self-government. They believed the Federal authorities were assailing that right. It was the sacred heritage of Anglo-Saxon freedom, of local self-government, won at Runnymede, which they believed in peril when they flew to arms as one man, from the Potomac to the Rio Grande.
“They may have been right, or they may have been wrong, but that was the issue they made. On that they stood. For that they died.”
Source: THE SOUL OF LEE, BY ONE OF HIS SOLDIERS RANDOLPH H. McKIM, 1918.
SLAVERY: TRUTH BE TOLD
Slavery
An excerpt from Southern by the Grace of God
By Michael Andrew Grissom
Nowadays, the desired reaction to the mere word itself is revulsion, repugnance and antipathy, because that's the way we've been trained by Hollywood, the press, the schools, and sadly, most of the mainline churches, to react. It has become our common collective reflex. Due to the fictional portrayal of antebellum slavery that has become a regular diet, we are made to believe that plantations existed for the sole purpose of beating and killing black men, raping black women, torturing both by all sorts of sordid measures, and generally enjoying the depravity. If you don't react with the proper amount of moral outrage, then they will brand you as a Nazi, a white supremacist, or a bigot.
But it hasn't always been that way. In the days of my youth, during which time the War for Southern Independence was less than 90 years in the past, still living were Confederate soldiers, former slaves, and even a few Union soldiers. In fact, Walter Williams, recognized as the last surviving confederate soldier, passed away in 1959 at the age of 117. Had the lurid details of Hollywood been circulating at the time, there were authentic voices who could have corroborated those enormities. After all, there were plenty of opportunities to do so given the constant media attention they were receiving as the last survivors of the Antebellum South; yet, no such confirmation was forthcoming. We simply understood slavery to be an outdated institution, no longer needed or desired in the 20th century. Slavery had been a legal American system whereby owners of large tracts of land could purchase workers for the fields and hold them in bondage. Contrary to the titillating tales of Hollywood, slavery had not died of moral outrage but as an adjunct of the War of the 1860s.
In the south of the mid-20th century, most people went to church. We knew from our study of the Bible that God had instituted slavery among the Jews and that Jesus had urged slaves to “be obedient to your Masters,“ with a corresponding directive to masters to “give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that you also have a Master in heaven.“ Who among us would have dared criticize God or taken Jesus to task for not condemning slavery in the New Testament?
Writing many years after the War Between The States, Victoria Clayton of Barbour County, Alabama, whose family had owned a plantation, describe the prevailing Southern attitude toward Antebellum slavery.
We never raised the question for one moment as to whether slavery was right. We had inherited the institution from devout Christian parents. Slaves were held by pious relatives and friends and clergymen to whom we were accustomed to look up. The system of slaveholding was incorporated into our laws, and was regulated and protected by them. We read our Bible and accepted its teachings as the true guide and faith and morals. We understood literally our Lord's instruction to his chosen people, and applied them to our circumstances and surrounding:
Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.
Leviticus 25:44-46
We simply and naturally understood that our slaves must be treated kindly and cared for spiritually, and so they were. We felt that we were responsible to God for our entire household.
To be sure, slavery can, indeed, be a reprehensible operation if practiced as in Africa, for instance, by Kamurasi, King of Inyoro, Mutesa, King of Buganda, or Shaka, the notorious Zulu potentate whom PBS incredulously tried to trade as a brilliant African leader. Stanley Burnham of the foundation for human understanding reports that the Shaka of PBS and the Shaka of history are not one and the same. Citing English trader Henry Francis Fynn’s visits to the Zulu Kingdom, he notes some of Shaka’s routine activities.
On the first day of Fynn's arrival at court 10 men were carried off to death, and he soon learned that executions occurred daily. On one occasion Fynn witness the dispatch a 60 boys under the age of 12 years before Shaka had breakfasted.... On one occasion between four and five hundred women were massacred because they were believed to have knowledge of Witchcraft... One of Shaka’s concubines was executed for taking a pinch of snuff from his snuffbox.... It was the rule in Zululand that no one might eat from any crop until the king had partaken of the first fruits of the year at a special ceremony.... At the ceremony, the King was accustomed to have many people executed for no other reason than to show his power and caused him to be feared.... During a period of one year after Nandi's [his mother] death, all women found to be pregnant were executed with their husbands.
