Davis' bicentennial eclipsed by Lincoln

The Kentucky Kernel ^ | 3/28/08 | Jill Laster

[cowboyway]

Over the last few months, celebrations for Abraham Lincoln's 200th birthday have drawn attention to the Kentucky native's life and his legacy as president. But the 200-year anniversary of another Kentucky president's birth, Confederate President Jefferson Davis, is receiving mixed reviews.

"I'll say it this way - winners write history," said Ron Bryant, a Lexington historian writing a book on Davis. "We need heroes, we need villains. Lincoln became a hero and Davis a villain."

Davis was born in what is now Todd County, Ky., in 1808, one year before Lincoln. Davis served as the only president of the 11 southern states that seceded from the Union between 1861 and 1865. The Confederate States of America surrendered in 1865, and Davis was locked in prison the same year.

Despite being denounced by many civil rights groups, signs of Davis' legacy can still be found throughout the state.

In Southwest Kentucky, a structure resembling the Washington Monument stands in memory of Davis. At 351 feet tall, the Jefferson Davis Monument is the fourth largest freestanding obelisk in the world, according to Kentucky State Parks.

Although Kentucky never seceded from the Union, a statue of Davis stands in the rotunda in the state's Capitol building.

"The Civil War is still very much alive in many places," said Cliff Howard, a Jefferson Davis impersonator. "Kentucky was on both sides of the fence. It still is."

Having heard of Kentucky's reputation for "being a little backward," integrated strategic communications senior James Davidson Jr. was not surprised about Davis' statue in the Capitol building.

Davidson, first-vice president of UK's chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, said a statue of Davis leaves a bad impression.

"What is Frankfort saying to the rest of Kentucky with it being there?" Davidson said. "I respect everyone's heritage and Southern tradition, but given the history, I think it shouldn't be there."

The statue of Davis, installed in 1936, is one of five statues in the Capitol building. Lincoln is the largest in the center, and Davis stands in the corner behind his right shoulder. Former Kentucky Congressman Henry Clay, physician and drafter of the state constitution Ephraim McDowell and former Vice President Alben Barkley also stand in the rotunda.

The last time Davis' statue came into debate was 2003, when a coalition of African-American groups protested its presence in the Capitol building. A state advisory committee left the issue up to former Gov. Ernie Fletcher, who took no action during his term.

Gov. Steve Beshear does not plan to remove the statue because Davis is a historical figure who represents part of Kentucky's cultural history, a spokeswoman said.

Student Government President Nick Phelps said his feelings on the statue in the Capitol building resembled how he felt during a controversy two years ago about a 46-foot mural in Memorial Hall depicting the history of Lexington and its surrounding area. The mural, which some said stereotyped American Indians and blacks, was not removed.

"I was not in support of removing the mural, so I would not support removing Jefferson Davis," Phelps said. "I don't think we should remove history. I think it removes the question, 'Who is he?' "

Many students might ask the same question about Davis.

In Kentucky, the Civil War is part of the middle school curriculum. Unless students take an advanced placement history course in high school, that's usually the last time they focus on 19th century American history, said Nayasha Owens-Morton, a U.S. history and African-American history teacher at Bryan Station Traditional High School.

William Campbell has taught a class on Lincoln at UK for about 10 years as an English and honors professor. Students going into his class know little about the confederate president, he said.

"About Jefferson Davis, Kentuckians tend to know that he was from our state, that there's a memorial dedicated to him somewhere in the state, and that he was the president of the Confederacy," Campbell said. "Of Lincoln's writings, most have read only the Gettysburg Address. Of Davis's writings, most have read nothing."

[Sherman Logan]

So you reject all census data, but anything in the US or state archives is beyond question? Was there some sort of national conspiracy to not count hundreds of thousands or millions of free blacks? Are you aware of the difference between a census getting one family’s records wrong and claiming that the cumulative record is therefore equally wrong?

According to this article from the UK, http://www.americancivilwar.org.uk/news_those-confederate-states_42.htm, there were 133,000 total free blacks in the CSA. That would equate to a potential military force of perhaps 15,000 or so volunteers, if every potential soldier wanted to fight for the slaveocracy.

I do not doubt that blacks served informally in the CSA armies, although I’m not clear how any, with possible exceptions of the Marines, were able to take the oath since the CSA Congress specifically prohibited blacks serving in the army before 1865.

