An opposing view: Descendant of black Confederate soldier speaks at museum

Thomasville Times-Enterprise ^ | 24 Feb 2004 | Mark Lastinger

[4CJ]

THOMASVILLE -- Nelson Winbush knows his voice isn't likely to be heard above the crowd that writes American history books. That doesn't keep him from speaking his mind, however.

A 75-year-old black man whose grandfather proudly fought in the gray uniform of the South during the Civil War, Winbush addressed a group of about 40 at the Thomas County Museum of History Sunday afternoon. To say the least, his perspective of the war differs greatly from what is taught in America's classrooms today.

"People have manufactured a lot of mistruths about why the war took place," he said. "It wasn't about slavery. It was about state's rights and tariffs."

Many of Winbush's words were reserved for the Confederate battle flag, which still swirls amid controversy more than 150 years after it originally flew.

"This flag has been lied about more than any flag in the world," Winbush said. "People see it and they don't really know what the hell they are looking at."

About midway through his 90-minute presentation, Winbush's comments were issued with extra force.

"This flag is the one that draped my grandfathers' coffin," he said while clutching it strongly in his left hand. "I would shudder to think what would happen if somebody tried to do something to this particular flag."

Winbush, a retired in educator and Korean War veteran who resides in Kissimmee, Fla., said the Confederate battle flag has been hijacked by racist groups, prompting unwarranted criticism from its detractors.

"This flag had nothing to with the (Ku Klux) klan or skinheads," he said while wearing a necktie that featured the Confederate emblem. "They weren't even heard of then. It was just a guide to follow in battle.

"That's all it ever was."

Winbush said Confederate soldiers started using the flag with the St. Andrews cross because its original flag closely resembled the U.S. flag. The first Confederate flag's blue patch in an upper corner and its alternating red and white stripes caused confusion on the battlefield, he said.

"Neither side (of the debate) knows what the flag represents," Winbush said. "It's dumb and dumber. You can turn it around, but it's still two dumb bunches.

"If you learn anything else today, don't be dumb."

Winbush learned about the Civil War at the knee of Louis Napoleon Nelson, who joined his master and one of his master's sons in battle voluntarily when he was 14. Nelson saw combat at Lookout Mountain, Bryson's Crossroads, Shiloh and Vicksburg.

"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 "scavenger," never had any qualms about fighting for the South. He had plenty of chances to make a break for freedom, but never did. He attended 39 Confederate reunions, the final one in 1934. A Sons of Confederate Veterans Chapter in Tennessee is named after him.

"People ask why a black person would fight for the Confederacy. (It was) for the same damned reason a white Southerner did," Winbush explained.

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, who 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."

Winbush said more than 90,000 blacks, some of them free, fought for the Confederacy. He 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.

After his presentation, Winbush opened the floor for questions. Two black women, including Jule Anderson of the Thomas County Historical Society Board of Directors, told him the Confederate battle flag made them uncomfortable.

Winbush, who said he started speaking out about the Civil War in 1992 after growing weary of what he dubbed "political correctness," was also challenged about his opinions.

"I have difficulty in trying to apply today's standards with what happened 150 years ago," he said to Anderson's tearful comments. "...That's what a lot of people are attempting to do. I'm just presenting facts, not as I read from some book where somebody thought that they understood. This came straight from the horse's mouth, and I refute anybody to deny that."

Thomas County Historical Society Board member and SVC member Chip Bragg moved in to close the session after it took a political turn when a white audience member voiced disapproval of the use of Confederate symbols on the state flag. Georgia voters are set to go to the polls a week from today to pick a flag to replace the 1956 version, which featured the St. Andrew's cross prominently.

"Those of us who are serious about our Confederate heritage are very unhappy with the trivialization of Confederate symbols and their misuse," he said. "Part of what we are trying to do is correct this misunderstanding."

[#3Fan]

Not imaginary to Captain Fox.

[#3Fan]

They must also notify their men that if they do not promptly obey any order given them by a sentinel, officer, or men in charge of them, they will be shot.

This alone proves Wirz' needed to be executed.

[4CJ]

This alone proves Wirz' needed to be executed.This alone proves Wirz' needed to be executed.

ROTFLM*A! This is the directive for Ft. DELAWARE - a UNION camp!!!

[#3Fan]

ROTFLM*A! This is the directive for Ft. DELAWARE - a UNION camp!!!

The same was in force at Andersonville, that's why nolu posted it.

[nolu chan]

[#3Fan] Murdering POWs for taking a leak. That alone justifies Wirz' execution.

#3, it was not for taking a #2 but for taking a #1. I am glad you agree it justifies an execution. It did not happen at Andersonville, it was at Point Lookout, Maryland.

