Posted on 07/22/2020 3:14:43 AM PDT by Kaslin
Irrelevant babbling.Seems to me that quotes by Cleburne have been posted & challenged before. Cleburne was actually a very attractive Confederate general, having supported offering slaves freedom in exchange for military service. Because of that he is fantasized to have said a lot of stuff I'm not sure if he ever did. Does anyone remember checking this out in the past? LOL! Feel free to check it as much as you like. It is a widely cited quote. Cleburne was hardly alone among Confederate generals in wanting to offer slaves emancipation in exchange for military service.
LOL! BS. Prove it.
uhhh long before those amendments were passed. Jeez, you're really not very good at this are you?Sure, "balanced budgets" just like every other state, and the Federal budget was always in balance, allowing reductions in the National Debt by 50% over the 30 years from 1867 to 1897.
After TRIPLING the tariff rates that were in place before utterly ruining the South's economy in the process....ie the very thing the Southern states seceded to avoid.Sure, "states rights" meaning the right of Southern states to nullify the 13th, 14th & 15th Amendments, among many other rights they didn't want applied to blacks (1st, 2nd, etc.).
Once again you are so ignorant of history you don't grasp the timeline. This was BEFORE those amendments were passed. What they wanted was to be left alone...to not have the federal government USURP all kinds of powers the sovereign states never delegated to it - which it had been doing steadily since it was founded. Sure, there were plenty of Northern Democrats just as racist as any ex-Confederate. It's one reason Democrats North & South were so quick to get back together again after the Civil War -- they shared a lot of feelings in common.
Guess what, it wasn't just Northern Democrats who were racist. Northern Republicans - like Abe Lincoln for example - were flamingly racist.One way to measure how vigorously such Black Codes (Jim Crow) were enforced would be to add up the number of lynching's: "According to the Tuskegee Institute, 4,743 people were lynched between 1882 and 1968 in the United States, including 3,446 African Americans and 1,297 whites. More than 73 percent of lynchings in the post–Civil War period occurred in the Southern states.[10] According to the Equal Justice Initiative, 4,084 African-Americans were lynched between 1877 and 1950 in the South.[11] "
Nobody denies the discrimination both North and South, against Blacks and Native Americans was awful. Should I go into the lynchings, the pogroms etc etc that happened up North? Should I mention the "black codes" adopted by multiple Northern states that had the express purpose of making it impossible for Blacks to live there and driving out the few who were there already. Should I mention the state constitutions that barred blacks from moving to various states? Those things all happened.A curious fact about lynchings is that before the Civil War they were not restricted to any state or region, and nearly all the victims were white. It's only after the Civil War that lynchings become increasingly concentrated in the South and nearly all those victims were black.
LOL! Blacks were not to be found in the North in any numbers until more than a generation after the war. Why? Because Northerners would not allow them to move there.So, post Civil War we have the 13th, 14th & 15th Amendments covering every state, but not enforced in the South. We also have Black Codes or Jim Crow outside the Deep South, but lynchings against African Americans increasingly restricted to the South.
Think Blacks rights were respected up North? LOL!That's a total lie, an insane Democrat lie.
No, its true. Lincoln made war against them (the states) in order to impose a government upon them that they did not consent to - the very definition of treason in the Constitution. US states were never 100% "sovereign", ever.
False. The facts do not agree with you about that. Nor do Madison and Hamilton in the Federalist Papers. Nor did Jefferson, etc etc.Sure, mutual consent as happened in 1776 and 1788, but not in 1861.
Each state is an independent sovereign political community. That is Madison's own description in the federalist papers. Mutuality is not required.Nearly all the people, especially Southerners, who became Jacksonian Democrats had previously been Jeffersonian Democratic-Republicans. Likewise, nearly all the people, especially Northerners, who became the opposition Whigs had previously been Washington-Adams-Hamilton Federalists.
They were different political parties. Get over it.All of that is a pack of Democrat lies, the kinds of lies which will rot your brain if you believe any of it. The truth is vastly different beginning here: In the 60 years (1801 - 1860) when Southern Democrats ruled Washington, DC, they spent about $2 billion in total ~$33 million per year, on average. Of that, roughly half went to the military, more in wartime, less in peacetime. Of the remaining expenditures, far less than $100 million total went to Internal Improvements, what we today call "infrastructure". Those included fortifications (i.e., Fort Sumter), postal roads, lighthouses and harbors. Of the money spent on Internal Improvements, just over half went to Southern states, less than half to Northern & Western states. So the only possible way the Democrat lie about Federal spending can be true is if by "the North" you mean every state & territory North of South Carolina -- which, of course, is what they did mean. As for the often repeated claim that nearly all of Federal revenues came from Southern exports -- still another Democrat Big Lie, which we have now flogged at great length & detail on many CW threads. It begins here: there were no Federal taxes on exports. Out of time, must stop here.
