Posted on 01/19/2022 11:05:26 AM PST by re_tail20
Regular folks and history buffs who believe Maryland leaned strongly toward the Confederacy during the Civil War era have never lacked evidence for the claim.
It was a Marylander, after all, on the U.S. Supreme Court who wrote the opinion in the infamous 1857 Dred Scott case, which found that Black people were not citizens — a ruling that helped spark the fighting. And Marylanders voted for a Southern sympathizer, not Abraham Lincoln, for president in the election of 1860. Then, some 20,000 Marylanders took up arms for the Confederacy.
But such facts can be deceiving if looked at in a vacuum — or so say the scholars behind a critically acclaimed new book that aims to explode long-standing myths about the period.
In “The Civil War in Maryland Reconsidered,” a collection of 13 essays assembled and edited by Baltimore historians Charles W. Mitchell and Jean H. Baker, are independent thinkers from as far away as California and England and as close as Johns Hopkins University. They point out, among other things, that contrary to popular belief, Maryland judges refused to put the Dred Scott decision into effect; that more Marylanders voted, in total, for the three presidential candidates who backed the Union than they did for John C. Breckinridge, the Southern Democrat who carried the state in 1860, and that four times as many Old Line State men fought for the Union than for the South.
Maryland, in short, was less sympathetic to the Confederate cause, and more behind the Union, than generations of historians have implied, says Mitchell, a self-taught Civil War expert, author and editor who got the sprawling essay project rolling four years ago.
History, he says, is framed by the values of those who pass it along. In the case of Maryland’s antebellum and Civil...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Every single Taney biographer, and Taney himself, is a Lincoln apologist? Who knew?
Lincoln arrested far FAR more people in his war of aggression which he started.
In whole numbers. If a country with a population of 30 million arrests 50,000 people while a country with a population of 5 million arrests on 25,000 people then in which country do you have a greater chance of being arrested. I'll give you a hint, the second one.
MD was famous for marriage. Specifically, Cecil County northeast-most corner of the state.
Maryland for marriage, Nevada for divorce.
Maryland has been depicted in several old movies as the place for a quick marriage. As I recall, a Bette Davis movie and definitely one of the famous Doris Day Rock Hudson flicks.
Huh? Where did you ever hear something like that?
Yes, basically.
They are buried in Baltimore’s original garden cemetery (that is actually redundant), Greenmount.
Except as the article lays out, Lincoln did sign the order and several people knew about it - including Taney himself.
In whole numbers. If a country with a population of 30 million arrests 50,000 people while a country with a population of 5 million arrests on 25,000 people then in which country do you have a greater chance of being arrested. I'll give you a hint, the second one.
I've produced a source saying upwards of 38,000 arrested by Lincoln without charge or trial. I produced another source - a PC Revisionist at that - who says Davis arrested far fewer people and suspended habeas corpus far less. In support of your claim to the contrary you've provided.....Mark Neely. LOL!
Except that none of Taney's biographers, including Taney himself, ever mentioned it.
Except that's false. Taney did mention it. You obviously haven't read the link or any of the citation I already posted.
What I have read is Taney's memoires, written by the Chief Justice himself. And he didn't mention it in that. I wonder why>
And yet in other's memoirs they do mention having this conversation with him. I wonder why?
Who to believe? Taney himself? Or other people? Such a dilemma. </sarcasm>
I was unaware Taney denied it in his memoirs. Do tell where he did so. Also...why do you suppose several other sources - 3 of them - say Lincoln signed the arrest warrant for Chief Justice Taney?
Denied it? He didn't even mention it. Feel free to read it for yourself: Memoir of Roger Brooke Taney, LL.D.: Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
It's actually a pretty interesting read. Taney apologized for almost nothing, so if he really thought Lincoln was going to arrest him I have a hard time believing he would have left that part out.
Do tell where he did so.
Taney approached Samuel Tyler some time in 1862 to write his memoires. It's all there in the book.
Also...why do you suppose several other sources - 3 of them - say Lincoln signed the arrest warrant for Chief Justice Taney?
