Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Five Union Soldiers Find Peace
The Southern Pines Pilot ^ | 10/17/10 | Jim Dodson

Posted on 10/19/2010 9:15:22 AM PDT by Bodleian_Girl

Shortly after 10 o'clock on a crisp Saturday morning two weeks ago, 75 folks solemnly clutching small American flags and digital cameras assembled in a grove of young pines at a modest farm in the Zion community, tucked into in the soft hills west of downtown Rockingham.

Their objective was to honor five forgotten Union soldiers who died in a skirmish only days before the end of the Civil War. Until now, the solders' remains have lain in hand-dug graves marked only by small piles of white stones for 145 years, their identities unknown.

The event, sponsored by the Richmond County Historical Society, was an unlikely memorial service to honor their service to country and unveil official grave markers for the newly identified deceased. Invited guests included ancestors of the dead soldiers from as far away as Rhode Island and Pennsylvania, plus local citizens and history buffs and even a color guard made up of the Sons of Confederate Veterans from both North and South Carolina.

As local historian James Clifton reminded the participants, what happened at Lassiter Farm on March 7, 1865, was only a tiny incident in the bloodiest conflict in American history, a vast conflagration that produced more than a million casualties including 620,000 soldiers - an estimated 8 percent of all white males from the North and 18 percent from the South. More American soldiers died in the Civil War than in the next six wars combined.

Ironically, it was only the honor of a Confederate soldier that kept the memory of the five Union deaths from vanishing forever into the ether......

(Excerpt) Read more at thepilot.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; US: Alabama; US: Indiana; US: South Carolina
KEYWORDS: civilwar; confederates; godsgravesglyphs; scv; south; union
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last
To: equalitybeforethelaw
It is what it is. They were invaders who looted the countryside.

Would you apply that same label to Lee's men during their campaigns in the Maryland and Pennsylvania during 1862 and 1863?

41 posted on 10/19/2010 10:35:06 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Hey mo-joe! Here's another one for your collection.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw
I believe if you do your research you will find that the Confederate Armies operating in the east (PA and MD) were scrupulous in issuing chits for supplies sequestered.

So if the Union foragers had only given out worthless scrip based on a valueless currency, it all would have been okay?

42 posted on 10/19/2010 10:35:48 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw
Not an assumption, a known fact: foraging was stealing from locals.

So you know that for a fact? You know these men were thieves? I wonder how you got that information from the article, since it didn't mention anything about what they had stolen.

43 posted on 10/19/2010 10:41:35 AM PDT by GOP_Party_Animal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep

“So if the Union foragers had only given out worthless scrip based on a valueless currency, it all would have been okay?”

That would have been a start at civilized behavior. Then if union forces could have restrained themsevles from burning the farm while carrying off any valuables might have sealed the deal that the union stood for something other than brute force. I don’t know, but it seems pretty simple. What would be your reaction if today’s servicemen acted this way towards any civilian population it occupied? Just askin.


44 posted on 10/19/2010 10:42:24 AM PDT by equalitybeforethelaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Cross
If the Sons of Confederate Veterans provide fanfare for union casualties, doesn't stand to reason that they'd provide fanfare for confederate casualties?

The Sons of Union Veterans of the Civil War decorates the graves of Civil War veterans in the local cemetary, both Union and confederate. Each grave gets the appropriate flag. Respecting the other side's dead is pretty universal. At least it should be.

45 posted on 10/19/2010 10:42:40 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Hey mo-joe! Here's another one for your collection.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw

The United States wasn’t much interested in “sealing the deal that the union stood for something other than brute force.” They were trying to end a war that had dragged on for four years by destroying the enemies will and ability to fight. The rebelling states could have stopped it any time they wanted.


46 posted on 10/19/2010 10:47:37 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw
Foraging was a fact of life for armies for thousands of years. Still is, in certain cases.

Most historically literate people know that.

That wouldn't include you, I take it.

47 posted on 10/19/2010 10:52:26 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep

“They were trying to end a war that had dragged on for four years by destroying the enemies will and ability to fight.”

Yeah, the old “we destroyed the village to save the village” meme. Or “we were just following orders”. Take your pick. You are what you do, not what you say you will do. Or more to the point, what you told people you did.

“The rebelling states could have stopped it any time they wanted.”

Believe this is what is known as a two way street amigo.


48 posted on 10/19/2010 10:52:26 AM PDT by equalitybeforethelaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw
Thes five brave soldiers died in the service of their country.

Your post should be an embarrassment to you. Show some class and ask that it be pulled.

49 posted on 10/19/2010 10:55:46 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Celtic Cross
Celtic Cross said: Foraging in enemy country is not necessarily thieving. The confederates foraged in union territory too, FYI.

Exactly right. And if anyone disagrees, ask this simple question: What was Heth's division doing on the Chambersburg Pike west of Gettysburg, June 30, 1863?

In his own words "On the morning of June 30, I ordered Brigadier-General Pettigrew to take his brigade to Gettysburg, search the town for army supplies (shoes especially), and return the same day.General Heth CSA

50 posted on 10/19/2010 10:55:49 AM PDT by fatboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

“Foraging was a fact of life for armies for thousands of years. Still is, in certain cases.
Most historically literate people know that.
That wouldn’t include you, I take it.”

So in your literate opinion, burning farms, consuming the livestock, destroying seed corn and looting all valuables was considered “accepted military foraging behavior” at the time? I will have to consult a real American like George Washington on that one. Hold on a moment.


51 posted on 10/19/2010 10:55:54 AM PDT by equalitybeforethelaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw
All that is in the article?

That sad little chip on your shoulder is effecting your reading comprehension.

52 posted on 10/19/2010 10:58:23 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw

Yes, they were looters and primarily stole from people with little resources.


53 posted on 10/19/2010 11:05:20 AM PDT by MBB1984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

“Thes five brave soldiers died in the service of their country.”

Where did you get the idea that they were brave? All that is known is they were foraging and got killed. As I have pointed out, foraging meant stealing from the locals. It would seem they may have encountered some true combatants rather than civilians. Because a newspaper wants to write a sympathetic article, history is to be forgotten?


54 posted on 10/19/2010 11:07:44 AM PDT by equalitybeforethelaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

Obviously, not because Lee paid most of them in Confederate money for what they obtained.

Furthermore, the citizens in Maryland and Pennsylvania were much better off materially than those in Virginia during the end of the war. In several instances, the bummers were stealing from people in dire poverty.


55 posted on 10/19/2010 11:11:43 AM PDT by MBB1984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky
You have to wonder what kind of mind responds to a story like this by applauding the deaths of 5 American soldiers 145 years ago.

Pathetic.

56 posted on 10/19/2010 11:13:10 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep

Since the Confederate money was not worthless your question is irrelevant. Immediately prior to Gettysburg, Lee won a huge victory actually giving the Confederate money increased value.


57 posted on 10/19/2010 11:19:47 AM PDT by MBB1984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw
Where did you get the idea that they were brave? All that is known is they were foraging and got killed.

Wow, you really do know how to dig a hole, don't you? You might as well enter the drilling business.

58 posted on 10/19/2010 11:22:38 AM PDT by Pyro7480 ("If you know how not to pray, take Joseph as your master, and you will not go astray." - St. Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Bodleian_Girl

Nice post!


59 posted on 10/19/2010 11:31:46 AM PDT by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: equalitybeforethelaw
How did you get the idea that they were brave?

From the fact that they gave their lives in defense of their country. Oh, that plus the fact that the Confederate veteran who owned the farm on which they died thought their deaths worthy of remembrance.

But what's his opinion compared to yours?

60 posted on 10/19/2010 11:35:51 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson