Posted on 08/27/2007 1:37:39 PM PDT by BnBlFlag
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Copperhead Chronicle Al Benson, Jr. Articles
Guess What Folks--Secesson Wasn't Treason by Al Benson Jr.
More and more of late I have been reading articles dealing with certain black racist groups that claim to have the best interests of average black folks at heart (they really don't). It seems these organizations can't take time to address the problems of black crime in the black community or of single-parent families in the black community in any meaningful way. It's much more lucrative for them (and it gets more press coverage) if they spend their time and resources attacking Confederate symbols. Ive come to the conclusion that they really don't give a rip for the welfare of black families. They only use that as a facade to mask their real agenda--the destruction of Southern, Christian culture.
Whenever they deal with questions pertaining to history they inevitably come down on that same old lame horse that the South was evil because they seceded from the Union--and hey--everybody knows that secession was treason anyway. Sorry folks, but that old line is nothing more than a gigantic pile of cow chips that smells real ripe in the hot August sun! And I suspect that many of them know that--they just don't want you to know it--all the better to manipulate you my dear!
It is interesting that those people never mention the fact that the New England states threatened secession three times--that's right three times--before 1860. In 1814 delegates from those New England states actually met in Hartford, Connecticut to consider seceding from the Union. Look up the Hartford Convention of 1814 on the Internet if you want a little background. Hardly anyone ever mentions the threatened secession of the New England states. Most "history" books I've seen never mention it. Secession is never discussed until 1860 when it suddenly became "treasonous" for the Southern states to do it. What about the treasonous intent of the New England states earlier? Well, you see, it's only treasonous if the South does it.
Columnist Joe Sobran, whom I enjoy, once wrote an article in which he stated that "...Jefferson was an explicit secessionist. For openers he wrote a famous secessionist document known to posterity as the Declaration of Independence." If these black racist groups are right, that must mean that Jefferson was guilty of treason, as were Washington and all these others that aided them in our secession from Great Britain. Maybe the black racists all wish they were still citizens of Great Britain. If that's the case, then as far as I know, the airlines are still booking trips to London, so nothing is stopping them.
After the War of Northern Aggression against the South was over (at least the shooting part) the abolitionist radicals in Washington decided they would try Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederate States as a co-conspirator in the Lincoln assassination (which would have been just great for Edwin M. Stanton) and as a traitor for leading the secessionist government in Richmond, though secession had hardly been original with Mr. Davis. However, trying Davis for treason as a secessionist was one trick the abolitionist radicals couldn't quite pull off.
Burke Davis, (no relation to Jeff Davis that I know of) in his book The Long Surrender on page 204, noted a quote by Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, telling Edwin Stanton that "If you bring these leaders to trial, it will condemn the North, for by the Constitution, secession is not rebellion...His (Jeff Davis') capture was a mistake. His trial will be a greater one. We cannot convict him of treason." Burke Davis then continued on page 214, noting that a congressiona committee proposed a special court for Davis' trial, headed by Judge Franz Lieber. Davis wrote: "After studying more than 270,000 Confederate documents, seeking evidence against Davis, the court discouraged the War Department: 'Davis will be found not guilty,' Lieber reported 'and we shall stand there completely beaten'." What the radical Yankees and their lawyers were admitting among themselves (but quite obviously not for the historical record) was that they and Lincoln had just fought a war of aggression agains the Southern states and their people, a war that had taken or maimed the lives of over 600,000 Americans, both North and South, and they had not one shread of constitutional justification for having done so, nor had they any constitutional right to have impeded the Southern states when they chose to withdraw from a Union for which they were paying 83% of all the expenses, while getting precious little back for it, save insults from the North.
Most of us detest big government or collectivism. Yet, since the advent of the Lincoln administration we have been getting ever increasing doses of it. Lincoln was, in one sense, the "great emancipator" in that he freed the federal government from any chains the constitution had previously bound it with, so it could now roam about unfettered "seeking to devous whoseover it could." And where the Founders sought to give us "free and independent states" is anyone naive enough anymore as to think the states are still free and independent? Those who honestly still think that are prime candidates for belief in the Easter Bunny, for he is every bit as real as is the "freedom" our states experience at this point in history. Our federal government today is even worse than what our forefathers went to war against Britain to prevent. And because we have been mostly educated in their government brain laundries (public schools) most still harbor the illusion that they are "free." Well, as they say, "the brainwashed never wonder." ___________________
About the Author
Al Benson Jr.'s, [send him email] columns are to found on many online journals such as Fireeater.Org, The Sierra Times, and The Patriotist. Additionally, Mr. Benson is editor of the Copperhead Chronicle [more information] and author of the Homeschool History Series, [more information] a study of the War of Southern Independence. The Copperhead Chronicle is a quarterly newsletter written with a Christian, pro-Southern perspective.
