.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds)
Posted on 03/08/2022 5:03:25 AM PST by Homer_J_Simpson
WASHINGTON, Friday, March 7.
The more the President's Message is discussed the more difficult is it to define the position of parties in regard to it. One great point, however, is gained the subject is universally discussed with more calmness than has ever before characterized a question about Slavery.
DEPARTURE OF GOV. JOHNSON FOR TENNESEE.
Gov. ANDREW JOHNSON, accompanied by his son, Col. ROBERT JOHNSON, WILLIAM A. BROWNING, Secretary, &c., Hon. HORACE MAYNARD, and Hon. EMERSON ETHERIDGE, Clerk of the House, left Washington this afternoon for Nashville, via Harrisburgh, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and Louisville.
THE MAILS TO THE SOUTH PACIFIC, VIA PANAMA.
The Senate Committee on Post-offices, at their meeting to-day, authorized Mr. COLLAMER to report Mr. SUMNER's bill to provide for the carrying the mails from the United States to foreign ports, with a recommendation that immediate action be had, so as to provide for carrying the mails to the South Pacific before the 21st inst., after which date Commodore VANDERBILT has notified the Postmaster-General he will refuse to take the mails. The bill, as reported, provider that any vessels clearing from a foreign port shall take and receive any mail matter placed on board said vessel by the United States Consul or by the port officers of such foreign port or place, for the United States, and shall deliver the same to the Post-office of the place aforesaid in the United States.
ALLOTMENTS OF THE NEW-YORK SOLDIERS.
The Allotment Commissioners from New-York to-day closed up the object of their mission, having visited upwards of 70 regiments, and handed over to the Paymaster-General all the certificates, so that that officer can complete what remains to be done. They have been eminently successful.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
First session: November 21, 2015. Last date to add: May 2025.
Reading: Self-assigned. Recommendations made and welcomed.
Posting history, in reverse order
https://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:homerjsimpson/index?tab=articles
To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by reply or freepmail.
Link to previous New York Times thread
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4044415/posts
News from Washington: How the President’s Message is Received – 2
Important from Kentucky: Great Extent of the Earthworks at Columbus – 2
Up the Tennessee River: The Late Engagement at Pittsburgh Landing – 2-3
Trouble with the Indians in Colorado – 3
From Kentucky: Kentucky Jurymen-Communication with Nashville Resumed, etc. – 3
Monthly Report of the Dispensaries of the City of New-York – 3
Clippings from Rebel Papers: Richmond Under Martial Law – 3-4
McClellan’s Generalship – 4
Editorial: The Recent Message of the President – 4
Pillow’s Programme and Its Failure – 4-5
Gen. Butler’s Expedition – 5
Ben McCulloch – 5
Richmond Markets – 5
General News – 5
"Editorial: The Recent Message of the President – 4"
The South accomplished no small portion of the task assumed.
It had at last come to be a dogma at Washington that Slavery and Freedom must proceed, pari passu, in political influence and in territorial extent.
But in securing so much the South really secured all.
Freedom, to be sure, had come to have more States, nominally, but Texas could at any day throw four additional States into the Southern scale, while party machinery had always contrived to secure from several of the Free States representatives thoroughly wedded to the Slave Power, so that while the balance between the two sections might be theoretically preserved, the South for the last thirty years held the power with an iron grasp, and administered the Government wholly in its own interests.
It could hardly be otherwise.
The South had an institution to conserve, upon which society there rested.
The North had none, except Freedom, in its more general sense.
The latter could oppose no adequate opposition or resistance to the well-matured policy of the former.
It is almost inevitable that the lowest civilization in society should exert a paramount influence on Government, as the efforts of men seeking to gain or retain place and power are nearly always in ratio to their lack of self-respect. [!!]
The Southern idea, which is one of abject despotism, rested like a pall upon the country, stifling, as far as possible, freedom of speech and action, fillin every office with the propagandists of Slavery, and representing us at foreign courts in persons, who had no more sympathy with Freedom at home, or with the struggles of the patriots and reformers in Europe, than the tools of Asiatic Absolutism.
No wonder that we had as a nation, become the scorn and bye-word among the suffering masses of Europe, with whom, long ago, the model Republic had not only ceased to be "the hope of mankind," but had become the standing argument for riveting more closely the chains of despotism.
But the South was not content with the progress it was making, but must overthrow a Government that appeared to stand in the way of its aims.
The results are before us, and one of the most remarkable is Mr. Lincoln's declaration -- that the Government should henceforth use its power to destroy the balance between Freedom and Slavery, which for a generation had been so sedulously maintained, and to render the North irresistible, by adding to it all debatable ground, by enfranchising the slaves upon it.
