Posted on 07/06/2006 7:01:52 AM PDT by SquirrelKing
It appears that the Northern invasion of the South is complete -- at least it is on a patch of land known as Delta Plantation in Jasper County.
There, a diehard rebel named Henry E. Ingram Jr. made his last stand against the onslaught of Yankees, only to be thwarted by a man from Long Island, N.Y., and now -- gasp -- a French Canadian.
Ingram promised to keep Yankees out of Delta Plantation in Jasper County when he bought 1,700 acres there in 1998. His resolve to keep them out still is strong, but the covenants he put on the land don't seem to have any teeth.
Those covenants did, however, scare Canadian-raised Bluffton resident Louise Legare a bit as she was close to signing a contract to buy a three-bedroom, two-bathroom house on the land from Bluffton Home Builders.
The list of rules she got from the builders was missing the first pages, so she went to the Jasper County Courthouse to get the missing ones. There, she found the covenants, or rules, that Ingram demanded of buyers:
1. They could not be Yankees.
2. They could not have the last name Sherman (an obvious reference to Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman).
3. And the land could not be sold or leased to those whose last names could be rearranged to spell Sherman.
Clearly, Ingram doesn't like Northern folk.
Now, however, Legare and Bluffton Home Builders are working with Ingram's son, Ashley Ingram, to remove the covenants. The former Delta Plantation is on both sides of U.S. 17, just north of the Georgia state line.
"When (Legare) brought it to us, we all kind of had a good laugh," said Jim Hobbs, a partner in the home-building firm.
In fact, Legare is buying the land and home from Bill Cook, another partner in the company, who happens to be a native of Long Island, N.Y. No one at Bluffton Home Builders had seen the covenants before Legare found the missing pages, and no one has ever tried to enforce them, Hobbs said.
If Henry Ingram had his way, he still would keep Yankees off of the 1,700 acres he once owned. His holdings on the plantation have dwindled to 10 acres.
Ingram, now a resident of Corpus Christi, Texas, said his son and attorney, who are both local, should be looking out for his anti-northerner wishes now.
"Yankees destroy everything they have up North, then they come down here," Ingram said. "When they destroy everything (in the South), where are they going to move next? Another country?"
Legare, who grew up north of Montreal, figures her far-northern upbringing must be especially abhorrent to Ingram.
"I must be more of a Yankee," she said. "I'm the person he really doesn't want to live there."
Amazingly, Legare is a much better choice to own Southern land than a New Yorker, according to Ingram.
"French people are much better and more desirable than a Yankee," said Ingram, who once owned video-poker casinos in Jasper County. "They don't stick their noses in other people's business."
The same feature drew Legare and Ingram to the land -- nature. Ingram said he's seen Carolina panthers, bald eagles and fox squirrels on the land. It is that quiet beauty Legare is after.
"I was raised in a very nature-like environment," Legare said. "I think the nature is beautiful in South Carolina."
Ingram, who says he is leaving Texas for Costa Rica soon, cites the boorish manners of Yankees as one of his prime dislikes for them.
"They look down their little pointy noses at the people in the South because we are polite and nice to them," Ingram said. "They think people who are polite and nice are dumb."
Contact Jim Faber at 706-8137 or jfaber@islandpacket.com. To comment on this story, please go to islandpacket.com.
in other words your post is meaningLESS & pointLESS!
free dixie,sw
PLEASE rave on, as you are (whether you realize it or not) recruiting FReepers to the southron cause.
don't you EVER get tired of being the BUTT of inside jokes by smarter FReepers on this forum???
free dixie,sw
Which means plenty of truth there, for after all the ignorant hater calling himself little stand little watie is offended.
I can't imagine a group where you would be on the inside looking out, unless it had bars on the window.
I don't think of you as being on the inside of any group worthy of respect.
"Had the south won their was for independence, what would have happened to slavery in the immediate post-war period??
i said that (in my OPINION) that:
It would have been politically IMPOSSIBLE for slavery to long survive, given the HONORABLE & BRAVE service of over 100,000 Black FREEDOM FIGHTERS. additionally, the coming of the Industrial Revolution to agriculture would have QUICKLY killed the profit in slavery & the time would have NOT been far off when "'ole massa" would have called "his people" together & said: "I can't afford to feed & house you anymore. There is the road. Get on it by sundown!" (this end of slavery would have been "UGLY"!)
