Posted on 02/25/2007 7:43:34 AM PST by OrioleFan
Lee was an avid reader of Northern newspapers smuggled across the lines. From them he gleaned not only bits of military intelligence but also – and more important in this case – information about Northern politics and the growing disillusionment with the war among Democrats and despair among Republicans. One of Lee’s purposes in the Maryland invasion was to intensify this Northern demoralization in advance of the congressional elections in the fall of 1862. He hoped that Confederate military success would encourage antiwar candidates. If Democrats could gain control of the House, it might cripple the Lincoln administration’s ability to carry on the war. On September 8 Lee outlined his ideas on this matter in a letter to Davis. “The present posture of affairs,” Lee wrote, “places it in our power…to propose to the Union government…the recognition of our independence.” Such a proposal, coming when “it is in our power to inflict injury on our adversary…would enable the people of the United States to determine at their coming elections whether they will support those who favor a prolongation of the war, or those who wish to bring it to a termination.”
This desire to influence the Northern elections was one reason Lee gave serious thought to resuming the campaign in Maryland even after Antietam. That was not to be. Democrats did make significant gains in the 1862 congressional elections, although Republicans managed to retain control of Congress. But morale in the Army of the Potomac and among the Northern public plunged to rock bottom in the early months of 1863 ...
Antiwar Democrats in the North – self-described as Peace Democrats but branded by Republicans as treasonable Copperheads – became more outspoken and politically powerful than ever. Lee followed these developments closely.
Your post make it sound as if the ANV took time out to hunt fugitive slaves. I doubt that was the case.
As for chickens, cows, and horses... well, yeah.
Of course slavery was "the" issue (despite claims of neo-confederates to the contrary) that was tearing the country apart. My point was that from the moment he was challenged with disunion, the Union was Lincoln's pole star, his one primary challenge as President.
Didnt he say somethin to the effect that if he had to keep slavery to preserve the union, he'd do it, and if he had to abolish slavery to preserve the union he'd do it. He clearly aw slavery as important but secondary.
Also, it was not the Republican platform nor Lincoln's intended political goal to abolish slavery outright:
http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/repub.html
Cooper Union - interesting speech but focussed on expansion of slavery into territories, not slavery in existing states...
http://members.aol.com/jfepperson/cooper.html
"I think that the South was doing very well in the subjugating the blacks department long before Lincoln was elected."
LOL.
"A soldier correspondent who went by the initials W.K.. riding with Jenkins; command, reported to the Richmond Inquirer that the Rebel troopers had appropriates "many 'contrabands' and fine horses." Perhaps more chilling were the words penned by a Confederate officer named William S. Christian: "We took a lot of negroes yesterday...I was offered by choice but as I could not get them back home I would not take them" - "Gettysburg: A Testing of Courage" by Noah Andre Trudeau, p. 79.
While campaigning in Pennsylvania the confederate army took everything edible and anything not nailed down that could be of use to the army. That included every black man they could get their hands on.
Actually, they didn't hunt fugitive slaves. They grabbed any black person they could get their hands on and took them back to slavery regardless of whether they had been free for generations or run away the prior week.
Lee soon came up with a better way of taking what he wanted without even having to resort to giving the owners worthless confederate script. He levied a requirement for supplies on towns, knowing ahead of time that there was no way the town could meet it. When they failed, he took what he wanted without compensation. Worked like a charm. Reference: "Retreat from Gettysburg: Lee, Logistics, and Pennsylvania Campaign" by Kent Masterson Brown.
This says nothing about rounding up blacks.
The blacks the rebels hunted were no more fugitive than were the cows and horses and chickens they roundeed up.
You need to find someone else to post to. Maybe to someone who actually believes you.
I have learned that when you show up on the thread it generally becomes the same old same old. So, if you could avoid pinging me, I would appreciate it. Thank you!
If you're looking for a place where you can post anything you want, no matter how outrageous, without the chance of anyone disputing you then I can point you to half a dozen southron sites where Yankees aren't allowed and where you will feel right at home. So long as you choose this forum then be prepared to have your claims challenged by anyone. Even me.
That the Confederates rounded up free, and freed blacks, when they had the opportunity is simply a fact.
The problem is not the debate or being challenged or even being wrong. That does not bother me. I will read your article, look at the scholarship, and make the necessary changes to my thinking if I find the scholarship valid.
I can do that because I like General Grant as much as General Lee and General Reynolds as much as I General Hill. I like Stonewall above them all and Jeb Stuart too!
I just don't have the time and energy you seem to have to post and argue and argue and post the same old conversation.
That is why I don't want to get involved in a conversation with you. I learned from the argument about Julia Dent Grant that there is a slipperiness to you that is exhausting. Hence the name Non-Sequitur. (But you do it well)
No, the others will be along shortly and you and they will go at it for 900 more posts until another thread comes up and it starts all over again.
From this article it would seem conclusive that the ANV did indeed engage in rounding up contrabands when they ventured North.
Great post.
And that commanders as high up as Longstreet knew about it. If Longstreet knew about it is there any reason to believe that Lee didn't?
And yet here you are.
That is a great non-sequitur. You do your name proud.
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.