One only has to follow the history of offers to pay for debt repudiated and property stolen to see how the whole suggestion that they wanted to negotiate with Lincoln is absolute nonsense. You posted the letter from South Carolina, and maybe they really did want to step up and do the right thing and pay for it all. But then the confederates took over and the watering-down began. We start with the provisional confederate constitution adopted on February 8th. That contained a clause in article 6 that read: "The Government hereby instituted shall take immediate steps for the settlement of all matters between the States forming it, and their other late confederates of the United States in relation to the public property and public debt at the time of their withdrawal from them; these States hereby declaring it to be their wish and earnest desire to adjust everything pertaining to the common property, common liability, and common obligations of that Union, upon the principles of right, justice, equity, and good faith." Well and good, in keeping with the spirit of the original South Carolina document. But when it came time to put that clause into effect, the confederate congress watered it down for the first time. Suddenly the "settlement of all matters between the States forming it, and their other late confederates of the United States in relation to the public property and public debt at the time of their withdrawal" became "settlement of all questions of disagreement..." No more talk about payment for property stolen or debt repudiated. But hey, something like that could certainly qualify as one of the "questions of disagreement" so maybe there was a chance after all. But then two weeks after that Davis wrote his letter to Lincoln and now "settlement of all questions of disagreement" becomes "agree, treat, consult, and negotiate of and concerning all matters and subjects interesting to both nations". Where did the offer to pay go? What happened to the settlement of debt? Gone with the wind, that's where. "Settlement" becomes a vague offer to talk about it. "Questions of disagreement" is now "matters and subjects interesting to both nations". So I guess that if paying for stolen property wasn't a matter of interest to the confederacy then it wasn't on the table, was it? If the confederacy didn't find the question of debt responsibility interesting then that wasn't open for discussion. Suddenly we've gone from a specific interest in compensating the U.S. for their actions to not mentioning them at all. The offer is gone.
And then three weeks later, when the final confederate constitution is sent for ratification, all mention of settlement is completely erased from it. So in just over a month the Davis regime goes from seeming to accept responsibility for compensating the victims of their secession to ignoring it altogether. By Lincoln's inauguration there is no intent to pay for anything. No reason for the delegation to Washington except to deliver the Davis ultimatum. And nothing else.
Projection. Feeling pretty liberal, are you?
You've forgotten all the times we watched as you pulled wings off flies, using your superior knowledge of the issues, your pseudohistorical nostrums and theories of the Union to disarm a newbie poster, and then gloat over the destruction of his homeland -- and you always mention black troops, fishing for a reaction. We can count on it.
No, I think you stir that up on purpose -- and we know why, from long acquaintance with your posting style and predilections.
Dealing with all y'all always leaves me feeling like I need an innoculation and a shower afterwards.
Maybe you ought to do that before you come in here.