(I love 19th Century political cartoons)
Posted on 10/26/2013 7:01:38 AM PDT by Davy Buck
I think Kentucky had dual governments both claiming authority. Things were not all “Black and White” back then. (which is my point)
The evil South supported slavery mantra, so the Union fought to free all the slaves is just way too oversimplified.
I agree
and I NEVER said it as black and white
what I said was and still say is that slavery was one of the issues
btw the Governor of that ‘Union side_ told Lincoln
“I will send not a man nor a dollar for the wicked purpose of subduing my sister Southern states. B. Magoffin”[10] “
so Kentucky declared themselves neutral
In his Inaugural Address, Lincoln stated that it was his duty “to collect the duties and imposts,” but beyond that “there will be no invasion of any state.”
In effect he was saying that if the seceded states failed to collect and pay the newly-doubled tariff rates, there would be an invasion. He was true to his word.
4/8/1861 Armed Coast Guard revenue cutter, Harriet Lane, put out to sea from New York and sailed South.
4/9/1861 The steam transports Illinois and Baltic got to sea. The Illinois carried 300 troops and the Baltic had 200. The Atlantic had sailed on the 7th with 358 troops. The Pawnee left from Norfolk with 10 guns and 200 troops.
All sailed South.
On the afternoon of April 11th, the first ship of the Federal Naval expedition, which was to reinforce and supply Fort Sumter, arrived outside the harbor. Charleston harbor observers on the barrier islands had discovered the Harriet Lane laying outside Charleston Bar, and notified the city of its presence.
That evening, a regularly scheduled cargo and civilian ship that served the New York to Charleston route, the Nashville, approached Charleston harbor.
The Harriet Lane fired the first shot of the engagement in Charleston as she tried to stop the inward bound Nashville from entering Charleston on the night before the bombardment of Fort Sumter.
The Harriet Lane had fired the first gun from the Union side.
Lt. Daniel Thompkins had command of the forward gun that fired this shot that marked the beginning of hostilities in Charleston Harbor. In firing her gun, and discouraging use of the harbor to the Nashville, the Harriet Lane effectively created a blockade of Charleston Harbor, an act of war of the Union.
A day later, the Union fleet boarded and confiscated another civilian ship, further enforcing the blockade.
Blockade defined: an act of war by which a belligerent prevents access to or departure from a defined part of the enemy’s coasts.
There to add on conflicts within sates during that time
but my original points stands
that slaver was one, ONE of the issues that led to the civil war
That said, I accept your otherwise gracious apology.
Europe's agriculture was becoming more productive as (or after) they abolished serfdom.
If you do not think that the tariffs imposed by the north and their manipulation of prices did not de facto promote slavery, then you are a deluded fool.
If everything is slavery, then nothing is slavery.
Except that firing on Sumter was a decision by the confederate government, not a lone nut.
Just for the record, though, a ship firing a shot across the bow of another ship is an act of war in your mind, right?
That was an interesting walk down memory lane. I see that pea’s schtick hasn’t mellowed (or improved) with age... ;’)
The flag is obviously not about racism, and doesn’t deserve second class status to the Mexican flag.
Ignore the ignorant idiots and fly the flag if you wish.
So using you opinion, The Buchanan Administration would have been justified starting a war with South Carolina after the battery on Morris Island fired the unarmed ship Star of the West on the 9th of January 1861.
To what opinion do you refer?
I don’t think it was a flag for or against racism. I do think it was a flag of treason. Robert E. Lee agreed when he submitted his application for a pardon for his treason.
The slave trade was illegal in DC.
The north didn’t start the war. The southern traitors did, and they started it for slavery.
The north fought the war to put down their insurrection.
The initiation of hostilities was by the southern insurrection.
Certainly there was a civil war in Haiti. The slaves won.
The fed gov tolerated slavery inside a state because it had no authority to stop it.
The Republicans ran on banning slavery from the territories, as had previously been done via the Northwest Ordinance.
To prevent that legal restriction on slavery, the insurrection was begun by the slave power. They failed in their insurrection.
They and their supporters have been lying about the insurrection ever since.
If you're a "decedent" of Jefferson Davis, I say to you "Rest in Peace".
But if you're a "descendant" of Jefferson Davis, I salute you for your pride in such an honorable heritage.
Leni
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.