When Lincoln began accepting black recruits, Davis gave birth to an entire herd of cows. Don’t you think his expressed outrage would have been considered a little odd if blacks were legally serving in the CSA already?

Since Congress prohibited black enlistment prior to passing a bill allowing it on March 13, 1865; how did all these blacks get into the army? Did the army just ignore the laws?

In early 1864 Patrick Cleburne, a rising star general, proposed recruiting black soldiers. It caused a major uproar and destroyed his chances of advancement. Why, if blacks were already serving? http://www.thewildgeese.com/pages/clebprop.html

As late as the end of 1864 a great many prominent southerners apparently were under the impression there were no black soldiers. When the bill to allow their recruitment was presented to Congress, here are a couple of reactions:

Howell Cobb of Georgia: “Use all the Negroes you can get, for the purposes for which you need them. The day you make soldiers of them is the beginning of the end of the revolution. If slaves will make good soldiers our whole theory of slavery is wrong.” He was apparently ignoring the considerable evidence from the Union armies that slaves could indeed make good soldiers, which meant that his whole theory of slavery was indeed wrong.

Virginia Senator R.M.T. Hunter, president pro-tempore of the Confederate Senate: “What did we go to war for, if not to protect our property?” Meaning the two-legged variety. Interestingly, he doesn’t mention tariffs.

Finally, do you really believe that slaves could be volunteers?

[Sherman Logan]

You are ignoring the difference between peonage and chattel slavery.

Whether people lived under slave-like conditions in these countries is quite beside the point.

Your statement was that massive numbers of slaves were sold to the Caribbean by northerners during the WBTS.

While peonage and other slave-like conditions may have been tolerated, this does not mean the local authorities would allow a foreign ship to drop anchor, offload hundreds of shackled blacks and hold a slave auction.

You have still presented no evidence whatsoever that northerners sold slaves to the Caribbean during the war. Please do. Anecdotes about social conditions on Caribbean islands do not constitute evidence that specific northerners did these things.

[x]

in 1864 a group of union "filth in blue" came onto our family's small farm in NC,had a 4-day drunken orgy of rape, looting (they must have gotten little, as our family HAD little to steal, other than household furnishings,a few cattle/hogs/poultry, hay/silage, etc.),burning,torturing & finally murdering everyone on the farm.

Just where was that farm, anyway?

And if everyone was murdered how do you know who did it?

Maybe it was the Confederates or the Home Guard.

Maybe it was so traumatic that you forgot that part.

[Sherman Logan]

slavery was DYING an UN-lamented natural death by 1860. only "the willfully blind" didn't know that. (as i've said many times here, i do not believe that, absent the WBTS, that "the peculiar institution" would have lasted another decade.)Nobody in the South seemed to know this. The slave population continued to expand. Most critically, the prices paid for slaves reached its high point in 1860. Those actually paying for slaves were expressing with their money their expectation that slavery would continue to expand and become even more profitable.

The average price of a slave in Texas went from $400 in 1850 to $800 in 1860.

[Sherman Logan]

another comment that i've covered previously on these threads: the census of 1860 was SO BAD that, due to flooding of the Red & Trinity Rivers, the "census takers" said that NOBODY lived WEST of the Trinity. (can you say DALLAS & FT WORTH, children??? SURE, you can.)

In 1860 the population of Dallas was 678. The population of Ft. Worth was only a few hundred.

[Sherman Logan]

the TRUTH is that the union operated DEATH CAMPS, which were DESIGNED to cause harm/death to CSA prisoners

They weren't very good at it, were they? Union soldiers in CSA camps had a higher death rate than southern soldiers in USA death camps.

[x]

the CS Marine Corps was ALWAYS desegregated (and about 20% NON-white) from 1861-1865.

swathead, it's up to you to prove that. The Confederate Marines weren't a large branch. From what I can make out there were never more -- never close to -- a thousand at any given time, so Black faces would really have stood out.

But give us a reference on that.

Slaves were impressed into the Confederate Navy. According to Wikipedia the Naval historian Ivan Musicant wrote that free Black men could enlist in the Confederate Navy with the squadron commanders consent and that slaves could volunteer for the Navy if their masters agreed. How many did so I don't know.

I did find this out about one African-American in the Confederate Navy.