The lucky ones were the African slaves who were fortunate enough to avoid the execution; but these poor souls were forced down the rivers to the coast, where they were sold to slave traders who loaded them onto ships crossing the Atlantic. Slaves were, by far, the most valuable cargo ship could carry. Ships from Spain, Britain, Portugal, France, Denmark, Holland, and New England that competed for this lucrative business. Throughout the three hundred and fifty years of the Atlantic slave trade, nearly 12 million African slaves made the trip, 42% of them going to the Caribbean and 38% of Brazil. Only 5% were brought to North America. The first slaver sailed from Boston in 1644, carrying slaves between Africa and the Caribbean. By 1700, Rhode Island had entered the slave trade, and for the next century 60% of the ships carrying slaves would be based in that tiny little state. Many of the powerful families in New England made their fortune in the slave trade. An example is Elihu Yale, for whom Yale University is named. Yale was a notorious slave trader who orchestrated the slave trade in the Indian Ocean from Madagascar to Sumatra and grew rich from it spoils. While in India representing the East India Company, he instituted a rule requiring 10 slaves to be on every ship sailing for Europe.
You can read the rest of this essay and so much more in the book Southern by the Grace of God by Michael Grissom.
Slavery
An excerpt from Southern by the Grace of God
By Michael Andrew Grissom
Nowadays, the desired reaction to the mere word itself is revulsion, repugnance and antipathy, because that's the way we've been trained by Hollywood, the press, the schools, and sadly, most of the mainline churches, to react. It has become our common collective reflex. Due to the fictional portrayal of antebellum slavery that has become a regular diet, we are made to believe that plantations existed for the sole purpose of beating and killing black men, raping black women, torturing both by all sorts of sordid measures, and generally enjoying the depravity. If you don't react with the proper amount of moral outrage, then they will brand you as a Nazi, a white supremacist, or a bigot.
But it hasn't always been that way. In the days of my youth, during which time the War for Southern Independence was less than 90 years in the past, still living were Confederate soldiers, former slaves, and even a few Union soldiers. In fact, Walter Williams, recognized as the last surviving confederate soldier, passed away in 1959 at the age of 117. Had the lurid details of Hollywood been circulating at the time, there were authentic voices who could have corroborated those enormities. After all, there were plenty of opportunities to do so given the constant media attention they were receiving as the last survivors of the Antebellum South; yet, no such confirmation was forthcoming. We simply understood slavery to be an outdated institution, no longer needed or desired in the 20th century. Slavery had been a legal American system whereby owners of large tracts of land could purchase workers for the fields and hold them in bondage. Contrary to the titillating tales of Hollywood, slavery had not died of moral outrage but as an adjunct of the War of the 1860s.
In the south of the mid-20th century, most people went to church. We knew from our study of the Bible that God had instituted slavery among the Jews and that Jesus had urged slaves to “be obedient to your Masters,“ with a corresponding directive to masters to “give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that you also have a Master in heaven.“ Who among us would have dared criticize God or taken Jesus to task for not condemning slavery in the New Testament?
Writing many years after the War Between The States, Victoria Clayton of Barbour County, Alabama, whose family had owned a plantation, describe the prevailing Southern attitude toward Antebellum slavery.
We never raised the question for one moment as to whether slavery was right. We had inherited the institution from devout Christian parents. Slaves were held by pious relatives and friends and clergymen to whom we were accustomed to look up. The system of slaveholding was incorporated into our laws, and was regulated and protected by them. We read our Bible and accepted its teachings as the true guide and faith and morals. We understood literally our Lord's instruction to his chosen people, and applied them to our circumstances and surrounding:
Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.
Leviticus 25:44-46
We simply and naturally understood that our slaves must be treated kindly and cared for spiritually, and so they were. We felt that we were responsible to God for our entire household.
To be sure, slavery can, indeed, be a reprehensible operation if practiced as in Africa, for instance, by Kamurasi, King of Inyoro, Mutesa, King of Buganda, or Shaka, the notorious Zulu potentate whom PBS incredulously tried to trade as a brilliant African leader. Stanley Burnham of the foundation for human understanding reports that the Shaka of PBS and the Shaka of history are not one and the same. Citing English trader Henry Francis Fynn’s visits to the Zulu Kingdom, he notes some of Shaka’s routine activities.
