Blacks and the Confederacy

Townhall.com ^ | January 20, 2016 | Walter E. Williams

[Kaslin]

Last July, Anthony Hervey, an outspoken black advocate for the Confederate flag, was killed in a car crash. Arlene Barnum, a surviving passenger in the vehicle, told authorities and the media that they had been forced off the road by a carload of "angry young black men" after Hervey, while wearing his Confederate kepi, stopped at a convenience store en route to his home in Oxford, Mississippi. His death was in no small part caused by the gross level of ignorance, organized deceit and anger about the War of 1861. Much of the ignorance stems from the fact that most Americans believe the war was initiated to free slaves, when in truth, freeing slaves was little more than an afterthought. I want to lay out a few quotations and ask what you make of them.

During the "Civil War," ex-slave Frederick Douglass observed, "There are at the present moment many colored men in the Confederate army doing duty not only as cooks, servants and laborers, but as real soldiers, having muskets on their shoulders, and bullets in their pockets, ready to shoot down loyal troops, and do all that soldiers may to destroy the Federal Government and build up that of the traitors and rebels" (Douglass' Monthly, September 1861).

"For more than two years, negroes had been extensively employed in belligerent operations by the Confederacy. They had been embodied and drilled as Rebel soldiers, and had paraded with White troops at a time when this would not have been tolerated in the armies of the Union." (Horace Greeley, in his book, "The American Conflict").

"Over 3,000 negroes must be included in this number (of Confederate troops). These were clad in all kinds of uniforms, not only in cast-off or captured United States uniforms, but in coats with Southern buttons, State buttons, etc. These were shabby, but not shabbier or seedier than those worn by white men in rebel ranks. Most of the negroes had arms, rifles, muskets, sabres, bowie-knives, dirks, etc. They were supplied, in many instances, with knapsacks, haversacks, canteens, etc., and were manifestly an integral portion of the Southern Confederacy Army. They were seen riding on horses and mules, driving wagons, riding on caissons, in ambulances, with the staff of Generals, and promiscuously mixed up with all the rebel horde" (report by Dr. Lewis H. Steiner, chief inspector of the U.S. Sanitary Commission).

In April 1861, a Petersburg, Virginia, newspaper proposed "three cheers for the patriotic free Negroes of Lynchburg" after 70 blacks offered "to act in whatever capacity" had been "assigned to them" in defense of Virginia.

Those are but a few examples of the important role that blacks served as soldiers, freemen and slaves on the side of the Confederacy. The flap over the Confederate flag is not quite so simple as the nation's race "experts" make it. They want us to believe the flag is a symbol of racism. Yes, racists have used the Confederate flag as their symbol, but racists have also marched behind the U.S. flag and have used the Bible. Would anyone suggest banning the U.S. flag from state buildings and references to the Bible?

Black civil rights activists, their white liberal supporters and historically ignorant Americans who attack the Confederate flag have committed a deep, despicable dishonor to our patriotic Southern black ancestors who marched, fought and died not to protect slavery but to protect their homeland from Northern aggression. They don't deserve the dishonor. Dr. Leonard Haynes, a black professor at Southern University, stated, "When you eliminate the black Confederate soldier, you've eliminated the history of the South."

[HandyDandy]

What a snipe jeff davis was. Did you actually read what you just posted? davis described the attack by Lincolns Fleet, did he? And this to the Congress of the Confederate States?

#2 Please provide anything that will support j.davis statement that he asked Major Anderson to please not fire on his forces, unless fired upon first, and that Major Anderson refused this request (besides jeff saying it to his Congress).

#3 Did jeff davis suffer from delusional paranoia? Did he react to things that didn't actually happen?

"This proposal was refused and the conclusion was reached that the design of the United States was to place the besieging (Confederate) force at Charleston between the simultaneous fire of the (U.S.) fleet and the fort. There remained, therefore, no alternative but to direct that the fort (Sumter) should at once be reduced."

jeff davis had no alternative but to reduce a federally owned/occupied fort based on a vague conclusion?? Are you friggin kiddin me? That A-hole started a war that caused the death of 600,000 Americans based on miscalculating Lincolns intent?!

There was no Damocles Sword, there was no invading tyrant. Except in j.davis' diseased mind.

[HandyDandy]

I understand the country was divided. There’s a joke that Lincoln told about Maryland. For another time. Sounds like Maryland gave Breckinridge a mandate.

[central_va]

Nobody here disputes the high quality of Federal Colored Troops. But that is not what this thread is about.

[Bull Snipe]

You answer the question. What inalienable right did the Buchanan Administration violate so badly that the only answer for the Southern States was secession. You States Rights folk should be able to handle that easily.