When A New Article Is Released You Will Know It First! Sign-Up For Al Benson's FREE e-Newsletter
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Copperhead Chronicle | Homeschool History Series | Al Benson, Jr. Articles
It hasn't failed. At least I have one.
Gerry mentions the dissolution of the states and the possibility of civil war ...
Gerry is saying that IF the convention were contemplating dissolution of the state governments, instituting a king and House of Lords, THEN he could understand the attempt to delegate to the federal government the power over the militia. The British status quo. But he wondered why Madison was attempting to grant to the federal government powers that threatened the existence/sovereignty of the states. If that was the intention of the convention, then Gerry warns that those proposing such would likely be planting the seeds of war - the people that just fought a war for independence were not likely to bind themselves to another despot or tyrant.
and no one notices ...
Madison noticed. Other delegates had refused to attend the convention, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations refused to send delegates, and others left in disgust. Some framers were just wary of placing too much power in the hands of a single person or government. To allay Gerry's fears Madison opines that dissolution/secession was the great evil, and advocates again for federalization over the militias, along with any other powers to prevent it, and maintain the union by force. Madison couldn't even convince his own state delegation to vote for the measure.
You can reject one suggested means to an end without rejecting the end itself.
Which explains 9 states rejecting Madison's insane motion. They still wanted a new government, just not one that bound them by chains or military force, one that had no power to prevent their secession.
usually the REALLY rank stuff is quickly deleted by "management".
free dixie,sw
WHEN exactly?
under what circumstances??
POSITIVE proof please.(see, N-S, 2 can play that game.)
free dixie,sw
WHEN exactly? - January 9 and April 3 repectively.
under what circumstances?? - The Star of the West was trying to bring supplies to Sumter. The Rhoda Shannon was a merchantman with a load of ice which wandered into Charleston Harbor. When challenged she raised the U.S. flag and then was fired upon.
POSITIVE proof please. - Here and Here and any number of history books.
see, N-S, 2 can play that game - Yes, but only one of us actually comes up with the facts. If I were you I'd swear, call you names, and then claim the information was posted by fortherepublic some time last year and that I didn't have the time to look it up for you.
Nice try. The Star of the West was bringing troops to reinforce Fort Sumter.
HEADQUARTERS OF THE ARMY,
New York, January 5, 1861.
Major T. H. HOLMES,
Eighth Infantry,
Superintendent Recruiting Service, Fort Columbus:
SIR: By direction of the General-in-Chief, you will detach this evening two hundred of the best-instructed men at Fort Columbus, by the steamship Star of the West, to re-enforce the garrison at Fort Sumter, South Carolina.
They will be furnished with arms, and, if possible, one hundred rounds of ammunition per man. Orders will be given to the proper officers of the staff department to furnish one hundred stand of spare arms and subsistence for three months.
The officers assigned to duty with the detachment are Lieuts. C. R. Woods, Ninth Infantry; W. A. Webb, Fifth Infantry; C. W. Thomas, First Infantry, and Asst. Surg. P. G. S. Ten Broeck, Medical Department, all of whom will report for duty to Major Anderson, commanding Fort Sumter.
Yours,
L. THOMAS.
It was bringing supplies as well. And what of the Rhoda Shannon? What was it’s crime? It might be bringing ice cream to the garrison?
Supplies for the 200 extra soldiers to be placed in Fort Sumter. As I recall, Fort Sumter had enough supplies for its own men for about three months at that stage.
Heck, if Anderson wanted provisions, all he had to do was ask. At least early on [Source: New York Herald, January 22, 1861].
NEWS FROM CHARLESTON
Charleston, Jan. 21, 1861
Governor Pickens on Sunday sent a lot of fresh produce to Major Anderson, with his compliments. Major Anderson refused to accept them, but returned his thanks for the courtesy, saying at the same time, that he would have to decline receiving anything until he knew what the government at Washington intended to order.
And what of the Rhoda Shannon? What was it’s crime? It might be bringing ice cream to the garrison?
No, as I remember it was an ice schooner bound for Savannah that blundered into the confrontation in Charleston Harbor by mistake.
Typo. ‘produce’ should have been ‘provisions’
You would not be entirely correct. Anderson was complaining about his supply situation from day 1, though his situation in January was nowhere near as bad as his situation in April.
No, as I remember it was an ice schooner bound for Savannah that blundered into the confrontation in Charleston Harbor by mistake.
Confrontation? It wandered into the harbor, was fired on, raised the Stars and Stripes, and was fired on some more. Hardly being confrontational.
[ns]: You would not be entirely correct. Anderson was complaining about his supply situation from day 1, though his situation in January was nowhere near as bad as his situation in April.
From Days of Defiance by Maury Klein:
The dwindling larder surprised Anderson. Instead of a six-month supply of staples, he barely had enough for four. The need for belt tightening forced him to another painful decision: The women and children had to be evacuated. Reluctantly he asked Pickens to permit one of the New York steamers to take the civilian dependents back to that city lest the shortage of supplies "produce sickness among them. Pickens granted the request readily, and on February 1 a lighter arrived to take the forty-two women and children to Charleston, where they were to board the steamer.