On the first day of Fynn's arrival at court 10 men were carried off to death, and he soon learned that executions occurred daily. On one occasion Fynn witness the dispatch a 60 boys under the age of 12 years before Shaka had breakfasted.... On one occasion between four and five hundred women were massacred because they were believed to have knowledge of Witchcraft... One of Shaka’s concubines was executed for taking a pinch of snuff from his snuffbox.... It was the rule in Zululand that no one might eat from any crop until the king had partaken of the first fruits of the year at a special ceremony.... At the ceremony, the King was accustomed to have many people executed for no other reason than to show his power and caused him to be feared.... During a period of one year after Nandi's [his mother] death, all women found to be pregnant were executed with their husbands.
The lucky ones were the African slaves who were fortunate enough to avoid the execution; but these poor souls were forced down the rivers to the coast, where they were sold to slave traders who loaded them onto ships crossing the Atlantic. Slaves were, by far, the most valuable cargo ship could carry. Ships from Spain, Britain, Portugal, France, Denmark, Holland, and New England that competed for this lucrative business. Throughout the three hundred and fifty years of the Atlantic slave trade, nearly 12 million African slaves made the trip, 42% of them going to the Caribbean and 38% of Brazil. Only 5% were brought to North America. The first slaver sailed from Boston in 1644, carrying slaves between Africa and the Caribbean. By 1700, Rhode Island had entered the slave trade, and for the next century 60% of the ships carrying slaves would be based in that tiny little state. Many of the powerful families in New England made their fortune in the slave trade. An example is Elihu Yale, for whom Yale University is named. Yale was a notorious slave trader who orchestrated the slave trade in the Indian Ocean from Madagascar to Sumatra and grew rich from it spoils. While in India representing the East India Company, he instituted a rule requiring 10 slaves to be on every ship sailing for Europe.
You can read the rest of this essay and so much more in the book Southern by the Grace of God by Michael Grissom.
DEO VINDICE:
THE SWORD OF TRUTH SHALL PREVAIL
This week the statue of Jefferson Davis which was torn down in Richmond, was put on display in a museum. The museum made a point to say that they were leaving it and displaying it in exactly the condition the mob left it. It is now a shrine for the savages to go view their handiwork.
They destroy, but we build up. For every monument that falls beneath the hands of American-ISIS, thousands of flags go up. Books fill bookshelves. We are fighting for our very survival.
This newsletter is falling between two so-called “independence days”—Juneteenth and July 4th. Both mark destructive days for the South. Juneteenth has been propped up by the Marxists as yet another federal holiday to squeeze out the real remembrances of the South—like Lee-Jackson Day. And while July 4, 1776 has noble history; July 4, 1863 marked the beginning of the end for the independence of Dixie. For generations, many southerners refused to celebrate the broken promise of Independence Day—choosing instead to remember the horrors of Vicksburg and Pickett’s Charge at Gettysburg.
Even now, the Spirit of ’76 is under attack by the Marxists as they seek to erase everything from our history as “racist.”
Source: The Confederate Shop
THE SWORD OF TRUTH SHALL PREVAIL
This week the statue of Jefferson Davis which was torn down in Richmond, was put on display in a museum. The museum made a point to say that they were leaving it and displaying it in exactly the condition the mob left it. It is now a shrine for the savages to go view their handiwork.
They destroy, but we build up. For every monument that falls beneath the hands of American-ISIS, thousands of flags go up. Books fill bookshelves. We are fighting for our very survival.
This newsletter is falling between two so-called “independence days”—Juneteenth and July 4th. Both mark destructive days for the South. Juneteenth has been propped up by the Marxists as yet another federal holiday to squeeze out the real remembrances of the South—like Lee-Jackson Day. And while July 4, 1776 has noble history; July 4, 1863 marked the beginning of the end for the independence of Dixie. For generations, many southerners refused to celebrate the broken promise of Independence Day—choosing instead to remember the horrors of Vicksburg and Pickett’s Charge at Gettysburg.
Even now, the Spirit of ’76 is under attack by the Marxists as they seek to erase everything from our history as “racist.”
Source: The Confederate Shop
THE LOST CAUSE MYTH
In case you’ve never heard the phrase, let me fill you in. This is how the mainstream wards of the Civil War narrative choose to define those of us who love and honor our Confederate ancestors.
Here is their textbook definition of the lost cause, from the Encyclopedia of Virginia:
“The Lost Cause is an interpretation of the American Civil War that seeks to present the war, from the perspective of Confederates, in the best possible terms…the Lost Cause created and romanticized the “Old South” and the Confederate war effort, often distorting history in the process…many historians have labeled the Lost Cause a myth or a legend.”