Why do you suppose that several other sources - three biographies and one autobiography - have nothing to say on any arrest warrant claims?
Taney was silent on the matter in his memoirs.
Silence does not prove the negative as you are trying to claim.
Why do you suppose that several other sources - three biographies and one autobiography - have nothing to say on any arrest warrant claims?
Why do you not read the link I have already posted? It answered your question directly. I even copied the text here for you to read. You obviously did not.
Of course. Tyler made the whole book up out of whole cloth, aided and abetted by Taney's family and friends. Makes perfect sense. </sarcasm>
Silence does not prove the negative as you are trying to claim.
If your purpose is to write an accurate and detailed biography of someone then you would not leave important information out unless there was no real evidence that it happened to begin with. If one biographer left the claim out one might easily suspect bias on their part. But all of them? And Taney himself?
Why do you not read the link I have already posted? It answered your question directly. I even copied the text here for you to read. You obviously did not.
I have read it. I'm still waiting for you to answer my question as to why not a single biographer every included the claim in any of their works. Not even Taney himself in his autobiography. Are you going to continue to ignore the question?
Pretty accurate Wallace thank you
Silence does not equal denial or affirmation.
If your purpose is to write an accurate and detailed biography of someone then you would not leave important information out unless there was no real evidence that it happened to begin with. If one biographer left the claim out one might easily suspect bias on their part. But all of them? And Taney himself?
You would have us believe you can read Taney's mind now? He may have felt it more politically expedient not to mention it in his memoirs. That does not prove it did not happen. Did Churchill mention Ultra in his memoirs? Yet Ultra existed.
I have read it. I'm still waiting for you to answer my question as to why not a single biographer every included the claim in any of their works. Not even Taney himself in his autobiography. Are you going to continue to ignore the question?
Taney chose not to mention it in his memoirs. As to the biographers, they were unaware that multiple others had mentioned Taney discussed it with them. Taney is not even the only source. Lincoln's secret service bodyguard as well as his personal secretary both said Lincoln signed the arrest warrant. Why would they all say that if it had not happened?
It does indicate lack of proof. Google "Was Abraham Lincoln Jewish?" You're going to find a few websites that will claim definitively that he was. Yet none of his biographers include that claim in any of their works. So if silence does not equal denial or affirmation then are you saying there is a chance that he was? Or does it mean that the biographers examined the 'evidence' and determined that it wasn't credible?
He may have felt it more politically expedient not to mention it in his memoirs.
You would have us believe that you can read Taney's mind now?
As to the biographers, they were unaware that multiple others had mentioned Taney discussed it with them.
Unaware of the Ward Lamon memo? Unaware of Taney's conversation with people that they recorded in the 1860's? How inept would you have us believe they are?
No it doesn't
Google "Was Abraham Lincoln Jewish?" You're going to find a few websites that will claim definitively that he was. Yet none of his biographers include that claim in any of their works. So if silence does not equal denial or affirmation then are you saying there is a chance that he was? Or does it mean that the biographers examined the 'evidence' and determined that it wasn't credible?
analogy fail.
You would have us believe that you can read Taney's mind now?
Did you see the part where I said "may have"?
Unaware of the Ward Lamon memo? Unaware of Taney's conversation with people that they recorded in the 1860's? How inept would you have us believe they are?
Read the article I posted.
Then why did none of the biographers, or Taney himself, mention it in any of his biographies?
analogy fail.
Because you say it did? Thanks for clearing that up. </sarcasm>
Did you see the part where I said "may have"?
I saw the part where you speculated on what he was thinking. Where is that different from what you accused me of doing?
Read the article I posted.
Answer the question I asked.
As I've already said, there could be any of a number of reasons.
Because you say it did? Thanks for clearing that up.
Because it was idiotic and not remotely comparable. Par for the course for you.
I saw the part where you speculated on what he was thinking. Where is that different from what you accused me of doing?
I offered a possible reason why he may not have. You tried to claim that because he did not mention it then that automatically means it did not happen. See the difference or do I need to type more slowly for you?
Answer the question I asked.
the article I posted already did.
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.