Just more ridiculous lies on your part. Lies which fly in the face of everything Southern, Northern and Foreign newspapers were saying....lies which fly in the face of what politicians and commentators on both sides as well as foreign commentators were saying....lies which fly in the face of what economic and tax experts who examined the period have said.
South Carolina Congressman Robert Barnwell Rhett had estimated that of the $927,000,000 collected in duties between 1791 and 1845, the South had paid $711,200,000, and the North $216,000,000. South Carolina Senator James Hammond had declared that the South paid about $50,000,000 and the North perhaps $20,000,000 of the $70,000,000 raised annually by duties. In expenditure of the national revenues, Hammond thought the North got about $50,000,000 a year, and the South only $20,000,000. When in the Course of Human Events - Charles Adams
the South paid about three-quarters of all federal taxes, most of which were spent in the North." - Charles Adams, "For Good and Evil. The impact of taxes on the course of civilization," 1993, Madison Books, Lanham, USA, pp. 325-327
Both northern states and southern states have histories of slave ownership.
In fact, of the original 13 states, 13 of them were slave states.
If you study either the United States Constitution or the Confederate States Constitution you will find they both enshrined slavery.
And during the time of the CSA, both the CSA and USA presidents took oaths to uphold their nations’ pro-slavery constitutions. It is a fact. Look it up.
[BroJoeK]: Seems to me that quotes by Cleburne have been posted & challenged before.
That particular quote of Cleburne is in my copy of the Official Records, Series I, Vol LII, Part II on Page 592.
Here is some history of what happened to the letter and how one copy of it was not destroyed and made its way into the Official Records: [Major General Patrick Cleburne and the Proposal to Arm Slaves.]
Attempts were made by other Confederate generals to get a copy of the letter during the war. Here is one in the Official Records:
Hdqrs. Hindman's Corps, Army of Tennessee,
Dalton, Ga., January 9, 1864.Maj. Gen. W. H. T. Walker.
Comdg. Div. Hardee's Corps, Army of Tennessee:General : I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note of this date,* and to decline complying with your request.
Whenever my proper superiors see fit to propound any interrogatories to me touching matters as to which they are entitled to inquire, it will be my duty to answer directly, and I shall do so. I have no opinions to conceal and will evade no responsibility that belongs to me. But I do not choose to admit any inquisitorial rights in you.
Permit me also to say that, according to my understanding, the course you propose to take conflicts with a distinct agreement of privacy among the officers consulted by General Cleburne, which agreement none of them can waive without the consent of all.
I am, general, with high respect, your obedient servant,
T. C. HINDMAN,
Major-General.
And here from the Official Records, Series I, Vol. LII, Part II, page 592 is the tail end of Major General Cleburne's January 2, 1864 letter (my bold below):
592 SW. VA., KY., TENN., MISS., ALA., W. FLA., & N. GA. [Chap. LXIV.]... excitement and some disaffection from our cause. Excitement is far preferable to the apathy which now exists, and disaffection will not be among the fighting men. It is said slavery is all we are fighting for, and if we give it up we give up all. Even if this were true, which we deny, slavery is not all our enemies are fighting for. It is merely the pretense to establish sectional superiority and a more centralized form of government, and to deprive us of our rights and liberties.
We have now briefly proposed a plan which we believe will save our country.
It may be imperfect, but in all human probability it would give us our independence. No objection ought to outweigh it which is not weightier than independence. If it is worthy of being put in practice it ought to be mooted quickly before the people, and urged earnestly by every man who believes in its efficacy. Negroes will require much training; training will require time, and there is danger that this concession to common sense may come too late.
P. R. Cleburne, major-general, commanding division; D. C. Govan, brigadier- general; John E. Murray, colonel Fifth Arkansas; G. P. Baucum, colonel Eighth Arkansas; Peter Snyder, lieutenant-colonel, commanding Sixth and Seventh Arkansas; E. Warfield, lieutenant-colonel, Second Arkansas; M. P. Lowrey, brigadier-general; A. B. Hardcastle, colonel Thirty-second and Forty-fifth Mississippi; F. A. Ashford, major Sixteenth Alabama; John W. Colquitt, colonel First Arkansas; Eich. J. Person, major Third and Fifth Confederate; G. S. Deakins, major Thirty-fifth and Eighth Tennessee; J. H. Collett, captain, commanding Seventh Texas; J. H. Kelly, brigadier-general, commanding Cavalry Division.
FLT-bird, you are doing an excellent job with your replies on this thread.
The asterisk that appeared the letter was defined at the bottom of the page as, "Not found"
The Alexander Stephens quote is from his "A Constitutional View of the Late War Between The States, Vol. 2" which was published in 1868. Definitely post rebellion.
Cleburne was killed at Franklin in 1864 so obviously his quote wasn't after the rebellion.
The Robert Lee quotes are from his letter to Lord Acton in 1866. Also post rebellion.
The Davis speech managed to mention slaves or slavery 24 times and tariffs or centralized power not a single time.
