142nd Anniversary of Gen. Lee’s death

Canda Free Press ^ | October 12, 2012 | Calvin E. Johnson, Jr.

[BigReb555]

America mourned the death of Gen. Robert E. Lee on Wednesday, October 12, 1870 and Friday, October 12th marks the 142nd anniversary of his death.

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Not moot at all. Do you consider any uprising against an established government to be "treason," regardless of the circumstances?

[Sherman Logan]

Of course it is. By definition an uprising against a government is treason against that government.

Of course, if you win you become the new government and are heroes, not traitors. At least to your new nation.

Need I quote the old saw about why treason never prospers?

[Sherman Logan]

I think you are confused about the Vicksburg campaign. Grant had superior numbers throughout relative to Pemberton, and even, though not by much, against the separate forces of Johnston and Pemberton, who of course were never able to combine forces against him.

Per southern regiments in the Union army. SC was the only state that didn’t produce at least one such (white) regiment.

[donmeaker]

Some can be justified, as the US Revolutionary War was justified (The war was begun by the British, and only after war began was independence declared.) In general, good causes attract support. Bad causes don’t, and the rebellion and insurrection of 1860-65 is a classic bad cause.

[donmeaker]

When conducting a river crossing there is a time when small forces have crossed, and others have not. So it was at Vicksburg, when Grant had crossed at Bruinsburg with small forces, Pemberton did nothing. Grant’s larger forces west of the river could do nothing. Eventually more of Grant’s forces got across, and yes, then he had superior forces.

You are right, I did make the error using Pendleton instead of Pemberton. Pendleton was a confederate artillery officer, but not the Pennsylvanian in command of the defenses of Vicksburg.

[donmeaker]

If you were for slavery, then the success of the rebellion would look good to you. If you were opposed to slavery, the failure of the rebellion was success.

[donmeaker]

Certainly the sins of slavery were not original to the US. The northern states which forbade slavery (beginning with Vermont) led the world. Britain, belatedly declared slavery illegal in 1833, and Wilburforce played a key role in removing theological justifications.

[jmacusa]

Spin it anyway you want. The South started the hostilities with it's attack on Ft. Sumter. And the war WAS about slavery and I'm bloody well fed-up with the revisionist nonsense saying it wasn't.Yes, it was not Lincolns original intention to end slavery. Among his reasons was that if he did the border states were it existed but where loyal to the North might go against the Union. And it certainly can't be said that the South was fighting to free them . Putting up a ;hell of a fight; was really the South running out the clock. When Lee was beaten at Gettysburg and Vicksburg fell , with the Confederacy split in two and the North in control of the Mississippi any general, any man possessed of the qualities you attribute to this man would have seen the strategic impact of this and realize the situation was hopeless and seek an end to the bloodshed. Instead Lee and Davis and his government dragged the slaughter on for two more bloody years.

[jmacusa]

The honor of not having been born in the South, sir? How about the honor of having been born American on any point of the compass? Slavery was on it's way MY God, what a tired shbolith that is. So the South went to war over a suppossedly ‘’dying’’ institution. Seems an awful lot of trouble to go through for something that was ‘’dying’’. My problem with Lee is that for all this veneration the man chose to fight for an evil and illegitimate government. I have an open mind and I do know the history. I might suggest you take your own advice. And I went to Catholic schools by the way by people, Catholic men and women who devoted their lives to Christ and who to a person possessed an education and morals far and above any that could have been found in a government school in my day and most certainly now.

[jmacusa]

No slavery was not an American creation. But it certainly was here when America was created.

[jmacusa]

I desire to stir old wounds? Surely you jest. It isn’t me who posted this article or any other Civil War thread. Whom ever does should know to expect disagreement. Who have I insulted? A man who has been dead for 142 years? And sorry to disappoint you but I am not ‘anti-Southern’’. I’m anti-Confederate and again to old wounds, it’s those who put up these paeans of praise to Southern secessionists who are keeping the wounds open. American conservatives honoring Southern Dixiecrats, now there’s irony for you. And what in the name of Sam Hill does anything of this have to do with getting rid of Obama? Myself, my friends and family will be beating down the doors on Election Day to vote the scoundrel out of office. Are you trying sub-rosa here i to imply I’m a Democrat? Please, get real.

[jmacusa]

Oh, what? A book where the South had won?

[jmacusa]

General I’d strongly suggest you look and see where and when slavery ended in the North.

[Sherman Logan]

Actually, the Congress of the Confederation led the way. In 1787 it prohibited slavery in the territories NW of the Ohio River.

[Delhi Rebels]

It was common for southern officers to use US uniforms on reconnaissance. That was how Jackson got shot by his own men.

So you're saying that Stonewall Jackson and his party were shot because they had donned Union uniforms to reconnoiter the Army of the Potomac's lines? I've never heard that version of what happened.

[BroJoeK]

X Fretensis: "Beleave the surrender meeting was at the McLean house at Appomatox, not the court house."

