Posted on 11/21/2006 5:23:06 AM PST by SJackson
The election results would indicate otherwise. Lincoln was sustained at the polls both in '62 and '64. Even McClellan, the Democrat nominee in 1864, couldn't take the full cut and run plan proposed by the Democratic Cindy Sheehans of the day.
On the other hand, huge numbers of confederate soldiers testified to the unpopularity of the confederate cause by voting with their feet and deserting from the cause of the slave empire.
Size of the Union and Confederate Armies
There is no accurate means of determining just how many individuals served in the armed forces of either the Federal or Confederate armies. Many educated estimates utilizing official and unofficial figures are available. The figures herein accepted are the result of an extensive study of these estimates.
Total enlistments in the Federal forces are officially put at 2,778,304, including, in the Army, 2,489,836 whites, 178,975 Negroes, 3530 Indians, and 105,963 in the Navy and Marines. Some scholars do not even accept these figures as authoritative and it must be borne in mind that many thousands who are included enlisted more than once. Also included are troops whose period of service varied from a few days to the duration. The important question is how many individuals served in the armed forces. Estimates run from 1,550,OO0 to 2,200,000 Federals. Probably something over 2,000,000 would be as accurate a figure as possible on total individuals in the Federal armed forces.
For the Confederates, figures are even more in dispute. Estimates of total Confederate enlistments run from 600,000 to 1,400,000. Many Confederate scholars count 6oo,oco total individuals. After considering the numerous surveys made, perhaps 750,000 individuals would be reasonably close. Thus it can be said that Federals, counting Negro troops, outnumbered the Confederates about three to one in number of individuals.
As to the navies, the Federals totaled 132,554 enlistments (105,963 credited to states, plus other sailors not so credited). For the Confederate Navy, in 1864 enlisted men totaled 3674, plus officers and marines, but no reliable totals are available.
Comparative Strength Date Union Total Union Present Union Absent Confederates
Present
for DutyConfederates
Aggregate
PresentConfederates
Present
& AbsentConfederates
AbsentJan. 1, '61 16,367
Regulars14,663
Regulars1704
RegularsJuly 1, '61 186,751 183,588 3163 Dec. 31, '61 209,852 258,680 326,768 68,088 Jan. 1, '62 575,917 527,204 48,713 Mar. 31, '62 637,126 533,984 103,142 June 30, '62 169,943 224,146 328,049 103,903 Dec. 31, '62 253,208 304,015 449,439 145,424 Jan. 1, '63 918,191 698,802 219,389 Dec. 31, '63 233,586 277,970 464,646 186,676 Jan. 1, '64 860,737 611,250 249,487 June 30, '64 161,528 194,764 315,847 121,083 Dec. 31, '65 154,910 196,016 400,787 204,771 Jan 1, '65 959,460 620,924 338,536 1865 125,994 160,198 358,692 198,494 Mar. 31, '65 980,086 657,747 322,339 May 1, '65 1,000,516 The figures show more completely than any text the disparity between the armies. The Federals at the start of 1862 had a two-to-one advantage which steadily mounted until the end of 1864 when the Union advantage in numbers present was over three to one. Also of great importance are the absentee figures. While continually high in the Federal forces, rising on January 1, 1865, to over a third of the total, the Confederate figures are much higher. At the end of 1864, the Southern absent totaled more than 50 per cent, and was of course much more important as the total available forces were so low. In addition, for much of the war a large Confederate force was in the Trans-Mississippi region, where it could not contribute to eastern operations.
Source: "The Civil War Day By Day" by E.B. LongThis Page last updated 10/22/04
Without doing the math it still looks like there was never a time when the rebel AWOL rate wasn't as bad or worse than the Union AWOL rate.
If you read my post carefully, I was pointing out that the South didn't trust Lincoln to uphold the law or the Constitution. His actions later on AFTER secession proved his character in that regard.
NO...he was not. NO ONE is allowed to supersede the Constitution. That is a dangerous precedence, AND because of his stupidity, I envision some Democrat like Hillary Clinton using the same excuse one day.....
The Founding Fathers did not give anyone the power to suspend the Constitution for a reason.
Actually, that isn't totally correct. Some units at 1st Mannassas DID carry smoothbore flintlocks.
Ditto...the Sedition Act was done away with LONG ago.
They had warships. And the ship that Lincoln sent had TROOPS on it as well. Sounds like an act of war to me.
The Alien & Sedition Act was done away with a long time ago, but there are still laws against Sedition and you can be prosecuted for sedition.
Since the Constitution was already superseded by those attacking the Union I find your quibbling with Lincoln hypocritical.
Show me where the Constitution forbids secession, and I will concede the argument.
Nonsense. The bombardment lasted for 33 hours, beginning at 4:30 in the morning on April 12 and continuing until the afternoon of the 13th.
As for the rest of your post, one can only wonder why the Confederates were so convinced they were starving the garrison, and why Anderson wrote that his men were running out of provisions and would be forced to surrender within days if they were, according to you, gorging themselves on chocolate and all the rest of the items you list.
Castro's been saying exactly that since at least 1964. Now, since we've clearly ignored him, is he justified in beginning to shell the base?
The Constitution DEFINES the Union. No state can do anything which changes that Union. The Union is defined as all those states which either ratified the Constitution OR which petitioned and were admitted by Congress.
All a state could do is petition Congress to be let out or work to pass an amendment specifying they could leave. There is NO power to unilaterally abrogate the constitution and it is not in the 10th amendment either.
You have already been shown the explicit statement Madison made in this regard.
And it is true that Davis violated the CSA constitution as much or more than Lincoln did the United States Constitution. Yet where are your complaints about that?
Don't change the subject. I am still waiting for proof that the Constitution prohibits secession. You won't find it.
Lincoln however, BLATANTLY violated it.
You were shown. There is no reason to have it written since any such right would mean there was no constitution.
Our Founders were not such idiots that they would put a self-destruct mechanism within the document. It was meant to last forever like the perpetual Union.
States had ONE chance to legally leave and that only covered the original thirteen. ALL the other states were CREATIONS of Congress entirely. All states had almost every necessary aspect of sovereignty removed by Article I, Section 10. There was not even a right to call conventions to proclaim secession.
And even if there were such a right lurking in the penumbras there certainly was no right to attack federal property and personnel.
If it isn't stated in the Constitution, then it doesn't count.
There is NO perpetual Union clause. And Texas had the right of secession from the time it joined the Union (by treaty).
If indeed the right of secession exists, then from the time South Carolina seceded, Ft. Sumter was no longer Federal property, and if so, then keeping a garrison in it was an illegal act, which would justify an attack.
all i know is what was reported by one of the faculty members of The Citadel (who, unlike you & i) was there on the scene.
i see NO reason that he had to lie about WHAT supplies were delivered & WHEN they were delivered to the fort. (frankly, his displeasure, at the rather "soft manner" that the persons in the fort were treated by the Charleston merchants & the city "fathers", comes through in his account.)
as for 33+ hours of bombardment, the bombardment such as it was, occurred over that period but evidently was neither continuous or great in numbers of rounds fired. (i therefore suspect that it wasn't much of a battle, when compared to an artillery bombardment of today or one of the sort at later battles of the WBTS.)
free dixie,sw
that's why you are a laughingstock to all here.
free dixie,sw
Because property rights immediately became null and void? When did the deed transfer back to South Carolina?
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.