This is a tremendous step for the head of the nation to take.
It would have been worth the life of the President to have uttered such sentiments two years ago.
In fact, no President could have been brought up to the point, but for the events that have recently taken place.
Where two grand principles in a nation are struggling for mastery, it is a vast stretch of courage or power to say, before any outbreak has taken place, that the influence of Government shall be thrown against one or the other -- especially that the right shall be thrown against the wrong -- for in such a case the wrong must inevitably be destroyed; while the right, being in the keeping of Providence can always afford to take the humble or subordinate position.
But after long suffering, the right can now take its own ground.
From the outset, the contest has been for the Border States.
Their possession by the South would erect it into a first-class Power, and render, it was believed, its reduction by the North impossible.
But whatever may be thought of practical difficulties, the President has placed the Government on the side of Freedom.
They will recover us the respect once felt for us in the Old World.
In dealing with this vexed subject we think he has hit the happy mean, upon which all parties in the North and all loyalists in the South can unite.
The raidcal will wish he had gone further, but will be content with the National expression in favor of Freedom.
The conservative will see that no rash or ill-advised steps will be taken: while all will admit that government sould be conservative, and not accept every ebullition of passion or expression of immature sentiment as the sober sense of the nation.
Having taken one step we should see our way clear before taking another.
There can be no doubt of the correctness of that taken by Mr. Lincoln.
It looks to the end, however long the way to it.
He does not propose to subvert, but to advance -- not to destroy till something better is ready to take the place of the old.
In this he will carry the nation and the world, and achieve the greatest work possible for humanity, by acting in harmony with correct principles, guided by a common sense which, in all the mazes and entanglements of his official position, never deserts him."
"ebullition of passion"??
That sentence is worth pondering. I suspect it embodies a fundamental truth about the human condition.
Hello Bro Joe K. Long time no see.
Certainly the war was about slavery and that means money.
In 1860 four million slaves gave the South a net worth of $3 billion dollars.
More than had been invested in rail roads and factories at the time.
Interestingly I recently read the story of a mortician, Rufus Weaver who had been contracted by the families and the Confederacy to exhume and return the remains of Confederate soldiers killed at Gettysburg.
He exhumed dozens and dozens of bodies, a grim task to be sure and he never got paid.
He calculated at the time he was owed $6,000 dollars.
Money in live people, not dead ones obviously.
Confederate chislers.
The was was about STATES RIGHTS, which they were promised when they signed the constitution.
Slavery was just the vehicle. It was a just cause, don’t get me wrong- but the issue was TELLING states what people had to do. Like buy health insurance.
In reality the North would have been devastated financially if the south withdrew- that why the war was fought about keeping sacred “The Union” (genuflect)
Own another human being. Thanks Southern Democrats. Thanks a whole bunch. Thanks for the worst war in American history.
Revised figures have put the number of dead as a result of “Jeff Davis's Excellent Secession'' at 700,000 thousand Americans.
700,000 Americans dead in four years, 60,000 of them civilians.
Those are some numbers.
States right to determine their own laws.
Not a ‘right to do’ something. The right NOT TO BE told what they can or cannot do, outside of the enumerated powers listed in the Constitution.
Plus there was more to the war than “we hate slavery so we are going to war with you”. You see that don’t you?
The South was going to withdraw because the North was telling them what they had to do (yes, regarding slavery).
Preventing the South from withdrawing was the goal, in all actuality, because the North would have been bankrupted (longer story there)
Slavery was going away slowly anyway. General Lee (OF THE SOUTH) even taught his slaves to read and write, even though it was actually against the law.
Remember- the USA did not INVENT slavery. It existed for thousands of years. And still exists in some countries.