The Lost Cause is further defined by six bullet points:
Secession, not slavery, caused the Civil War.
African Americans were “faithful slaves,” loyal to their masters and the Confederate cause and unprepared for the responsibilities of freedom.
The Confederacy was defeated militarily only because of the Union’s overwhelming advantages in men and resources.
Confederate soldiers were heroic and saintly.
The most heroic and saintly of all Confederates, perhaps of all Americans, was Robert E. Lee.
Southern women were loyal to the Confederate cause and sanctified by the sacrifice of their loved ones.
All those sure sound like the truth to me, but I digress.
In a nutshell, modern historians attempt to de-bunk all that we believe. They say our history is a lie. The war was all about slavery. Blacks down South were all treated horribly. Robert E. Lee and our Christian ancestors were a bunch of traitorous-evil men. The list goes on.
I’ve heard it said that you can tell a lot about a man by what his enemies have to say about him. And surely, history screams of the virtuous character of Robert E. Lee, so much so that it’s nearly impossible to refute. But Lee wasn’t the only marbled Confederate whose enemies spoke highly of him prior to, during, and after the war. Stonewall Jackson is another one of these men.
This week I stumbled upon a piece of history Concerning the death of Jackson and it had me thinking about “the lost cause myth.” The article was published in a Staunton, Virginia newspaper in 1863, and records the statements of one of the Norths most well-known abolitionists and devout Congregationalist preachers, Henry Ward Beecher. Please take the time to read his statements:
Staunton Vindicator, Volume XVIII (18), Number 16, 5 June, 1863, Henry Ward Beecher’s Opinion of Stonewall Jackson:
“A brave and honest foe has fallen! Thomas Jonathan Jackson had died of wounds received in the confusion of the battle of Chancellorsville at the hands of his own men! There is not left another man in the South to take his place, and Richmond papers scarcely exaggerate when the say that the Confederacy could better have lost fifty thousand men! Good in counsel, his peculiar excellence was in the field—We know of no man on either side that surpassed him, if any equaled, in handling an army.
We are in some respects better judges of his military talents than Southern men. Since we felt the blow which they only saw dealt. It is certain that no other man has impressed the imagination of our soldiers and the whole community so much as he. An unknown name at the beginning of the war, save to his brother officers, and to his classed in the military school at Lexington, Virginia, his footsteps were earliest in the field from which now death has withdrawn them. But in two years he has made his name familiar in every civilized land on the globe as a general of rare skill, resource and energy.
No other general of the South could develop so much power out of the slender and precarious means, by the fervid inspiration of his own mind, as Jackson. He had a solute control of his men, seeming almost to fascinate them. He drove them through marches long and difficult. Without resources, feeding them as best he could; he delivered battles as thunder could discharges bolts, and, if the fortunes were against him, then, with even more remarkable skill than in advancing, he held him men together in retreat, and with extraordinary address encourage, eluded pursuit, sometimes fighting sometimes fleeing, till he brought off his forces safely. Then, almost before the dust was laid upon the warpath, his face was again towards his enemies, and he was ready for renewed conflict. His whole soul was in his work. He had no doubts nor parleyings within himself. He put the whole force of his being into his blows for the worst cause man ever fought for, as few of our generals have ever learned to do for the best cause for which trumpet ever sounded. Henceforth we know him no more after flesh. He is no longer a foe. We think of him now as a noble-minded gentleman, a rare and eminent Christian! For years he has been an active member of the presbyterian church, of which he was a ruling elder. He never, in all the occupations of the camp, or temptations of the campaigns, lost the fervor of his piety, or remitted his Christian duties.
We know that before every important move spend much time in prayer. He had so put his soul in the keeping of his Master that he was relieved from all thought of self, and had the whole power of his life ready for his work. Officers of Fremont’s army who pursued him and his famous retreat from the Shenandoah Valley, found him to be greatly beloved by the common people among whom, in former times, he had labored, in prayer meetings, in temperance meetings, in every Christian word and work. No wonder he fought well along a region whose topography he had mapped down with prayers, exhortations in Christian labor.