(my readers KNOW that i am NO fan of the slavers, as they "dealt in human flesh/suffering" & cared about NOTHING but $$$$$.)
free dixie,sw
1. the REVISIONIST/LEFTIST nonsense out of NE ,elitist, "poison ivy league screwls" &
2. hateful, anti-dixie BILGE, which even "DM" doesn't believe, though he hopes his readers will.
free dixie,sw
PITY that you are getting to have the same reputation for knowledge/intellectual ability as "M.eSPINola" the HATER/nitwit/FOOL.
free dixie,sw
the DY lunatics (like you for example)would fit in nicely in a dictatorship, as such regimes require LITTLE from their subjects but PARROTING the "party line" & the UNTHINKING allegiance & obedience to the "elites'" every desire.
that is MOST of what you post, "Mr SPIN".
free dixie,sw
Sure, whatever you say... oh brother, have gone off the deep end on that line.
So that's the reason why your slave driving heroes triggered full scale rebellion against the American government in 1861, and in case you forgot - were crush in 1865?! The seditious plantation crowd were simply being real loyal Americans by plunging the United States into Civil War - how nice of them.....putz!
Take a pill Norman.
CSA = Confederate States of America
I doubt that. But you're dismissing the fact that the Confederate Army didn't segregate the blacks and the Union Army did. Why? Because the so called anti-slavery yankees refused to have blacks in their ranks!
I am also sure, since race didn't matter, that blacks owned white slaved.
I don't think any blacks owned white slaves but free blacks did own black slaves.
Are you sure you want to pursue this path? It only exposes the extreme prejudice and racist attitudes of the 'liberators' and their progeny.
Some of us know better now.
Others, not so sure.
What you're trying desperately not to admit is that there were and are differences in northerners and Southerners and geography plays a part.
The north was settled by the Puritans of mostly Welsh and English stock.
The South was settled by Cavaliers of Irish and Scottish blood.
That in itself is enough to start a war.
(BTW, I can trace my ancestors to Ireland and Scotland.)
Did you mean 'scalawag'?
Anyway,
Scalawag - a white Southerner who supported Reconstruction policies after the American Civil War (usually for self-interest)
"Stand Watie was born Dec. 12, 1806, near Rome Georgia, and died Sept. 9, 1871, at his home on Honey Creek in Delaware County, Oklahoma, near the northwest corner of Arkansas. He learned to read and write English at a mission school in Georgia, and occasionally helped write for the Cherokee Phoenix newspaper (after Sequoyah developed the 86-symbol Cherokee syllabary in 1821) with his brother Buck Watie (who took the name of Elias Boudinot from a white benefactor). His father David Watie (or Oowatie) was the brother of Major Ridge, and the Ridge-Watie families became wealthy slave-owning planters in the new Cherokee constitutional republic that replaced tribal government in 1827. The state of Georgia opposed any form of tribal government and in 1828 began to pass repressive anti-Indian laws without any recourse for the Cherokee in state courts. After gold was discovered on Cherokee lands in northern Georgia, 3000 white settlers poached on Indian lands. Only the treaties with the federal government gave Indians protection from the states. The Supreme Court under John Marshall declared the repressive state laws null and void in the 1832 Worcester v. Georgia case, but President Jackson refused to enforce the court's decision. In 1832, Georgia confiscated most of the Cherokee land, including the estates of John Ross, and sold them in a land lottery to whites. The Georgia militia entered the Cherokee capital of New Chota and destroyed the Cherokee Phoenix. "
"The Ridge-Watie faction allied with President Andrew Jackson to sign the New Echota Treaty Dec. 29, 1835, that required Cherokees to leave Georgia in return for 800,000 acres in the Indian Territory and $15 million. The Treaty was opposed by tribal chief John Ross and the Council and most Cherokees who refused to leave their homes in Georgia. The Ridge-Watie group led the voluntary removal of 2000 Cherokees from Georgia to the Indian Territory in 1837, but Ross and 10,000 others were forced out on the "Trail of Tears" in 1838. Some members of the anti-treaty party decided to kill the leaders of the Treaty Party at a secret meeting at Double Springs on June 21, 1838, and the next day killed Major Ridge and John Ridge and Elias Boudinot. The executions were justified by a clause of the Cherokee Constitution that authorized the death penaly for anyone selling tribal land without authorization. Stand Watie was also marked for death, but was warned and escaped. The Cherokee nation was deeply divided by the experience of the Treaty and the Trail of Tears and the Ridge-Boudinot murders. Watie formed a band of warriors for protection and refused to disband after Ross complained to the Jackson government. This internal civil war lasted until a truce was established in 1846 and Stand Watie joined the Tribal Council 1845-1861 (although Ross would remain the official elected Principal Chief until his death in 1866) presiding over a Cherokee population of 21,000 in the Indian Territory in 1861."