Arkansas 1862 Engagements
| Date | Engagement | Military Units | Losses | Victor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 17 | Little Sugar Creek, AR | Union Army of the Southwest (Curtis ~2,000) & Confederate Army of AR (McCullough ~2,000) | Union 33-total (13-killed), Confederates 250-total (23-killed) | Inconclusive |
| Mar 6-8 | Pea Ridge, AK | Union Army of Southwest (Curtis, Sigel ~10,500)& Confederate Army of the West (Van Dorn, Price, McCulloch, Pike ~16,500) | Union 1,384 total (203 killed), Confederate 2,000 total (unknown killed) | USA (Union outnumbered) |
Virginia Engagements. 1861 - 1862 to date
| Date | Engagement | Military Units | Losses | Victor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 18-19 | Sewell's Point, VA | Union naval squadron vs Confederate shore artillery | 10 total | inconclusive |
| May 29- June 1 | Aquila Creek, VA | Union naval squadron vs Confederate shore artillery | 10 total | inconclusive |
| June 1 | Fairfax Court House, VA | detachments from CSA & USA armies | 8 on each side, 1 each killed | inconclusive |
| June 1 | Arlington Mills, VA | detachments from USA ( ~200 McDowell) & CSA (~9 Bonham) armies | Union 2-total (1 killed); CSA 1 wounded | inconclusive |
| June 10 | Big Bethel, VA | Union (Butler) -3,500, CSA (Magruder) -1,400 | Union 71-total (18-killed); CSA: 10-total (1-killed) | CSA (CSA outnumbered) |
| June 15 | Hooe's Ferry (near Mathias Point) VA | Union schooner Christina Keen; CSA Farmer's Fork Grays | none -- Christina Keen captured and burned | CSA |
| June 17 | Vienna, VA | Detachments from both Union & CSA armies | Union: 12-total (8 killed); CSA: none reported | CSA |
| June 27 | Matthias' Point, VA | Union gunboats ~50 vs. Confed garrison ~500 | Union: 1-killed, 4-wounded; CSA none | CSA |
| July 18 | Blackburn's Ford, VA (pre-Manassas) | Union Department of NE Virginia (McDowell, Richardson) -3,000 vs. Confederate Army of VA (Beauregard, Longstreet) -5,100 | Union: 83-total; CSA 70-total | CSA |
| July 21 | Bull Run/Manassas, VA | Union Department of NE Virginia (McDowell, Patterson) -54,000 (18,000 engaged) vs. Confederate Army of VA (Beauregard, Longstreet) -34,000 (18,000 engaged) | Union: 2,708-total (481-killed); CSA 1,897-total (387-killed) | CSA |
| Aug 7 | CSA burned Hampton, VA | Union (Butler) vs. Confederate Cavalry (Magruder) | Union unknown; Confederates unknown | CSA |
| Aug 8 | skirmish at Lovettsville, VA | Union vs. Confederate | Union unknown; Confederates 6-total | USA |
| Aug 25 | Mason's Hill, VA | Union (Lowe's observation balloon) vs. Confederate Army NVA (Longstreet, Stuart) | Union unknown; Confederates unknown | USA |
| Aug 31 | Munson's Hill, VA | Union Army of the Potomac vs. Confederate Dept of Northern VA | Union 5-total; Confederates unknown | USA |
| Sep 3 | Bailey's Cross Roads, VA | Union & Confederat detachments | Union 8-total; Confederates none | CSA |
| Sep 11 | Lewinsville, VA (McLean, Fairfax County) | Union 79th NY Highlanders (Stephens ~1,800) & Confederate 1st & 13th VA (JEB Stuart ~400) | Union 12-total (3-killed); Confederates none | CSA (CSA outnumbered) |
| Oct 21 | Ball's Bluff, VA | Union MA, NY, MI, MN & CA Infantry, RI Artillery (Stone -1,720) & Confederate VA & MS Infantry, VA cavalry & artillery (Evans -1,709) | Union 1,002-total, including Lt. Oliver Wendell Holmes (223-killed including US Senator Edward Baker R-OR)), Confederates 155-total (36-killed) | CSA |
| Nov 26 | Skirmish at Hunter's Mills, VA | Union 3rd PA Cavalry (Bell ~94) & Confederate 1st NC Cavalry (Ransome ~120) | Union 33-total (1-killed), Confederates unknown 0? | CSA |
| Dec 20 | Drainsville, VA | Union Pennsylvania Volunteers (Ord ~5,000) & Confederate VA, KY & NC Volunteers (Stuart ~4,000) | Union 71-total (?-killed), Confederates 230-total (?-killed) | USA (1st larger Union victory in VA) |
| Jan 3, 1862 | Cockpit Point, VA | Union gun boats (Wyman ) & Confederate shore battery (French ~50) | none | Inconclusive |
| Mar 8-9 | Hampton Roads, VA | Union Navy (Marsten, Worden, USS Monitor +11 ships) & Confederate Navy (Buchanan, Jones CSS Virginia +5 ships) | Union 369 total (261 killed, 7 ships sunk), Confederate 24 total (7- killed) | Inconclusive (Strategic USA) |
Summary of Civil War Engagements as of March 8, 1862:
Engagements in Confederate states:
| State | Union Victories | Confederate Victories | Inconclusive | Total Engagements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| South Carolina | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| Virginia | 4 | 11 | 6 | 21 |
| North Carolina | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Florida | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Louisiana | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Tennessee | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Arkansas | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| Total Engagements in CSA | 11 | 13 | 8 | 32 |
Engagements in Union states/territories:
| State | Union Victories | Confederate Victories | Inconclusive | Total Engagements |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maryland | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 |
| West Virginia | 9 | 2 | 2 | 13 |
| Missouri | 11 | 9 | 1 | 21 |
| New Mexico | 0 | 7 | 0 | 7 |
| Kentucky | 4 | 3 | 2 | 9 |
| Oklahoma | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
| Total Engagements in Union | 25 | 24 | 6 | 55 |
| Total Engagements to date | 36 | 37 | 14 | 87 |
Total casualties over 45,000 including over 4,000 KIA.