[Bull Snipe]

All well and good. The Fox plan to resupply the Fort consisted of a string of boats being towed by a steam powered tugs past several Confederate batteries to land provision at the fort. Hardly an all out assault on the Confederate defenses of Charleston.

[sauropod]

Bfl

[rockrr]

The lost cause losers are hair-splitting with you but I knew that you were referring to the various Declaration Cause documents put out by South Carolina and four other states: http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/primarysources/declarationofcauses.html

They all list slavery as their principle complaint.

[Smokin' Joe]

Check out the map

[kalee]

For later

[BroJoeK]

DiogenesLamp: "That there were black Union soldiers does not really dismiss the fact that there were black Confederate soldiers."

Reread my post #84 above.

No, there were black slaves forced to serve the Confederate Army, tens of thousands of them.
Some were even forced to fire at Union troops, as the example I quoted in post #84 points out -- forced.

The most notable free black Confederate regiment was the 1st Louisiana Native Guards (CSA) -- all volunteers, unpaid, supplied their own uniforms & equipment.
They first formed on May 29, 1861 and were twice ordered by Confederate authorities to disband -- on February 15, 1862 and again on April 25, 1862.

The volunteer Confederate 1st Louisiana Native Guards served no purpose and fought no battles.

After the second order to disband, some of those previous Confederate troops joined the new Union 1st Louisiana Native Guards (USA), where they served & fought honorably.

Confederate 1st Louisiana Native Guards:

Death of Union free-black Captain Andre Cailloux, 1st Louisiana Native Guard (USA)), at the Battle of Port Hudson, May 27, 1863

[BroJoeK]

Bull Snipe: "Exactly how was the South paying 50%-80% of the Federal budget?"

DiogenesLamp: "Income Taxes, property taxes, Since I believe it was BroJoeK that came up with the 50% number, and since he is on your side, I will let him explain it to you.
This would be one of those "admissions against interest" and therefore you know it is likely to be the truth."

The Truth takes no sides & has no agenda.

The logic here is circuitous, to say the least, but it does work: the US Federal Government collected no taxes -- none -- on exports, so money from no crops grown in the South and sold overseas went directly into Federal coffers.

But the Federal Government did collect tariffs on imports, and indeed in 1860 this was it's largest (by far) source of income.
Import tariffs were mostly collected in major Northern ports like New York, Philadelphia & Boston.
But, so the argument goes: where did the money to pay for all imports come from?
Answer: from exports, of course, and the biggest exports were Southern agricultural products, most notably, cotton and tobacco.

The export numbers we have for 1860 vary depending on source, but it's pretty clear that cotton alone was at least 50% of total exports and tobacco another 5%.
This is how pro-Confederates (then & now) like to claim the war was "all about taxes" and how Lincoln could not live without revenues from Southern crops.

If the South refused to export, then there'd be no money to pay for imports and, correspondingly, no income for the Federal treasury.
That's why Lincoln started the war, so they claim.

Well, there are several points to make here:

1. In early 1861 the Confederacy did stop exporting cotton, and it had no serious effect on Federal revenues.
   Once Congress acted, it found other revenue sources to more than replace Southern agricultural exports.

2. Even in 1860, Southern agricultural products were not the United States' only exports.
   Eastern, Northern & Western products -- from fish & forestry to dairy, beef and manufactured goods -- made up at least a third to half of total US exports.

3. The people who suffered most from Confederate embargo of cotton exports were Confederates themselves.
   Producing 5 million bales per year, worth circa $200 million, such revenues would have paid handsomely for a powerful Confederate army & navy, had they been realized before Civil War broke out.

As for the claim that "Lincoln started the Civil War", that's just stuff and nonsense.
In fact, the Confederacy for months provoked war, started war, formally declared war and sent military aid to pro-Confederates fighting in Union Missouri, all before a single Confederate soldier was killed directly in battle with any Union force, and before any Union army invaded a single Confederate state.

The best historical analogies are:

• In 1941, as FDR declared, a state of war with Japan began when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
  Likewise in 1861, a state of war began when Confederates assaulted Fort Sumter.

• Today's Commie Cubans do not recognize the US military's right to be at Guantanamo Bay, and demand US withdrawal.
  But the US, rightly, continues to man, support & resupply it's forces in Guantanamo, so if, as Confederates did in 1861, the Commie Cubans launch a military assault on our guys & gals there, that would be and act of war (declared or not) against which the United States would respond militarily.

[cowboyway]

I understand the country was divided.

Still is. Threads like this and the mountain of Trump threads prove it. Divisions within divisions....

[BroJoeK]

cowboyway: "Well, it appears that Little Miss Snark and her sewing circle have joined in the fun."