While you confirm this act was justification for an execution, the United States Army report states, "The Board of Investigation having carefully examined the evidence in the case of Private Irving Williams, Company D, Thirty-sixth U. S. Colored Troops, are of the opinion that the said Williams was justified in shooting the prisoner of war, Mark Lisk, inasmuch as it appears from the evidence that the aforesaid Williams acted in strict conformity to the orders he received from the officer of the guard."

Actually, the stated fact that the sentinel who did the shooting was a member of the Thirty-sixth U.S. Colored Troops probably should have made you somewhat suspicious about whether or not the prison was Andersonville.

[nolu chan]

[#3Fan] Post #282 was my first post on the subject and proves that I said the arms were for the "ship's men".

#282 [#3Fan] I saw that the ship's men needed arms because they expected to be attacked by Confederates, but I don't see where arms were to be delivered. The Confederates had attacked ships before any agreement was made between the Buchanan administration and the rebels, so they had a thing about attacking ships.
#341 [#3Fan] It looks as if the arms were for the ship.
#383 [#3Fan] Confederates opened hostilities by firing on the "Star of the West" (is that the name?) so hostilities towards ships were to be expected.
#386 [#3Fan] The "Star of the West" was attacked.

#3Fan was specifically referring to armed men defending against an attack against the ships, as proven beyond a resonable doubt by the above quotes. Numbers 383 and 386 apply icing to the context.

[nolu chan]

[#3Fan] The same was in force at Andersonville, that's why nolu posted it.

If you fantasize the same rules were in force in Andersonville, prove it.

I posted it because it proves, as #3Fan agrees, that there was justification to execute the U.S. Army camp commander of Fort Delaware who issued such inhuman, barbaric rules, in violation of the laws of war.

[nolu chan]

RATION REDUCTION BY WAR DEPARTMENT

OFFICIAL RECORDS: Series 2, vol 7, Part 1 (Prisoners of War)

=================

http://www.ehistory.com/uscw/library/or/120/0150.cfm

OFFICE COMMISSARY-GENERAL OF PRISONERS, Page 150

Washington, D. C., May 19, 1864.

Honorable E. M. STANTON, Secretary of War, Washington, D. C.:

SIR: I have the honor to suggest that the ration as now issued to prisoners of war may be considerably reduced without depriving them of the food necessary to keep them in health, and I respectfully recommend that hereafter the ration be composed as follows, viz: Hard bread, 14 ounces, or 16 ounces soft bread; corn-meal, 16 ounces; beef, 14 ounces; pork or bacon, 10 ounces; beans, 6 quarts per 100 men, or rice, 8 pounds per 100 men; sugar, 12 pounds per 100 men; coffee, 5 pounds ground or 7 pounds raw per 100 men, or tea, 1 pound per 100

================

http://www.ehistory.com/uscw/library/or/120/0151.cfm

Page 151 CORRESPONDECNE, ETC. -UNION AND CONFEDERATE.

men; soap, 4 pounds per 100 men; salt, 2 quarts per 100 men; vinegar, 3 quarts per men; molasses, 1 quart per 100 men; potatoes, 15 pounds per 100 men. I also recommend that ration of sugar and coffee, as above fixed, be issued only every other day.

I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

W. HOFFMAN,
Colonel Third Infantry and Commissary-General of Prisoners.

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

[First indorsement.]

MAY 19, 1864.

The within recommendation is referred to the Chief of Staff, the Commissary-General and Commissary-General of Prisoners, and Surgeon-General for report.

EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.

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

[Second indorsement.]

MAY 19, 1864.

Respectfully referred as above directed. Why not dispense with tea, coffee, and sugar and reduce the ration to that issued by the rebel Government to their own troops?

H. W. HALLECK,
Major-General and Chief of Staff.

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

[Third indorsement.]

I concur with the views expressed by Major-General Halleck.

J. P. TAYLOR,
Commissary-General of Subsistence.

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

[Fourth indorsement.]

I respectfully approve of the reduction of the ration as suggested by Major-General Halleck.

W. HOFFMAN,
Colonel Third Infantry and Commissary-General of Prisoners.

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

[Fifth indorsement.]

SURGEON-GENERAL'S OFFICE, May 19, 1864.

The reduction proposed by Major-General Halleck could be carried out with the exception of the ration for the sick and wounded, who would require that proposed by Colonel Hoffman or more than its equivalent in medicine and hospital items.

Very respectfully,

J. K. BARNES,
Acting Surgeon-General.

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

[Sixth indorsement.]

MAY 27, 1864.

Proposed ratio, except that sick and wounded are to have tea, coffee, and sugar, approved.

H. W. HALLECK,
Major-General and Chief of Staff.

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

[Seventh indorsement.]

The ration approved by the Chief of Staff and Surgeon-General approved.

EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.