He was unselfish. He fought neither for reputation now, nor for future personal advancement. He therefore did not fall into the ruinous habits of our generals who are always negating to do the things that can be done, because they are small, but squander time in men and patience in getting ready for great battles, which elude them or defeat them. He incessantly struck on the right and on the left, and kept alive the fire in the heart of the ill-clad, poorly-fed and overworked men by the excitement of the enterprise and the constant relish of victory small in detail but who some was all important.
Let no man suppose that the north will triumph over a fallen son with insulting graduations! Nowhere else will the name of Jackson be more honored. Not for the adhesion to the cause of slavery, but for his untarnished personal character, for his devout piety, and for his military genius.”
Now, you might be wondering, why would an abolitionist and close relative (brother) of Harriet Beech Stowe (author of Uncle Tom’s Cabin) be praising and eulogizing “a slave-supporting, treasonous rebel” like Thomas Stonewall Jackson? There are some mighty-bold statements within this article. And it’s not to suggest that all Northerners felt this way about Jackson—but it does speak volumes against what our foes call “the lost cause myth.”
First, Jackson is not only eulogized by a Northern foe, but recognized and commended, Including his military and tactical prowess, battlefield reputation, tenacious bravery, unequalled handling of an army, and great Christian character. Second, Beecher cites the northern awareness that our Southern boys were, “ill-clad, poorly fed and overworked.”—at a disadvantage. Surely even statistics clearly show the monetary, personnel, and supply advantage that the invader possessed over the South. Third, we read a clear cause for Jacksons fight and death, “Nowhere else will the name of Jackson be more honored. Not for the adhesion to the cause of slavery, but for his untarnished personal character, for his devout piety, and for his military genius.” In just one article, a northern abolitionist in the middle of the Civil War, cites many of the claims that the anti-Confederate crowd either calls a myth or lie. So, was Henry Ward Beecher just another liar perpetuating the lost cause myth—or was he simply speaking the truth? You decide. But I guarantee, some “educated” anti-Confederate will claim this article is simply made-up—fabricated just like the hundreds of historical articles which refute their narrative and vindicate the Southern cause…the lost cause.
Sources: The Confederate Shop
The Encyclopedia of Virginia
In case you’ve never heard the phrase, let me fill you in. This is how the mainstream wards of the Civil War narrative choose to define those of us who love and honor our Confederate ancestors.
Here is their textbook definition of the lost cause, from the Encyclopedia of Virginia:
“The Lost Cause is an interpretation of the American Civil War that seeks to present the war, from the perspective of Confederates, in the best possible terms…the Lost Cause created and romanticized the “Old South” and the Confederate war effort, often distorting history in the process…many historians have labeled the Lost Cause a myth or a legend.”
The Lost Cause is further defined by six bullet points:
Secession, not slavery, caused the Civil War.
African Americans were “faithful slaves,” loyal to their masters and the Confederate cause and unprepared for the responsibilities of freedom.
The Confederacy was defeated militarily only because of the Union’s overwhelming advantages in men and resources.
Confederate soldiers were heroic and saintly.
The most heroic and saintly of all Confederates, perhaps of all Americans, was Robert E. Lee.
Southern women were loyal to the Confederate cause and sanctified by the sacrifice of their loved ones.
All those sure sound like the truth to me, but I digress.
In a nutshell, modern historians attempt to de-bunk all that we believe. They say our history is a lie. The war was all about slavery. Blacks down South were all treated horribly. Robert E. Lee and our Christian ancestors were a bunch of traitorous-evil men. The list goes on.
I’ve heard it said that you can tell a lot about a man by what his enemies have to say about him. And surely, history screams of the virtuous character of Robert E. Lee, so much so that it’s nearly impossible to refute. But Lee wasn’t the only marbled Confederate whose enemies spoke highly of him prior to, during, and after the war. Stonewall Jackson is another one of these men.
This week I stumbled upon a piece of history Concerning the death of Jackson and it had me thinking about “the lost cause myth.” The article was published in a Staunton, Virginia newspaper in 1863, and records the statements of one of the Norths most well-known abolitionists and devout Congregationalist preachers, Henry Ward Beecher. Please take the time to read his statements:
Staunton Vindicator, Volume XVIII (18), Number 16, 5 June, 1863, Henry Ward Beecher’s Opinion of Stonewall Jackson:
“A brave and honest foe has fallen! Thomas Jonathan Jackson had died of wounds received in the confusion of the battle of Chancellorsville at the hands of his own men! There is not left another man in the South to take his place, and Richmond papers scarcely exaggerate when the say that the Confederacy could better have lost fifty thousand men! Good in counsel, his peculiar excellence was in the field—We know of no man on either side that surpassed him, if any equaled, in handling an army.