Is cowboyway a blast from the past?
I seem to recall such a poster from years ago, haven't seen him around so much lately.

Is this the same poster?
As I remember, the older one was pretty rough around the edges, much preferred insults to actual history.

[BroJoeK]

HandyDandy: "Lincoln suckered him."

DiogenesLamp: "And of that, I have become convinced.
Lincoln was a very shrewd operator..."

"Shrewd operator" or dolt, Lincoln "suckered" nobody.
He merely, as President Buchanan had in January, sent ships to resupply the Union troops in Union Fort Sumter, fully informing the South Carolina governor of his intentions.
And just as they had in January, Confederates again fired on Union resupply forces, but this time also fired on, and demanded surrender from Fort Sumter.

In both January & April the choice for violence was the Confederacy's, and in April that choice went beyond "provocation" to actual initiation of war with the United States.

Three weeks later (May 6, 1861) the Confederacy confirmed its intentions with a formal Declaration of War against the United States, simultaneously sending military aid to pro-Confederates fighting in Union Missouri, calling up another 400,000 troops and ordering military supplies from abroad.

In the mean time, no Confederate soldier had been killed directly in battle with any Union force, and no Union Army had invaded any Confederate state.
So the choice to start war was strictly the Confederacy's, not Lincoln's.

[BroJoeK]

cowboyway: "And that's 5,000 to 10,000 percent more than you revisionists Yankees usually admit to."

Those numbers came from a readily available google link.
The source does not appear to me as pro-Confederate propaganda, so I have no reason to dispute it.

However, the important point to grasp here, as illustrated by the quote in post #84, is that these were virtually all slaves -- forced to serve at gun-point.
Tens of thousands were support workers -- cooking, cleaning, setting up camps, building fortifications, driving supply wagons, etc.
And smaller numbers of slaves were forced to stand and fight.

[rockrr]

Appears to be the same. Hasn’t improved with age or experience.

[BroJoeK]

PeaRidge quoting: "...Captain G.V. Fox, an ex-officer of the Navy. He is charged by authority here, with the command of an expedition (under cover of certain ships of war) whose object is, to reinforce Fort Sumter."

That order is dated April 4, signed by General Scott.

On April 6, Lincoln notified Governor Pickens that "an attempt will be made to supply Fort Sumter with provisions only, and that if such attempt be not resisted, no effort to throw in men, arms, or ammunition will be made without further notice, [except] in case of an attack on the fort."[23]

Those were Lincoln's final orders to Fox, whose resupply mission sailed on April 10.
So the decision to use Lincoln's resupply mission as the excuse to launch military assault on Fort Sumter (April 12), and war on the United States rested squarely with Jefferson Davis.

[PeaRidge]

The secession of seven Southern states came as a shock to the North. The South had been threatening to secede since the Tariff of Abominations of 1828, but the North thought that those threats lacked resolve, because the advantages of remaining in the Union were so great that the North had believed that the South would hold still for being squeezed dry economically and turned into the agricultural colonies of the North.

The secession of the Southern states hit the Northern capitalists heavy blows in their pocketbooks, in two ways. First, the capitalists had expected to squeeze the Southerners with big import-tariffs, to finance the rapid industrialization of the U.S. Second, many of the Northern capitalists had been earning fortunes by factoring the Southern cotton crops; by transporting the cotton in their coasters and green-water ships; and by buying cotton cheaply to process in their New England textile-mills. Now the British stood ready to take over all those chores at competitive prices.

The Northern capitalists decided that this situation was all Lincoln’s fault. Until he was elected, everything had gone fine; but now—following the election—seven Southern states had seceded from the Union, and nobody knew how many more might follow. If Lincoln wanted the continuing support of the capitalists, he would have to bring those Southern states back into the Union, now!

This was a very serious problem for Lincoln, because the Northern capitalists were his sole support-base. He was a Whig, not a Republican. His goal was to implement Henry Clay’s “American System,” to convert the U.S. from a federation of states into a nation-state with an all-powerful central government, which would tax the citizenry (but primarily the Southerners) heavily to speed up the industrialization of the U.S. Chase and Seward—both abolitionists—were the Republicans’ real heroes; if the capitalists now deserted Lincoln, Chase and/or Seward—who both had respectable support-bases of their own—would slice him up like chopped liver the first time he made a wrong move. So he would now have to conquer the South in war and drag it back into the Union to appease the Northern capitalists.

Summary of article in Southern Heritage magazine, 2009.

[Bull Snipe]

Thanks. Though I doubt our current leadership would respond with force if the Cubans decided to retake Gitmo.

[Bull Snipe]

Thanks