Some confusion here is understandable, since Virginia had the possibly unique practice of naming places with the suffix "Court House", thus, "Fairfax Court House," "Culpepper Court House," plus the still-named "Charlotte Court House," nearby to "Appomattox Court House," etc.

So the place is named "Appomattox Court House", the surrender signing was in Wilmer McLean's home there.

Reconstruction of "Old Appomattox Court House":

Wilmer McLean's home in Appomattox Court House:

McLean House surrender room:

Paintings of surrender showing officers known or thought to be present:

Appomattox Court House National Park is must see for anyone interested in Civil War history and battlefields.
Driving distance from Gettysburg, PA to Appomattox, VA is about 265 miles, figure roughly five hours if you don't stop along the way... ;-)

[mac_truck]

Don't think so. CSA Constitution specifically prohibited protectionist tariffs, though without defining them. Given the minimal trade that made it through the blockade, CSA tariffs never raised much money.

Confederates imposed import tariffs of 12.5% starting in early 1861, which included goods "imported" from the North.

A combination of the U.S. Navy blockade of southern ports and rampant smuggling between North and South prevented their import tariff from raising much money for the Confederate government.

-btw I don't know why anyone would bother referring to the CSA Constitution since the Confederates themselves really didn't pay much attention to it.

[Fast Moving Angel]

I apologize for assuming that a Catholic school education would teach the same revisionist history as that taught in public schools, as it was always my understanding that a Catholic education was broader and better than a public education and therefore would have endeavored to put forth more of the truth.

You are still asserting that the South “went to war over slavery.” For reasons I set forth previously, as well as those given by other posters in this thread, this is not the case. Again, slavery was a factor, but not the factor. Please read Mr. Scruggs’ article on the Morrill Tariff which I previously cited. The vast majority of Confederate soldiers didn’t own slaves; most of them were farmers or laborers. Why would they “go to the trouble,” as you call it, to risk their lives for an issue in which they had no stake? No, they went “to the trouble” to defend their country and to stand up for an honorable cause in which they believed.

The Confederate government was not illegitimate, nor was it more evil than that of Lincoln’s. I’m sure you wouldn’t make this claim if the seceding states had stayed in the Union and continued to pay extortion, or rather the oppressive tariffs, imposed upon them by the federal government to keep it running. As long as the money kept flowing from the south to the north, the north wasn’t concerned about the manner in which it was generated – Lincoln repeatedly said that he had no intention of interfering with the institution of slavery. And of course the seceding states would create an entity to govern their free and voluntary association of states – this is what you call illegitimate. I suppose you would make the same claim if the secession threatened by Massachusetts and others at the Hartford Convention were accomplished.

As I said, I was not born in the South, and growing up, I had the same revisionist history crammed down my throat which was written by the victors in the WBTS. As a kid in school, I didn’t know any better and so of course bought into the same slavery propaganda. It’s only within about the last 7 years, since I became involved in researching for a book in progress, that I sought out books and other materials published either during or immediately after the WBTS that set forth accurate accounts, written by people who were “there”, that I reached the intellectual conclusion that the South’s position was correct and that the Confederate states should have been allowed to secede and form their own government – and realized that much I had been taught was wrong. But I’m just a researcher; the South certainly has more capable advocates and defenders than me.

Proponents of both sides can debate these issues forever and neither will convince the other side otherwise. Even if those of you in the pro-north position are not persuaded, perhaps you may wish to investigate the truth further, if for no other reason than to satisfy your curiosity or expand your knowledge.

[BroJoeK]

Sherman Logan: "Other Virginians chose to stand with their nation, including Thomas, one of the best Union generals."

You can find a listing of Union generals here.

By my count, of some 550 Union generals, roughly 20% were Southern-born.
Of those, about 1/3 came from Kentucky, followed (in descending order) by Virginia, Maryland, Washington DC, Tennessee, Alabama, and the Carolinas.
Even Georgia, Florida & Delaware each contributed one or two Union generals.

I could find no record of Union generals born in Mississippi, Louisiana or Texas.
Nor have seen reports of a Confederate general (out of 400 appointed) born outside the Confederacy.

Of Union generals, perhaps 10% were born in other countries, especially Prussia.
George Meade, the victor at Gettysburg, was interestingly born in Cadiz, Spain, son of a Philadelphia merchant naval agent for the US government.
After his father's death in 1828, Meade's family returned and lived in the South, where he also spent most of his civilian and military careers.

[Delhi Rebels]

Nor have seen reports of a Confederate general (out of 400 appointed) born outside the Confederacy.

There were a few, not many. Two that come to mind are Samuel Cooper, who was a full general in the Confederate army and served as Adjutant General for the duration of the war. He was born in New York. And Josiah Gorgas was the head of the Confederate Ordinance department and promoted brigadier general in the later half of the war. He was from Pennsylvania.