Robert Smalls (1839-1915), the son of plantation slaves, was taken by his master in 1851 to Charleston, S.C., where he worked as a hotel waiter, hack driver, and rigger. Impressed into the Confederate Navy at the outbreak of the war, he was forced to serve as wheelman aboard the armed frigate Planter. On May 13, 1862, he and 12 other slaves seized control of the ship in Charleston harbour and turned it over to a Union naval squadron blockading the city. This exploit brought Smalls great fame throughout the North. [some sources use the name Small]

Smalls went to work as a civilian pilot for the Union Navy on the Keokuk, which was sunk during an attack on Charleston. Rescued, he went on as pilot on the Planter, which was a civilian run ship under contract to the Army. During a Confederate ambush of the Planter, her white captain wanted to surrender, but Smalls locked him in the coal bunker and escaped in spite of heavy fire. He was named the ship's captain for his bravery.

After the war, Smalls rose rapidly in politics, despite his limited education. From 1868 to 1870 he served in the South Carolina House of Representatives and from 1871 to 1874 in the state senate. He was elected to the U.S. Congress (1875-79, 1881-87), where he sponsored a bill requiring equal accommodations for both races in interstate transportation. Smalls spent his last years in Beaufort, S.C. where he served as port collector.

Source

Smalls was a very brave and capable man, indeed. Maybe the way he got into the rebel navy was representative of other "Black Confederates."

Anyway, swattie, I found something out and made a contribution to the discussion. It wasn't that hard and I didn't have to make anything up. Try it some time. It might make you feel better about yourself.

[Sherman Logan]

in 1864 a group of union "filth in blue" came onto our family's small farm in NC,had a 4-day drunken orgy of rape, looting (they must have gotten little, as our family HAD little to steal, other than household furnishings,a few cattle/hogs/poultry, hay/silage, etc.),burning,torturing & finally murdering everyone on the farm.

my family had at least 92 members = mostly elderly men,women & children under the age of 10YO, as the able-bodied men/older boys were "away with the forces", robbed/raped/looted/assaulted/tortured/murdered just because they were NON-white/poor/available to the "filth in blue that flowed down from the north".

Pretty good sized small farm. I'd be interested in knowing the specific location.

Sherman was still down in GA in 1864, so it wasn't his boys.

Eastern North Carolina was occupied for much of the war, along the coast, and there may have been some skirmishing in the mountains, but most of NC was free of the Yankee invader throughout 1864.

An atrocity like this would be one of the biggest in the entire war. I've been reading on the WBTS for 40 years, and I've yet to read of a single incident where large numbers of women, much less children, were murdered by either side's regular forces. Numerous men in the Union army were hanged for rape.

Guerrillas and deserters excepted from this generalization. But even at Lawrence the killers would tip their hats to the ladies before throwing their wounded husbands back into the burning house. John Brown was polite to the ladies at Ossawotamie while hacking their husbands and sons apart with swords.

This whole discussion reminds me of some of my discussions with Mormons. They are convinced that many thousands of Mormons were murdered by the mobocrats in MO and IL. But try to pin them down on a count, and it turns out the largest number killed at one time was 17, and it's tough to come up with a total of 100. Interestingly, as far as I can tell the Mormon Church has never compiled a documented list of those killed. Odd, if the results would support their claims of massive persecution and murder.

Meanwhile, the Mormons murdered over 200 gentiles at Mountain Meadows. This puts a serious dent in their ability to claim status as victims.

So I think they mentally "invent" past events that fully justify their present feelings of grievance. The real events "must" have happened and just been suppressed, or they wouldn't feel so angry. IOW, the anger creates the atrocities, rather than the atrocities causing the anger.

A similar mechanism can be seen in some minorities today. When they don't face the racial antagonism they expect, they stage events to justify their own anger.

[SeaHawkFan]

I remember reading that the Nazis lost the war.

[stand watie]

i KNOW that you don't DESIRE that the US census figures are TOTALLY wrong & at BEST "guesses" AND that there "just couldn't be" the HUGE number of Black VOLUNTEERS that Dr Blackerby (and MANY other sources) state(s) that there was, as it makes your thesis (& that of the REVISIONIST, south-HATING, sanctimonious DAMNyankee nitwits/LIARS/leftists here) LOOK DUMB & (possibly) DISHONEST. nonetheless, what i said was CORRECT.

