Posted on 06/09/2009 8:47:35 AM PDT by Davy Buck
My oh my, what would the critics, the Civil War publications, publishers, and bloggers do if it weren't for the bad boys of the Confederacy and those who study them and also those who wish to honor their ancestors who fought for the Confederacy?
(Excerpt) Read more at oldvirginiablog.blogspot.com ...
No it isn't. But thanks for trying to contribute.
thus you KNOW better, but CHOOSE to be deceitful. (otoh, everyone here knows that, so you are accomplishing NOTHING, except wasting your time.)
even REVISTIONIST/northern/STATIST academics admit that lincoln wanted a war AND that he was UN-willing to accept anything except abject surrender of the south's goal of FREEDOM or have a WAR. (thus the blood of a MILLION Americans is forever on his hands & upon those of the other DAMNyankee elitists/statists, who were quite willing to kill every American to "preserve the union of the UNWILLING".)
free dixie,sw
Ah, it was the date that threw me off - 4 days before Sumter. I couldn't understand what the Virginia milita would be doing that would justify anyone firing on them.
The significance of that date is that the Virginia secession vote was still two weeks away, so Virginia was still in the Union.
Not so much, no. Virgina had long since joined the rebellion by May 9th. The confederate congress had admitted them as a state on April 27th and Virginia forces had already seized Harper's Ferry and the navy yard in Norfolk even before that. Since Virginia had joined the war on the confederate side, exchanging fire with a U.S. ship would be expected.
The other incident I was thinking of was the Rhoda Shannon incident on April 3 in Charleston harbor, which we've discussed in the past. You insisted iirc that the Confederates were trying to sink the Shannon, and the other side said no, no, those were only warning shots.
According the the account in the OR, the rebel batteries fired a couple of shots across the bow and then fired at the Shannon, claiming several hits. It was apparently determined later that only one shell had hit, going through a sail. Link
Go away and don't bother me again until that book comes.
No, it's evidence you're trying to read things in that aren't there, and generally transact your anti-Southern polemics again.
The Virginia commissioners arrived three days before their convention reported secession, and weeks before the vote. They were in no way too late, but Lincoln personally told them they were, because of Sumter. Lincoln wanted war, was why they were "too late". "Too late -- I got elected," would have been a little more candid.
[TexConf] By the way, after secession, the fort was no longer United States property.
[You, knowing better because you've been informed in the past] Based on what rule of law?
Based on the eminent domain of South Carolina over all lands within her borders, that rule of law. The same one that wouldn't allow the Russians to build a missile base on Hilton Head Island.
[TexConf] Lincoln wanted a war. He knew that he was forcing the South into a corner, where they would have to fight!
Then considering how anxious the confederacy was to initiate the war it's hard to tell which side wanted it more.
John Nicolay didn't think so, and he was in the catbird seat with respect to Lincoln's war plans -- his "carefully matured purpose". Nicolay let the people of the North in on the truth at last -- Lincoln took them to war, it wasn't "and the war came."
"And the war came" almost sounds Clintonian nowadays, to those of us whose ears have been trained to hear the weasel words in Clintonspeak, and to parse the meaning of "is".
It sounds like the Virginians started shooting. Before, as you've correctly noted, actually ratifying their secession. Of course, that hadn't stopped them from joining the confederacy and allowing confederate troops onto their soil at that point, either.
The attack on the Yankee. --The fact that one of Lincoln's roving pirates was fired on a few days ago, at Gloucester Point, by some Virginia artillerymen, has been mentioned.--The boat (the Yankee,) attempted to pass the fortifications at that place, when six rounds were fired at her, which drove her back. Captain J. Thompson Brown, who commands at Gloucester Point, is of opinion that he could have sunk her. His orders were only to prevent her passing, which he did. A liberal construction of his orders would have been justified under the circumstances of the case.
--Richmond Daily Dispatch, May 11, 1861
The only fairies are in your basement.
I will let TexConfed speak for himself, but I assumed that he's referring to the group that Davis sent some time before that with his ultimatum demanding recognition.
Based on the eminent domain of South Carolina over all lands within her borders, that rule of law.
Try again. Eminent domain doesn't work on federal property, any more than the federal government could use eminent domain to seize state property. And in any case, eminent domain requires legal proceedings, fair compensation for the property, things like that. Not bombarding it into surrender.
The same one that wouldn't allow the Russians to build a missile base on Hilton Head Island.
Now you're just being silly. States can't deal with sovereign nations, the federal government would be the one to prevent the Russian base.
John Nicolay didn't think so, and he was in the catbird seat with respect to Lincoln's war plans -- his "carefully matured purpose". Nicolay let the people of the North in on the truth at last -- Lincoln took them to war, it wasn't "and the war came."
Neither was Robert Toombs, who prophetically warned Davis what would happen if he fired on the fort, and stated in no uncertain terms that it would be he who was initiating the war.
