Posted on 06/21/2002 7:41:57 AM PDT by Aurelius
Or the Charleston SC civilians bombarded for months by Federal batteries. Examples:
(1) "Miss Plane, the lady reported as injured from a shell on Christmas morning, died on Wednesday from the effects of the injuries received." (Charleston Courier, Dec 31, 1863, as reported in The Daily Picayune, Jan 17, 1864)
"The St. Philip Street school-house remained untouched. A frame house adjoining it has nevertheless been hit by one of the shells, and fears were entertained for the safety of the school-house. Shells were flying round it constantly during the bombardment. The teachers, however, still keep the school open and the little girls and boys attended it in great numbers very regularly." (From The New York Herald, as reported in The Daily Picayune, Feb 12, 1864)
"There have been lately two large fires in Charleston, caused by our shells. Deserters say the city is now divided into two districts, viz: 'in range' and 'out of range,' and that no other expression is used. Nine persons were killed a few nights since, and a large number wounded, including men, women, and children, and twelve homes burned to the ground." (Washington Republican, Feb 26, 1864, as reported in The Daily Picayune March 11, 1864)
I'm sure there are more examples of civilians being hurt by the Federal bombardment of Charleston. These were the ones I found in the few pages I have of the wartime New Orleans paper, The Daily Picayune.
Nuff said. You're dismissed. I made the nearly fatal mistake of living in that liberal, Yankee Hell-hole for over a year.
Yes, it shows the real, true heart of the south.
Deo vindice!
Don't know what a "neo-Reb" is, but there is no doubt to the truth of your (under)statement that the "South is very important to this country." The North, meantime, and their waves in the metropolises of the South, are a hindrance to the South and West. I think since the North wouldn't let us be free of them, we should just kick them out of the Union next time. We (meaning we, the people of the South, not scalawags like Slick) like the Constitution, not Collectivism. We'd like to live under the Constitution, not Collectivism. May we choose to do that peacefully?
Now, about the term "neo-Reb:" If you are referring to Confederates, we have been Confederates for generations; there is nothing "neo" about it. And since we are the ones that wanted to preserve the Founders' dream, how are we the "rebels?"
Neither do I, to tell you the truth. I was simply repeating the term used by the person who I was responding to in this thread. I probably shouldn't have repeated it.
The more I learn of Robert E. Lee, the more I love him. He has to be one of the most noble men in all of history. I respect his tack after the war, and it made both moral and practical sense, but part of me has always disagreed with his rejection of guerilla warfare. He convinced a lot of Confederates to give up the idea.
Jesse James and a few stragglers who moved to Mexico just didn't a guerilla war make.
BTW, I hope you and a handful of others will someday succeed in returning the Boston area to its 18th century love of liberty.
It also shows that not all Yankees were blind to or approving of the suffering in the South. Just as not all Yankees today are blind to the complexities of the history or importance of the struggle to this day.
I think the biggest problem here is all the colleges in town. Liberals send their kids here from all over the country and then they never leave because this is such a great place to live! Well, at least we haven't had a tax-and-spend Democrat in the governor's office since 1990 (Mike Dukakis). Things are looking good for Mitt Romney in November too.
BTW, Massachusetts is surprisingly conservative once you get outside the I-495 belt.
My wife's great-grandfather is known to have died a prisoner at Point Lookout, but he is one of the many, many who died there that are not listed on the records.
stand watie, I found the following that might interest you in a Feb 27, 1864 issue of The Daily Picayune newspaper from New Orleans. They were reporting something published in the Chicago Tribune of the 18th (I think they mean Feb 18th).
Among our prisoners are about 100 copperfaced, bareheaded and barefooted Indians from the smoky mountains of North Carolina. Such savage wretches should never be taken prisoners. They will be sent north with the rebel deserters.
The article doesn't say exactly where the Feds captured the Indians. The article has the title, "The War in East Tennessee" and indicates the information came from a letter from Knoxville. The last part of the paragraph I excerpted above mentioned the locations of Kingston, Crab Orchard, and Jacksboro. What I listed above is the only part that mentions the Indians.
And when Stuart presented all these horses and wagons to Lee a few days later following the second day at Gettysburg, Lee is supposed to have said simply, "General, they are an impediment to me now." That because Stuart was joyriding instead of scouting out the Union army, wasn't it? As a result Lee got surprised at Gettysburg and the rest is history.
If Davis is your idea of a great man of history then I question your standards in that area.
That means a lot to me.
You mentioned an outpost in Pennsylvania. As far as I know the only time Stuart was in Pennsylvania was during the Gettysburg campaign.
You wouldn't have, would you?
Probably not. I would have been fighting for the Union against the rebellion.
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.