The steamer left on February 3 with the women and children.
SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your communication of this date, stating that you are authorized by his excellency the governor to inform me that he has directed an officer of the State to procure and carry over with my mails each day to Fort Sumter such supplies of fresh meat and vegetables as I may indicate. I confess that I am at a loss to understand the latter part of this message, as I have not represented in any quarter that we were in need of such supplies.
You may have been had.
For a lot of people the Confederacy was a bunch of neighborhood guys -- good ol' boys meeting in a garage -- who decided to fight the power and take on the Man.
In many cases, they were the power and the Man. Certainly many East Tennesseeans tended to think so. They trusted the federal government more than they trusted the wealthy planters of the flat lands.
Maybe the 20th century would give their decendants reason to think they'd made the wrong choice. But one has to compare the two alternatives and their consequences, not what actually happened to some imaginary utopian scenario.
But if the state assemblies passed a bill of secession and the governor signed such it should have been recognized as a lawful withdrawal form the Union.
Many or most East Tennesseeans certainly didn't think so. And think back on how things were at the time. Davis and the fireeaters were doing all they could to force the results they wanted. In one state the referendum required to ratify secession never took place. In another the result never has been reliably established. There was violence and threats of violence. It wasn't all a neat and clean measured process.
And what happened after ordinances of secession were passed (and often before)? Property was seized. Supplies and weapons were stolen. Debts renounced. Forts attacked. Even if secession were legal, that left a lot of questions about debts, agreements, responsibilities, obligations, settlements, and federal property. Davis's answer was to pick up the gun.
I don't think you're neighbors were wrong to oppose the rebellion, even at the risk of being attacked as rebels themselves. Keep on reading, and learning, and you may be surprised at what you discover and come to believe.
Then I came to think of him as something like a Hobbit, a gnarled and grizzled forest creature:
But you may be right. Maybe he's a rap star or wannabe rapper. His lines have so much more impact when read as poetry. They certainly don't pass muster as prose.
You asked me why the Federal Treasury was in jeopardy and about to run out of money.
The finances of the Federal Government had been in a very disordered condition due to business downturns resulting from the political disturbances, and which by reducing the imports of overseas goods, had reduced the customs income, the chief source of revenue for the Treasury.
In June, 1860, a loan of twenty million dollars had been authorized by Congress. Of this amount, ten million was offered in October in a five per cent stock, and it had been taken by investors at a small premium.
Before any installments were paid up, the panic that attended the election had affected credit, and many bids were withdrawn.
This so seriously affected the Treasury Department, that as the New Year approached, it seemed likely there would be no funds with which to meet the interest on the National debt.
By the Act of December 17th, 1860, an issue of ten million dollars, in treasury notes, was authorized, to bear such a rate of interest as might be offered by the lowest bidders, but so shaken was credit, few bids were made, and some of them at a rate of thirty six per cent interest per annum.
The capitalists interested in the Government credit finally took one million five hundred thousand dollars of one year treasury notes, at twelve per cent per annum (the amount was subsequently raised to five million dollars), on condition that the money should be applied to paying the interest on the national debt.
This was certainly a dark day in the Capitol, when the Federal Government, which had earned the honor of being the only nation that had ever paid its debts in full—principal and interest—and which in 1856, with an overflowing treasury, had paid twenty-two per cent premium for its own stock, was now reduced to give twelve per cent interest, for a few millions, and to engage to protect its credit with the money.
This, combined with the specter that as soon as the primary cotton and tobacco producing states seceded with the subsequent massive loss in exportable products, that the US Treasury was in great jeopardy.
Domestic banks, investors, and overseas credit sources realized quickly with both the loss of southern goods from the trade business, and the new low tariff system going into Charleston and New Orleans, that unless some sort of action were taken to close these ports, that the Treasury was about to default.
As commandant of a military post, I can only have my troops furnished with fresh beef in the manner prescribed by law, and an am compelled, therefore, with due thanks to his excellency, respectfully to decline his offer. If his suggestion is based upon a right, then I must procure the meat as we have been in the habit of doing for years, under an unexpired contract with Mr. McSweeney, a Charleston butcher...
It seems as if you did not quite read the order.
I will give it to you again:
(Fox) “He is charged by authority here, with the command of an expedition (under cover of certain ships of war) whose object is, to reinforce Fort Sumter.”
Reinforce is action, not preparation.
So your claim is that, despite the fact that we can read Fox’s actual orders to only attempt to reinforce if the attempt to land supplies alone is opposed, his REAL orders were to land reinforcements either way. Is that about it?
You can certainly read for yourself. You do not need anyone to make a claim.
GOOD SHOW!!!
free dixie,sw.
free dixie,sw
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.