All true or true-ish but I fail to see the relevance. You wanted to show Lincoln to be a racist but compared to three of your rebel heroes Lincoln comes off very well by comparison.
Davis 2nd Inaugural goes on at great length about the tariffs, the propensity of an unbridled majority to rule over the minority without restraint, etc. That was obviously not post war.
“You wanted to show Lincoln to be a racist but compared to three of your rebel heroes Lincoln comes off very well by comparison.”
I have never fully appreciated your argument that the South was pregnant but the North was only a little bit pregnant.
“As I carefully explained the first time (how many times will you ignore it?), your claim that slavery is the “cornerstone” of the US Constitution, refers back to Alexander Stephens famous claim that slavery was the “cornerstone” of the new Confederate constitution.”
You must be exhausted from standing on that soap box. When you get your strength back don’t forget to loop back and address my earlier reply to you(below).
“No. You are wrong. My statement was about the cornerstone federal court case, not Alexander Stephens’ speech. And the cornerstone federal court case was not about the Alexander Stephens’ speech either.”
His first, and only, inaugural. And that was for an external audience. His first speech to the Confederate congress, given in April, mentions none of that. It goes to great lengths to mention slavery, 24 times, and mentions none of the other issue you list.
His second annual address to the Confederate Congress I meant. It never mentions slavery. It does mention exactly what I referenced.
Assuming we're still talking about the Davis quote from reply 539 you still don't have it right. It wasn't from his first inaugural or second inaugural, second annual address to congress or any annual address to congress. It was from his April 29, 1861 message to congress. The very same address where he mentions slavery 24 times but never mentions tariffs or centralized government. Don't believe me? Then read it here for yourself.
No. I have it correct. It is as I stated before, from his 2nd annual address to the Confederate Congress. Here it is.
"The people of the Southern States, whose almost exclusive occupation was agriculture, early perceived a tendency in the Northern States to render the common government subservient to their own purposes by imposing burdens on commerce as a protection to their manufacturing and shipping interests. Long and angry controversies grew out of these attempts, often successful, to benefit one section of the country at the expense of the other. And the danger of disruption arising from this cause was enhanced by the fact that the Northern population was increasing, by immigration and other causes, in a greater ratio than the population of the South. By degrees, as the Northern States gained preponderance in the National Congress, self-interest taught their people to yield ready assent to any plausible advocacy of their right as a majority to govern the minority without control." Jefferson Davis Address to the Confederate Congress April 29, 1861
woodpusher: "And whatever you quoted was not the next paragraph. Or the one after that. Here is my quoted paragraph, and the rest of the document. Your quote does not seem to appear in the Virginia Bill of Rights or the Virginia Constitution."[BroJoeK] FRiend, we all make mistakes and can all sympathize when we see glaring mistakes from our "debate partners".
In this particular case, the words you claim here are not found in the "next paragraph", are in fact both quoted and highlighted by you, exactly as I said, in the next paragraph.
Like I said, we all make mistakes, so I won't rub this one by you in... too much. ;-)
I wish to address this seperately as the error is all mine and I own. I just wish to explain what the error was as it was not the error you almost unavoidably concluded it was.
Note that I stated, "Here is my quoted paragraph, and the rest of the document." And yet, the rest of the document does not appear at my #508. And, as you correctly noted, I quoted, in boldface the specific content I just stated was not there.
I did not see it in my initial reading. I went to the link and ran a text search on "the general Congress" and it retured no result. I did it again to make sure. Same result. I copied the whole thing and put it into my reply at #508. In proof reading I noticed the problem which I had caught and corrected on 3 Aug 2020 when I posted my #508. The original linked source contains an error, a stray parenthesis before the word general.
http://www.nhinet.org/ccs/docs/va-1776.htm
We therefore, the delegates and representatives of the good people of Virginia, having maturely considered the premises, and viewing with great concern the deplorable conditions to which this once happy country must be reduced, unless some regular, adequate mode of civil polity is speedily adopted, and in compliance with a recommendation of the (general Congress, do ordain and declare the future form of government of Virginia to be as followeth:
Having noticed my error, I went back and edited my draft response to eliminate the long (now irrelevant) quote of the Virginia constitution and only quoted the the first two paragraphs, and emphasized the part to which you referred with boldface.
I somehow failed to remove the paragraph referring to the error I had caught, and the rest of the document which I had deleted from my draft. I apoligize for the error, which was all mine. I am sorry for the confusion.
A second annual address in April 1861? You are aware that the Confederacy was established and their interim constitution approved in February 1861 right? Or did Davis give monthly annual addresses?
I provided the citation. Feel free to look it up yourself.
Oh I did, long before this conversation reached this ridiculous stage. In fact I provided a link to it several replies ago. Davis was addressing the rebel congress to announce the Confederate constitution had been ratified. He says so himself, first sentence, first paragraph.
and I provided mine which was Davis 2nd annual address to the Confederate Congress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.