---

http://www.ehistory.com/uscw/library/or/119/0446.cfm

Page 446 PRISONERS OF WAR AND STATE, ETC.

HEADQUARTERS CAMP PAROLE,
Near Annapolis, Md., October 30, 1863.

Colonel WILLIAM HOFFMAN,

Commissary-General of Prisoners, Washington, D. C.:

COLONEL: I beg leave respectfully to forward the accompanying rolls of 190 invalids who arrived yesterday from Richmond, Va., via City Point, and have been placed in hospital at Annapolis. These invalids arrived here in a pitiable condition of mind and body, having experienced extreme suffering from a want (apparently) of proper food. Five deaths from debility accursed during the passage from City Point to Annapolis.

I am, colonel, very respectfully, your obedient servant,

ADRIAN R. ROOT,
Colonel Ninety-fourth New York Volunteers, Commanding Camp Parole.

[First indorsement.]

OFFICE COMMISSARY-GENERAL OF PRISONERS,

November 4, 1863.

Respectfully submitted for the information of the secretary of War.

W. HOFFMAN,
Colonel Third Infantry and Commissary-General of Prisoners.

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

http://www.ehistory.com/uscw/library/or/119/0485.cfm

Page 485 CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. -UNION AND CONFEDERATE.

WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington, November 9, 1863.

Major General E. A. HITCHCOCK, Commissioner of Exchange:

GENERAL: You will please report what measures you have taken to ascertain the treatment of United States prisoners by the rebels at Richmond, and you are directed to take measures for precisely similar treatment toward all the prisoners held by the United States, in respect to food, clothing, medical treatment, and other necessaries.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

EDWIN M. STANTON,
Secretary of War.

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

http://www.ehistory.com/uscw/library/or/119/0649.cfm

HEADQUARTERS MILITARY PRISON, CAMP MORTON,
Indianapolis, Ind., December 5, 1863.

Colonel WILLIAM HOFFMAN, U. S. Army,

Commissary-General of Prisoners, Washington, D. C.:

COLONEL: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of instructions of the 1st instant prohibiting trading by the prisoners

http://www.ehistory.com/uscw/library/or/119/0650.cfm

Page 650 PRISONERS OF WAR AND STATE, ETC.

with the sutler. This order will be strictly obeyed. I beg permission to remark that the privation of tobacco will cause more trouble and discontent among the prisoners than that of the short allowance of clothing. The revolvers of the use of the prison guard have arrived, with a part of the equipments, and I shall endeavor to make the guard as effective as possible with the means at my command.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

A. A. STEVENS,
Colonel, Commanding Camp Morton.

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

http://www.ehistory.com/uscw/library/or/119/0654.cfm

HDQRS. HOFFMAN'S BATT., DEPOT PRISONERS OF WAR, Near Sandusky, Ohio, December 5, 1863.

Colonel WILLIAM HOFFMAN,

Commissary-General of Prisoners, Washington, D. C.:

COLONEL: Many of the prisoners, especially among the late arrivals, are in need of shoes, stockings, and, indeed, other clothing, to be suited to the climate and season. There is also a great call for tobacco, paper, stamps, &c. ; also vegetables, &c. They have money in my hands for the purchase of such articles. Is it the design that they should be prohibited? Under my present orders to issue no clothing, and there being no sutler to buy of, it amounts to a prohibition. If they can have them, how can they be supplied? My own judgment is that some one should be appointed, whether called sutler or by any other name, who should supply the prisoners; that he should sell from a list furnished by the commanding officer, on which articles could be added or taken off, as desired. I could furnish you the list and when anything was added to it, send it to you, subject to your approval. I will only further add that I see no medium course. Either that they cannot have the articles, or some one be appointed to provide them. If they were allowed to send to the city, some one must do their errands. If officers or non-commissioned officers, it brings them in such contact as to lead to bribery, &c. Indeed it makes a number a persons to take care of instead of one.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

W. S. PIERSON,
Lieutenant-Colonel Hoffman's Battalion, Commanding.

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

[#3Fan]

I have said all along that murderers were on both sides and POWs should never have been shot for easing themselves whether the South or the North.

[#3Fan]

Post #282 was my first post on the subject and proves I said the arms were for the troops.

[#3Fan]

If you fantasize the same rules were in force in Andersonville, prove it.

If you were honest you would not deny that POWs at Andersonville were shot for breeaking deadline. I have already posted testimony showing that POWs were murdered in this way. At least in the north three warnings were issued.

I posted it because it proves, as #3Fan agrees, that there was justification to execute the U.S. Army camp commander of Fort Delaware who issued such inhuman, barbaric rules, in violation of the laws of war.

I've said all along there were murderers on both sides. You are not honest enough to admit that there were murderers on both sides.