I don't think you have a case, meaker.
The yankee method for ending slavery was far worse. He told the slave to go free and yanked the welcome mat when the ex-slaves tried to enter the yankee domicile.
meanwhile, IF you really KNEW anything FACTUAL about the WBTS, you'd KNOW that the SLAVERS (NORTH & SOUTH!) OFTEN collaborated with the invading DY army, as nothing but $$$$$ was important to them. lincoln, the TYRANT, said "in his own hand" that he was willing to PROTECT slavery (where it existed) PERMANENTLY, in return for the southern states returning to the union.
free dixie,sw
of course it was NOT the real-life "Scarlett O'Haras", who were RAPED, tortured,robbed,assaulted & MURDERED by the criminals in blue. rather it was "persons of colour", religious minorities & the "poorest of the poor" whites who were most frequently victimized & suffered MOST.
nonetheless, had our southron ancestors WON their war for FREEDOM, the "end of the peculiar institution" would (i believe) been UGLY, as the freedmen would have found themselves out of the road with NOTHING but the clothes they were wearing, when "tossed off" the plantations/farms. (as you know, our family was as "distant" socially/academically/financially from the "big house", as the MOON was. i have no sympathy for anybody who was in the "flesh trade" either. NONE!)
free dixie,sw
I figure that the Ridge faction got the 15 million dollars, and first shot at the 800,000 acres of land.
Stand Watie would have noticed this, and when sent to the Confederate legislature, greatly impressed southern plantation holders (who because of poor farm practices, were always looking for more virgin land further west) with his willingness to provide that virgin land at the expense of his tribe, as had other members of his family.
As such he was a "confederate" version of a scalawag, but his plans did not come to fruition due to the Union victory.
Gee, I wonder why the Southern slave powers didn't accept that offer.
Guess they were to arrogant to know when they offered a generous bargain, and when they were WHIPPED!
The difference didn't seem to start a war when Jackson was President.
Only when the "rights" of the southern slave powers were threatened by the legal victory of a President belonging to a party that wanted to limit slavery to its current extent, as had the Northwest Ordinance, only then was it a cause for war.
The Slavers sought to continue their position, gained by oppression of both blacks (in the obvious way) and whites ( by drafting them into the militia, used for slave patrols), and open western lands for their expansion. Southern agricultural practices were not efficient, intending to get the maximum out of land in a few years, followed by selling out, dissolving the slave property, and starting again further west.
The Southern fire eaters had overinvested (speculated) in slave property, and closing territories to their property would have depressed the value of their investment.
That, dear gentlemen, is the reason for the war. They demanded that the Union be run to their advantage, or they would quit, and drag out as much as they could get away with out of spite. It cost about 900,000 lives to resolve their issue. They lost.
So did the poor whites drafted two and three times over into the southern slave patrol-militia, then into the "Confederate" army, then, after being wounded and sent home to recover, they were again often drafted into state militias. Meanwhile the wealthy slavers arranged that they didn't have to go if they owned a certain number of slaves.
Sure, there were injustices in the north too. No doubt. I don't buy the Lost Cause stuff, mostly invented (and i have read primary sources on that) after the war to justify their rebellion.
didn't seem to start a
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.