PRIVATELY recruited/State-raised & "local forces" (as i previously stated) did NOT ever come under the CSA's central government laws. furthermore, FEW southerners "out in the sticks" CARED what "Richmond" thought/said/felt/believed. they simply IGNORED what they didn't like.

and ONE more time, NO slaves could NOT be "volunteers". only FREE men could be soldiers/sailors/marines. (btw, this "slaves could not be volunteers" is ONE of the KNOWING, INTENTIONAL, lies told by those to try to DECEIVE the ignorant/intellectually lazy/naive.)

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

actually, i thought i made it reasonably plain that what was going on in the islands was ACTUAL "chattel slavery" under a different name. it's no different than: if i punch you in the nose & SAY that i only "touched your face",it doesn't mean that you didn't feel pain. the REALITY is the REALITY;no amount of "changing the words"makes any difference to the TRUTH.

those "chained poor folks", who worked "under the lash" for NO $$$$ WERE slaves, no matter how you/anyone else TRIES to"confuse the issue".

fwiw, only about three DYs here are DUMB ENOUGH to NOT see that i'm correct.

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

laughing AT you, FOOL.

NOBODY here is DECEIVED by your DAMNyankee, STUPID, lies & FOOLishness.

instead, you are simply laughed AT by everyone & thought to be FR's biggest DUMB-bunny.

the HECATOMB against my family was reported by a circuit-riding preacher to the US PM in that area & NOTHING was done, except that the PM told the preacher to "get lost or else", in so many words.

laughing AT you, as MOST people on these threads do.

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

and your point is???

do you HAVE a point??? OR could it be that you are trying "diversion" instead of simply saying that you're 100% WRONG about the census issues & most everything else???

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

"----had a higher death rate---" ===> actually, that TOO is an outright LIE. at Point Lookout Death Camp alone, at least 15,ooo CSA POWs were murdered in cold blood, as well as at least 5,ooo more died of INTENTIONAL abuse.

free dixie, sw

[stand watie]

well, "x", once more you've made yourself SOOK stupid, by quoting "wikipedia". (NOBODY whose IQ is greater than their belt size believes that as a 'source").

NOBODY.

the frank truth is that you are simply "blowviating", rather than providing FACTS. NOBODY is deceived by your bilge. why not go "peddle" your nonsense elsewhere - perhaps on "daily KOokS" or the A.N.S.W.E.R. websites???

laughing AT you, as most here do. why not go back to posting SILLY cartoons & pictures of old movie stars? (you're competent to do that & evidently nothing more.)

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

and your point IS??

do you HAVE a point???

the FACT is that you sound like one of those "pitiful cases" that believe "might makes right" and/or "the end justifies the means".

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

the SOLE reason that you haven't read of the MANY hundreds of atrocities committed by the "FILTH IN BLUE" is that the WINNERS write the "history".

there are MANY sources for the MANY WAR CRIMES & CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, which were committed by the DYs. BUT you have to WANT to find them.

MOST DYs (and most Americans for that matter) do NOT want to know the TRUTH;comforting LIES are "more their speed".

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

fwiw, you might want to reread #435 & respond in detail to my comments, rather than simply " in so many words" answering something else, that i didn't address.

otoh, you could just "blowviate" as most of the DUMB-bunny DYs on FR do.

free dixie,sw

[stand watie]

inasmuch as the "enumerators" did NOT visit either Dallas or Ft Worth in 1860, HOW would you KNOW what the population of those two towns were???

btw, even if you are correct,a THOUSAND plus people is hardly "nobody lived west of the Trinity"!

instead of making yourself LOOK ridiculous, admitting that you are DEAD WRONG would make you LOOK honest/smarter than MOST of the DYs here.

free dixie,sw

[x]

An atrocity like this would be one of the biggest in the entire war.

By way of comparison, we do know that 13 men and boys were butchered by rebel forces in North Carolina's Shelton Laurel Massacre.

Now suppose that 92 men, women, and children had been massacred by Union troops.

The Democrats, former rebels, controlled the South for generations.

Wouldn't they have played up this massacre, or at least made a monument to it?

No? I guess they really must have hated Indians -- even fake Indians and imaginary Cherokees.

Really, swattie just makes this nonsense up and repeats it so often that he comes to believe it.

But you can understand why. He craves the attention, and apparently, he gets it.