Except that nobody was telling the South it had to do anything in November 1860 when Fire Eaters began organizing to declare secession and then (May 6, 1861) war against the United States.
An alleged Union assault on slavery was the only cause powerful enough motivate a majority of patriotic Southerners to reject the Federal union.
"Unfair tariffs" or Federal infrastructure spending weren't going to do the job.
Fire Eaters needed slavery to convince most Southerners secession was their only choice.
And for that, reality didn't matter -- "Ape" Lincoln and his "Black Republicans" was all they really needed to say.
We should of picked our own cotton.
Most of the North was fighting to save the Union at the beginning. Most northerners cared less about slavery. Emancipation of the southern slaves was a tactic to hurt the South.
Emancipation never happened.
Look what that brought this country.
A welfare state designed by the same democrats who fought for slavery,state rights or to defend their states. However you want to look at it.
Booth changed the world by killing the great emancipator.
Abolition helped kill the country IMHO.
That's not entirely wrong, but from Day One, Republicans were the anti-slavery party.
So in 1856 most Northerners did not care enough about slavery to vote Republican.
But by 1860 they did, so what changed?
It was the SCOTUS Dred Scot decision, which all but legalized slavery in the North.
That's what made Republicans out of previous pro-slavery Northern Democrats.
And anti-slavery was part of the Union war-effort from the very beginning, in the form of "Contraband of War" and Congressional Confiscation Acts.
Anti-slavery was not some kind of **afterthought** but rather was considered key to Union victory from the beginning.
Of course, Union anti-slavery strategy was kept a bit low-key, at first, in order to keep from spooking pro-slavery Border State citizens -- i.e., Maryland, Kentucky & Missouri.
But as of "today", Lincoln is openly advocating for compensated emancipation, such as was already done in Washington, DC.
Sadly, that proposal went nowhere, not even in Delaware, but by now the Union is firmly anti-slavery, and will become increasingly more so.
GrandTorino: "Look what that brought this country. A welfare state designed by the same democrats who fought for slavery, state rights or to defend their states."
Thanks for pointing out that Confederates were Democrats, and that today's Democrats want a new form of slavery, where you & I work to support their voters.
Think very carefully again...
They went to war to PREVENT Secession from ‘the union’ (genuflect) Because ‘the union’ (genuflect) was sacred and must be preserved, and must be spoken of in reverent terms.
But... why was the south seceding? Because the North was telling them what they could do, against the US constitution and the rules agreed to when they signed it.
You can ignore any root issue if you think of that alone.
The north could not let the south secede because of $$$.
Notice I have not mentioned slavery, yet, because the above information does not require it. It could have been anything, like telling you that you had to buy health insurance.
The North did not say “We are going to go to war with the south because they won’t get rid of slaves”
Right, Northerners said, in effect, "Confederates started war at Fort Sumter, so now we must defeat them and restore our Union."
They also soon realized that defeating the Confederacy would require destroying the slavery on which it was based.
The question has always haunted me.
My Great Grandfather was a Southern Yankee. The youngest son of a family in the Shenandoah vally, he left home and fought with a Ohio artillery battery. It was never passed down in the family history why he made this decision. I like to think it was to stop slavery.
If you go to the Southern Yankee website you can find him. His name was Lorenzo Strosnider. He ended up fighting a lot of his battles in the very valley he left.
I agree with your points as far as the history books are concerned.
It just appears, the more I read personal accounts of both sides,the fight was more about the institution and Nationalism than the actual slave. History seems to gloss over that.
Look up my G Gramps if you have a chance. It’s very interesting.
If we could only know all those untold stories.
What is really sad is there are more slaves alive today than were ever in the USA.
We import goods from these slave owning countries like we could never do without.
Open borders and H2B workers provide “slaves” to mow the lawn.
One of my Great Grandfathers was fresh off the boat from Europe, spoke little or no English, in 1862 volunteered for an Illinois regiment out of Quincy.
They served until August 1865.
“States rights to do what? Own another human being.”
I believe both the United States Constitution and the Confederate States Constitution included slavery.
And Presidents of both countries took oaths to defend and protect their pro-slavery constitutions.
If the South was fighting for slavery, who was fighting against slavery?
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.