We are in some respects better judges of his military talents than Southern men. Since we felt the blow which they only saw dealt. It is certain that no other man has impressed the imagination of our soldiers and the whole community so much as he. An unknown name at the beginning of the war, save to his brother officers, and to his classed in the military school at Lexington, Virginia, his footsteps were earliest in the field from which now death has withdrawn them. But in two years he has made his name familiar in every civilized land on the globe as a general of rare skill, resource and energy.
No other general of the South could develop so much power out of the slender and precarious means, by the fervid inspiration of his own mind, as Jackson. He had a solute control of his men, seeming almost to fascinate them. He drove them through marches long and difficult. Without resources, feeding them as best he could; he delivered battles as thunder could discharges bolts, and, if the fortunes were against him, then, with even more remarkable skill than in advancing, he held him men together in retreat, and with extraordinary address encourage, eluded pursuit, sometimes fighting sometimes fleeing, till he brought off his forces safely. Then, almost before the dust was laid upon the warpath, his face was again towards his enemies, and he was ready for renewed conflict. His whole soul was in his work. He had no doubts nor parleyings within himself. He put the whole force of his being into his blows for the worst cause man ever fought for, as few of our generals have ever learned to do for the best cause for which trumpet ever sounded. Henceforth we know him no more after flesh. He is no longer a foe. We think of him now as a noble-minded gentleman, a rare and eminent Christian! For years he has been an active member of the presbyterian church, of which he was a ruling elder. He never, in all the occupations of the camp, or temptations of the campaigns, lost the fervor of his piety, or remitted his Christian duties.
We know that before every important move spend much time in prayer. He had so put his soul in the keeping of his Master that he was relieved from all thought of self, and had the whole power of his life ready for his work. Officers of Fremont’s army who pursued him and his famous retreat from the Shenandoah Valley, found him to be greatly beloved by the common people among whom, in former times, he had labored, in prayer meetings, in temperance meetings, in every Christian word and work. No wonder he fought well along a region whose topography he had mapped down with prayers, exhortations in Christian labor.
He was unselfish. He fought neither for reputation now, nor for future personal advancement. He therefore did not fall into the ruinous habits of our generals who are always negating to do the things that can be done, because they are small, but squander time in men and patience in getting ready for great battles, which elude them or defeat them. He incessantly struck on the right and on the left, and kept alive the fire in the heart of the ill-clad, poorly-fed and overworked men by the excitement of the enterprise and the constant relish of victory small in detail but who some was all important.
Let no man suppose that the north will triumph over a fallen son with insulting graduations! Nowhere else will the name of Jackson be more honored. Not for the adhesion to the cause of slavery, but for his untarnished personal character, for his devout piety, and for his military genius.”
Now, you might be wondering, why would an abolitionist and close relative (brother) of Harriet Beech Stowe (author of Uncle Tom’s Cabin) be praising and eulogizing “a slave-supporting, treasonous rebel” like Thomas Stonewall Jackson? There are some mighty-bold statements within this article. And it’s not to suggest that all Northerners felt this way about Jackson—but it does speak volumes against what our foes call “the lost cause myth.”
First, Jackson is not only eulogized by a Northern foe, but recognized and commended, Including his military and tactical prowess, battlefield reputation, tenacious bravery, unequalled handling of an army, and great Christian character. Second, Beecher cites the northern awareness that our Southern boys were, “ill-clad, poorly fed and overworked.”—at a disadvantage. Surely even statistics clearly show the monetary, personnel, and supply advantage that the invader possessed over the South. Third, we read a clear cause for Jacksons fight and death, “Nowhere else will the name of Jackson be more honored. Not for the adhesion to the cause of slavery, but for his untarnished personal character, for his devout piety, and for his military genius.” In just one article, a northern abolitionist in the middle of the Civil War, cites many of the claims that the anti-Confederate crowd either calls a myth or lie. So, was Henry Ward Beecher just another liar perpetuating the lost cause myth—or was he simply speaking the truth? You decide. But I guarantee, some “educated” anti-Confederate will claim this article is simply made-up—fabricated just like the hundreds of historical articles which refute their narrative and vindicate the Southern cause…the lost cause.
Sources: The Confederate Shop
The Encyclopedia of Virginia