Says who? They were still in the Union. The confederate congress had admitted them as a state on April 27th
Well, that was the Confederate congress, sitting in Montgomery. Did Gov. Letcher or the Virginia lege illegally apply to them for admission? Wouldn't have been kosher if they did, not with a secession convention still sitting, and the People not yet having spoken. Plus, the governor and legislators and judges were all still bound by the Supremacy Clause of Article VI. The secession convention itself, however, being the People, was not so limited -- sitting as the People, the convention wielded the powers and rights of sovereignty.
.....and Virginia forces had already seized Harper's Ferry and the navy yard in Norfolk even before that.
Occupied smoking ruins, you mean. The Yankees abandoned them and set them on fire -- creating a fire hazard to the surrounding community. I would fire the state official who let those fires burn unattended!
You just can't get the good knock-down, drag-out mano-a-mano combat between Militia and U.S. troops that you want out of those incidents.
Since Virginia had joined the war on the confederate side, .....
.....but they hadn't ......
.....exchanging fire with a U.S. ship would be expected.
By you, perhaps. We'd need after-action reports from both sides to determine who fired on whom and with what purpose. Good question to start with: What was an armed federal schooner, enforcing Lincoln's bellicose and illegal blockade of a State still in the Union, doing sailing that close to Gloucester Point? Land batteries can't change their positions, they're fixed. So what was that schooner doing making a course for the battery? Sounds to me like she had orders to make trouble, but then we'd need a copy of her master's orders, wouldn't we? And Lincoln was in the habit of issuing oral instructions for his skulduggery -- like the Taney warrant, and arming the Missouri Wideawakes.
Thanks for the link.
Of course, our modern experience of international crisis management still lay in their future.
Not unless you've got a working Constitution with an active and operative Supremacy Clause.
No Union means no Constitution means no more federal supremacy. Don't you get it? These were foreign countries.
An Enraged Actress. --Stanwix Hall, Albany, was the scene of what might have proved a tragedy a few days since. Miss Henrietta Irving--one of the Irving sisters — was the heroine of the affair. She entered the room of J. W. Booth, who was stopping at the Stanwix, and attacked him with a dirk, cutting his face badly. She did not however, succeed in inflicting a mortal wound. Failing in this, she retired to her own room and stabbed herself. Again she failed in her destructive purpose. What promised to be a real tragedy in the outset was, after all, but a farce. The cause of this singular proceeding was attributed to jealousy or misunderstanding.
I think it's safe to say that the confederate congress didn't admit Virginia without Lechter and the legislature being aware of it. Regardless of the scheduling of the vote, Virginia had been a confederate state for amost a month when it was held. The actual vote itself was obviously considered irrelevant - had the population voted against secession I can't imagine Davis calling the whole statehood thing off.
Occupied smoking ruins, you mean. The Yankees abandoned them and set them on fire -- creating a fire hazard to the surrounding community. I would fire the state official who let those fires burn unattended!
In both cases the facilities were burned to keep them out of the hands of the Virginia milita sent to illegally seize control of them.
You just can't get the good knock-down, drag-out mano-a-mano combat between Militia and U.S. troops that you want out of those incidents.
No, but you get an indication of intent. Clearly Virginia was a full and willing partner in the rebellion from the moment the convention voted to secede.
.....but they hadn't ......
But they had. The eighth state admitted, remember?
We'd need after-action reports from both sides to determine who fired on whom and with what purpose.
No. Look it up. No homework assignments, lentulusgracchus. I'm not here to run errands at your beck and call.
What was an armed federal schooner, enforcing Lincoln's bellicose and illegal blockade of a State still in the Union, doing sailing that close to Gloucester Point?
The blockade wasn't illegal, and Virginia had already joined the rebellion on the Southern side.
Land batteries can't change their positions, they're fixed. So what was that schooner doing making a course for the battery? Sounds to me like she had orders to make trouble, but then we'd need a copy of her master's orders, wouldn't we?
Based on the newspaper article Bubba posted it sounds like she was trying to sail by Gloucester Point when the rebs opened fire. They claim 6 rounds were fired at the ship and say nothing about return fire. Sounds more like yet another act of aggression on the part of those Virginia forces you claim were still loyal to the Union.
Then why are you tossing in irrelevant terms like 'eminent domain' into the equation? Totally inapplicable to international dealings between nations.
Especially having proclaimed their adoption of the confederate constitution on April 17 and all.
Actually, Lentulus answered you quite well I think.
No matter WHICH commissioners, the bottom line here, NS, is that Lincoln had ample opportunity to make peace with the South, on an equitable basis. He did not have ANY intention of doing so, he wanted all or nothing. That isn’t compromise. War suited his agenda, and that is exactly what he got. What he didn’t foresee, is that he would be a casualty of the conflict he chose to initiate.
Except that Lincoln didn’t initiate the secession, didn’t precipitate the hostilities, and did respond to the aggressions of the rebellious south. Other than that I’m right there with ya!
Two-headed babies and fetuses from Mars ..... step right up and see the five-legged salamander .... at three o'clock sharp, the bearded lady will *prove* she's not a man! .....meanwhile, this way to the lioness.... and the tigress ..... and the egress.
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.