[#3Fan]

I've said all along POWs on both sides were treated badly, a fact that you are not honest enough to admit. You guys are no dishonest that you can't admit anything.

[nolu chan]

[#3Fan] Post #282 was my first post on the subject and proves that I said the arms were for the "ship's men".

#282 [#3Fan] I saw that the ship's men needed arms because they expected to be attacked by Confederates, but I don't see where arms were to be delivered. The Confederates had attacked ships before any agreement was made between the Buchanan administration and the rebels, so they had a thing about attacking ships.
#341 [#3Fan] It looks as if the arms were for the ship.
#383 [#3Fan] Confederates opened hostilities by firing on the "Star of the West" (is that the name?) so hostilities towards ships were to be expected.
#386 [#3Fan] The "Star of the West" was attacked.

#3Fan was specifically referring to armed men defending against an attack against the ships, as proven beyond a resonable doubt by the above quotes. Numbers 383 and 386 apply icing to the context.

[nolu chan]

I accept your abject admission that you are unable to justify your invalid assertion that the same rules were in force in Andersonville.

[nolu chan]

OFFICIAL RECORDS: Series 2, vol 6, Part 1 (Prisoners of War)

LINK

Page 314 PRISONERS OF WAR AND STATE, ETC.

OFFICE COMMISSARY-GENERAL OF PRISONERS,

Washington, D. C., September 23, 1863.

Colonel C. THOMAS,
Acting Quartermaster-General, Washington, D. C.:

COLONEL: In view of the probable necessity for additional accommodations at Camp Douglas for prisoners of war, I respectfully recommend that the buildings burned down last winter not yet rebuilt may be put up with as little delay as possible. After the large expense recently incurred in the introduction of water to the camp with an extensive sewerage, and the reconstruction of the fence, it is economy to prepare quarters for prisoners to the full extent of the ground.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

W. HOFFMAN,
Colonel Third Infantry and Commissary-General of Prisoners.

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

[First indorsement.]

QUARTERMASTER-GENERAL'S OFFICE,

September 23, 1863.

Respectfully submitted to the honorable Secretary of War for his decision as to whether the additional buildings recommended to be erected by Colonel William Hoffman, Commissary-General of Prisoners, shall be erected.

CHS. THOMAS,
Acting Quartermaster-General.

LINK

Page 315 CORRESPONDENCE, ETC. -UNION AND CONFEDERATE.

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

[Second indorsement.]

Forward an estimate of the cost of erecting the buildings.

E. M. STANTON.

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

[Third indorsement.]

WAR DEPARTMENT, November 7, 1863.

These papers are respectfully referred to the Commissary-General of Prisoners. The Secretary of War is not disposed at this time, in view of the treatment our prisoners of war are receiving at the hands of the enemy, to erect fine establishments for their prisoners in our hands. Whatever is indispensable, however, to prevent suffering, whether from the effects of the weather or other causes, will be provided by commanding officers of prison establishments if ordinary means fail, by the use of the prison fund if necessary to that end, as far as it will so, Nothing more will be authorized.

By order of the Secretary of War:

JAS. A. HARDIE,
Assistant Adjutant-General.

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

[#3Fan]

My post #282 was my first post on the subject and shows that I said the arms were for the "ship's men".

[#3Fan]

I accept your abject admission that you are unable to justify your invalid assertion that the same rules were in force in Andersonville.

You are not honest enough to admit that POWs were trteated badly at Andersonville and were murdered for breaking deadline.

[#3Fan]

Again, you are not honest enough to admit that POWs were treated badly at Andersonville. I've said all along they all were treated badly.

[nolu chan]

You have said that an action I proved happened at Point Lookout was justification for the execution of Captain Wirz. You have said that an action I proved happened at Fort Delaware was justification for the execution of Captain Wirz. You have said the published rules of Fort Delaware that I quoted were the same as those at Andersonville. You mental bowel movements do not constitute proof or even provide persuasive evidence to support your position.

[nolu chan]

[#3Fan] Post #282 was my first post on the subject and proves that I said the arms were for the "ship's men".

#282 [#3Fan] I saw that the ship's men needed arms because they expected to be attacked by Confederates, but I don't see where arms were to be delivered. The Confederates had attacked ships before any agreement was made between the Buchanan administration and the rebels, so they had a thing about attacking ships.
#341 [#3Fan] It looks as if the arms were for the ship.
#383 [#3Fan] Confederates opened hostilities by firing on the "Star of the West" (is that the name?) so hostilities towards ships were to be expected.
#386 [#3Fan] The "Star of the West" was attacked.

#3Fan was specifically referring to armed men defending against an attack against the ships, as proven beyond a resonable doubt by the above quotes. Numbers 383 and 386 apply icing to the context.